Other Columns by Thomas D. Segel
Thomas D. Segel Bio

Printer-Friendly Version

The saga of Cindy Sheehan continues with online postings and traditional outlets of both print and electronic media chanting an unending anti-war mantra.

The web page publication Yahoo News, on August 21, 2005, ran a banner headline reading "Cindy Sheehan Stirs Up Long Overdue Anti-War Movement". The text of the article reads "She is no glamour girl, and yet she has a throng of admirers who have been nursing inside themselves, for the last two years and more, the secrets she implicitly reveals."

The article identifies her as "The Gold Star Mother of the Iraq War" and later in the text charges ..."Cindy Sheehan's lightning effect on the country is that she has been saying -- with her actions, gestures and intonations, if not exactly in words -- what has been left deliberately unsaid in America until now...That the war in Iraq is useless."

In general, the tone of this article reflects media coverage from most national sources. What is never voiced or placed in print is the "Why" of their actions.

For untold decades, news reporting has been charged with adherence to what is called the 5 "Ws" of journalism. This is an instruction that any factual event should address the "who", "what", "where", "when" and "why" of the story. Some place along the road between Vietnam and Iraq our media lost the "why".

Why do most reports insist on identifying Cindy Sheehan as a "Gold Star Mother"? The term identifies families who have lost a son or daughter in combat. But, articles never mention why they continue to use that term. Nor does the media report Gold Star Mothers (formally named American Gold Star Mothers) have placed a news box on their website stating, "Cindy Sheehan is currently in the news. She and her organization have no connection whatever with American Gold Star Mothers, Inc. We are a 501 C (3) organization and as such do not engage in political activities. We do support our troops. After all they are our children."

From New Mexico, Charlie Revie, a retired Army officer asks why the media continue to endlessly address the complaints of Cindy Sheehan? He also asks "Why is the main stream media slanting the news the way they do? It is beyond my comprehension. Some of his questions are "Why the over emphasis and fixation on U.S. body count, U.S. body parts, blood and guts? For every U.S. casualty there have been at least 10 Iraqi civilian casualties." He further asks, "Why cannot the media support our national objectives? The mainstream media orchestrated our ultimate defeat in Vietnam by their pandering. General Giap notes in his autobiography that we had the NVA beat at the end of Tet and would likely have given up had it not been for the main stream media slant in the United States that we would eventually withdraw."

John Boring is a retired Marine living in Arizona. He writes, "I had sympathy for Cindy Sheehan until I read an article in the Sunday's nation section written by G. Robert Hillman. Not quite midway in the story there is a quote by Sheehan, speaking of her family's disagreement with her cause: "It doesn't surprise me that they resent it, because they're Bush supporters," she said. Why didn't that quote get prominent media attention?

>> Continued -- Page 1 2