This article explores the criticisms of the media in their new coverage in the months leading up the Iraq War. It has been argued by academics, journalists, and other members of society that the media was biased towards the Bush Administration and thus swayed public opinion. This article suggests that the mass media failed to present varied point of views regarding America’s potential involvement in Iraq. Thus, the media can be held partially responsible for the war.

The article provides a detailed analysis of the topic and explains its claims thoroughly. The article states “Bush administration officials were the most frequently quoted sources, the voices of anti-war groups and opposition Democrats were barely audible, and the overall thrust of cover- age favoured a pro-war perspective.” Therefore claiming that the media was in fact biased towards the Bush administration. Furthermore, while the article states that journalists do seek out opposition in order to give their article balance and consequently not be one sided, it is also stated that foreign opinions are not often presented. It is thought that often people only relate to that which they already believe and as a result, they do not resonate with the opposition. Additionally, foreign beliefs were believed to not be in line with American interests and therefore not widely represented in mass media.

The articles founds were that the criticisms of the media in the lead up the the Iraq war are “justified.” After conducting their research it was found that the media favoured the Bush Administration, that their opinions were the ones most quoted, and the “directional thrust” of TV news reports show the invasion of Iraq in a “more positive than negative light.”