I saw this story on Yahoo!... And I don't exactly see what benefit the media finds in portraying all Arab Americans as anti-Americans, (unless of course you're one of those who feels there is some kind of Jewish conspiracy out there in the media to favor Israel and make Arabs look bad. I don't believe that.)
The most interesting thing about this case... I don't think a non-Iraqi student could have gotten away with this... if there's anything that mitigated this incident from pure stupidity on the kid's part, it's the fact that his parents were born in Iraq and he has at least some cultural connection. The CIA could take a hint from that. It shows one of the advantages of having a culturally diverse society.
Most of the media itself is anti-American, and is always looking for opportunities to boost their own opinions and biases. They ignore stories that go against their preset biases.
Dazzleman (and MarkDel), beyond your overbroad generalizations which I disagree with (Sean Hannity is of course, not a member of the media; he does not of course, have one of the highest rated political shows of the century... no conservative can possibly be a member of the media because as we all know...).
Rather, let us deal with the matter under specific discussion. The issue here seems to be either
an Iraqi American who plays a confrontational role, a "spokesperson" of Iraq against government policy,
or an Iraqi American who plays a supportive role, a "cheerleader" and giver of gratitude for American sacrifices,
One of these stories is rife with controversy and conflict; yes, it can be portrayed as a brave stand. The other story is sweet and cuddly, but it can't be portrayed as the same kind of "desperate struggle against the government." Think about, generally, the kind of stories the media likes to report. Do they report conflictual, controversial stories, or do they prefer sweet and cuddly ones? What is more compeling- a hero that seems to stand against a powerful force, or a hero that has the support of the community?
In going to Iraq, this boy risked his life; he stood against a powerful danger and this alone makes his story compelling. But beyond that, what psychological factors pique one's interest?
I seem to remember when "the American Taliban" John Walker Lindh got a great deal of attention a few years ago, but I can't remember if conservatives complained at the coverage he received. Tens of thousands of Americans went to Afghanistan, soldiers and civilians, to support the military and post-military effort. Yet this guy, John Walker Lindh, the American traitor, receives such disproportionate coverage. Why? Is the media anti-American? Or, could it be that because Lindh is in such a unique position, that the American people want to know more about him? I believe it is the latter.
