Embedding: more background

To the Editor:

I was delighted to read Lieutenant Commander Brendan R. McLane's generally positive appraisal of embedded media during the Iraq War ("Reporting from the Sandstorm: An Appraisal of Embedding," Spring 2004). To amend the record on two points:

* As far as I am aware, it was the Marine Corps and I who pioneered modern embedding in 1992, when a Newhouse News Service photographer and I joined a Marine Expeditionary Unit for a year. The Marines had agreed that we would have unrestricted access to everything that happened during that year, including classified missions in Somalia. With no assistance (or, for that matter, notice) from the Defense Department, we resolved all the issues that arose. The result was an intense and extremely profitable experience on both sides.

* In 2002 the Army and I pioneered the concept of embedding a journalist into the command center of a highly sensitive and in part classified operation, Anaconda. With the active encouragement of the task force commander, Major General F. L. Hagenbeck, the public affairs officer, the C-2, and I negotiated and signed an agreement that gave me and my photographer unfettered 24-hour access to the command center and its staff and resources. I was free to write what I considered appropriate, but I had to submit all copy to the intelligence officer before transmission. Our agreement spelled out in detail what could and what could not be edited out of my copy. Again, the arrangement worked superbly well; I was able to report accurately (and dramatically) from the eye of the storm--without compromising the operation. The Army got its story told, and newspaper readers got deeper insights and a more human-dimension flavor of the operation than they could get from Washington-based reporting.

Both of these experiences demonstrate that it is possible for experienced journalists to gain the insights that embedding allows, at all levels, without compromising either our independence or our accuracy.

David Wood

National Security Correspondent, Newhouse News Service

Washington, D.C.

The Author Replies:

David Wood's two personal examples read like superb cases of embedding done correctly. The results then please both the military and the press. As he would probably agree, this needs to be the way of the future. Reporters like Wood, Rick Atkinson, and Tom Ricks have the type of credentials on which the military can justify the disclosure of even classified information, since both sides trust each other.

On a side note, it is interesting that Wood's first embedding experience was with the Marine Corps. The Marines do seem to pioneer relations with the press, as with Tom Ricks' Making the Corps. However, in the aftermath of Operation Iraqi Freedom, some have argued that the pendulum of access should swing back the other way. Their argument is that the next conflict might not be as successful or quick as the one in Iraq, and thus embedded coverage could undermine military operations.

Perhaps the press coverage of the occupation could serve as a case study for the future. Many positive and negative stories have made it to the front page, and an analysis could be made of whether the military believes the coverage has been accurate and fair. Anecdotally, I have read many e-mails describing very positive experiences from officers serving in Iraq, officers who believe their side of the story is not being told.

Lieutenant Commander Brendan McLane, USN

COPYRIGHT 2004 U.S. Army War College
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group