Security

Pentagon Dangles Afghan Road Hype; Reporters Bite

"U.S. forces had identified the nation’s decrepit road system as a top priority for the ambitious reconstruction program," I reported from Afghanistan in the summer of 2007. "But poor security combined with persistent charges of corruption have combined to stall many road-building projects, frustrating efforts to boost the economy and creating a major obstacle to […]

590667468_1cd06b2383_b_2_2

"U.S. forces had identified the nation's decrepit road system as a top priority for the ambitious reconstruction program," I reported from Afghanistan in the summer of 2007. "But poor security combined with persistent charges of corruption have combined to stall many road-building projects, frustrating efforts to boost the economy and creating a major obstacle to effective military operations."

Turns out I was onto something bigger than any mere reconstruction story. According to the inestimable Josh Foust, writing for Columbia Journalism Review, the Pentagon grabbed a hold on the roads theme, spun it in their favor, and dangled it in front of gullible reporters:

Sometime last fall, a new story began making its way out of
Afghanistan: the country's roads are being paved, and with that paving comes newfound security. The claim was repeated by many embedded reporters, both freelance and staff, and for months was a recurring theme in personal accounts of the war.

The problem is that roads don't necessarily equal security. In fact, sometimes the Taliban uses newly paved roads to more quickly reach its targets. Other times, the Taliban deliberately targets road builders. The bottom line, according to Foust, is "the idea that roads somehow cause security is simply ridiculous."

Nevertheless, by late 2007 the roads=security "meme," Foust contends, "was starting to resemble a coordinated 'shaping' campaign by the U.S.
military, meant to control coverage of the war." He lays the blame in two places. First, "parachute" embedded reporters:

For far too many short-term reporters, unversed in the issues and subtleties of local events, skepticism is simply a lost art. Unable to question the sometimes questionable claims of officials, they too often serve as empty mouthpieces, repeating press releases as if they were actual news. ... Those who embed with military units for longer periods of time seem less susceptible to the spin machine.

Second, the military public affairs apparatus:

*They have every right to push their side of events, but, as I have argued, they actually need to do a better job of it. The problem ... is that they are so ham-fisted in their dissemination efforts. *

(Photo: me)

ALSO: