8 ms·

The gun camera video doesn't seem to have been picked up by any mainstream US news outlets, at least, not that show up on Google News. It's on the BBC's front p

by Zak 17y ago

The gun camera video doesn't seem to have been picked up by any mainstream US news outlets, at least, not that show up on Google News. It's on the BBC's front page. This seems odd to me.

wmeredith 17y ago
http://huffingtonpost.com http://huffingtonpost.com has it in bold red letters on their front page. That's the most mainstream place I've seen it.
- pgbovine 17y ago
  i'd hardly call huffington post 'mainstream' ;) not when FOX News has a huge lead on all other mainstream news outlets in the US.
krschultz 17y ago
New York Times has it, though CNN doesn't. There is another more recent military abuse scandal breaking today that is overshadowing this one at least as far as I can tell.
ErrantX 17y ago
Im not surprised it's on the BBC to be honest; they are usually quite good at picking up on news like this. In actual fact their article seems either rushed or ass covering. There are many "they say" and "appears" in the article.
- ElliotH 17y ago
  As a big fan of the BBC and with greatest respect to their journalism - it is ass covering. The reason is that so long as they only report fact they're quite safe. So when they say a voice says: The transmissions says of one of the individuals: "He's got an RPG [rocket-propelled grenade]. I'm going to fire. Then they can't be said to be inaccurate - the video does indeed include someone saying those words. The article just leaves it to the reader to decide upon its accuracy - a very safe option. That said this video doesn't really need a 'report' so much as a pointer to its location. It speaks for itself - chilled me to the bone.
dotBen 17y ago
There's a number of reasons why that video hasn't, and probably won't, appear on mainstream news (for what it is worth, I use to work for BBC News Website in a technical capacity): Firstly, most mainstream news websites have rules and policies on showing videos coming from unknown and unvarifieable sources - especially war. The concern is that videos can be edited and doctored to make them appear to construe something else that doesn't represent the true facts. I'm not saying this video is doctored/edited in this way, but it's a blanket policy most news orgs will keep to. Instead they will report that WikiLeaks have this video and link to them instead. Which is what is happening here. There is a second, and somewhat sad issue here too. That video remains property and copyright of the US military, which means news organizations probably wouldn't want to redistribute it anyway as they don't have permission. News orgs have been known to republish photos and videos they don't own when there is extra-ordinary reasons but I don't know if this is enough to warrant that. As an aside, I'm also concerned that it could get pulled from YouTube if the US military issue a DMCA notice or similar request due to national security.
- dantheman 17y ago
  All government video/pictures etc are public domain.
  - tibbon 17y ago
    Exactly. The US Military cannot hold copyright. They could classify it, but that's about it.
  - Splines 17y ago
    Really? I'm not trying to be facetious: Can anybody roll up to the military and ask for arbitrary gun camera footage?
    - jrockway 17y ago
      If they get it, it's not protected by copyright. That's it.
J_McQuade 17y ago
I've taken flames for saying so in the past, but it bears repeating: Having a publicly funded news source in your country that is required by its very charter not to pander to political or corporate interests is utterly invaluable, despite its inevitable shortcomings.
tptacek 17y ago
That may be because it isn't really news, other than the leak of the video. Reuters saw this video in 2007, and had been openly pushing for an investigation ever since.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
davi 17y ago
posted 17 minutes ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad...
paulsmith 17y ago
It's currently the #2 story on Google News.
TNO 17y ago
It's been on the front of the Fox News website for a few hours now: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/05/video-appears-forces-firing-unarmed-suspects-baghdad/om/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/05/video-appears-for... Edit: URL

by Zak 17y ago

The gun camera video doesn't seem to have been picked up by any mainstream US news outlets, at least, not that show up on Google News. It's on the BBC's front page. This seems odd to me.

wmeredith 17y ago

http://huffingtonpost.com http://huffingtonpost.com has it in bold red letters on their front page. That's the most mainstream place I've seen it.

pgbovine 17y ago
i'd hardly call huffington post 'mainstream' ;) not when FOX News has a huge lead on all other mainstream news outlets in the US.

krschultz 17y ago

New York Times has it, though CNN doesn't. There is another more recent military abuse scandal breaking today that is overshadowing this one at least as far as I can tell.

ErrantX 17y ago

Im not surprised it's on the BBC to be honest; they are usually quite good at picking up on news like this. In actual fact their article seems either rushed or ass covering. There are many "they say" and "appears" in the article.

ElliotH 17y ago
As a big fan of the BBC and with greatest respect to their journalism - it is ass covering. The reason is that so long as they only report fact they're quite safe. So when they say a voice says: The transmissions says of one of the individuals: "He's got an RPG [rocket-propelled grenade]. I'm going to fire. Then they can't be said to be inaccurate - the video does indeed include someone saying those words. The article just leaves it to the reader to decide upon its accuracy - a very safe option. That said this video doesn't really need a 'report' so much as a pointer to its location. It speaks for itself - chilled me to the bone.

dotBen 17y ago

There's a number of reasons why that video hasn't, and probably won't, appear on mainstream news (for what it is worth, I use to work for BBC News Website in a technical capacity): Firstly, most mainstream news websites have rules and policies on showing videos coming from unknown and unvarifieable sources - especially war. The concern is that videos can be edited and doctored to make them appear to construe something else that doesn't represent the true facts. I'm not saying this video is doctored/edited in this way, but it's a blanket policy most news orgs will keep to. Instead they will report that WikiLeaks have this video and link to them instead. Which is what is happening here. There is a second, and somewhat sad issue here too. That video remains property and copyright of the US military, which means news organizations probably wouldn't want to redistribute it anyway as they don't have permission. News orgs have been known to republish photos and videos they don't own when there is extra-ordinary reasons but I don't know if this is enough to warrant that. As an aside, I'm also concerned that it could get pulled from YouTube if the US military issue a DMCA notice or similar request due to national security.

dantheman 17y ago
All government video/pictures etc are public domain.
- tibbon 17y ago
  Exactly. The US Military cannot hold copyright. They could classify it, but that's about it.
- Splines 17y ago
  Really? I'm not trying to be facetious: Can anybody roll up to the military and ask for arbitrary gun camera footage?
  - jrockway 17y ago
    If they get it, it's not protected by copyright. That's it.

J_McQuade 17y ago

I've taken flames for saying so in the past, but it bears repeating: Having a publicly funded news source in your country that is required by its very charter not to pander to political or corporate interests is utterly invaluable, despite its inevitable shortcomings.

tptacek 17y ago

That may be because it isn't really news, other than the leak of the video. Reuters saw this video in 2007, and had been openly pushing for an investigation ever since.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

davi 17y ago

posted 17 minutes ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad...

paulsmith 17y ago

It's currently the #2 story on Google News.

TNO 17y ago

It's been on the front of the Fox News website for a few hours now: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/05/video-appears-forces-firing-unarmed-suspects-baghdad/om/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/05/video-appears-for... Edit: URL