Walking a bit closer to one of the huge guns with my headphones and mics just after a solider fires it into the distance, I inadvertently end up aiming my mics at a group of soldiers talking nearby. They hesitate, and then collectively move somewhere else. I feel slightly uncomfortable and hope that I make it apparent that I just want gun noises, clicking, firing, rounds being loaded, and not their conversation. But a haze of disinterest at best and vague hostility at worst hovers everywhere on the firing range.
Scott turns away from a soldier he’d been talking to and walks back towards me with his mic and digital recorder, giving me a shrug as he does so. He’s a bit concerned about the soldiers’ reaction to us being there to document their training. The vibe is certainly mixed.
The Impact of War series that Scott’s been contributing to is, in my estimation, an attempt to show how truly life-altering a deployment is; an attempt to clarify an otherwise blurry notion many of us may have on what all is entailed in being a soldier.
We were escorted via military vehicle the 15-20 minute drive into the wilderness of the base by the uniformed equivalent of a public relations person. On the ride back he and Scott talked quite a bit about the uneasy relationship between reporters and soldiers. He cites reporters who drop into locations, Iraq, Afghanistan, for a few days and then leave believing they’re experts and qualified to report on how life really is in a war.
Get in, get the story and get out. Then get paid.
The situation between soldiers, reporters, wars and coverage of it is, I’m finding, very complex. To start, the mild antagonism I felt at the base is nothing unusual apparently. And I sort of understood that antagonism in a vague way that I couldn’t quite articulate. I think I might have felt the same way in their shoes. But why?
I’m totally speculating when I imagine there might be some resentment. I know personally if I were about to be shipped off to another country and forced to endure harsh conditions, I might look resentfully upon reporters whose job is so less real, less dangerous, not life-threatening…not relevant.
I think another possibility is is that reporting by nature is parasitic. Scott and I, that day, are making a living off of these soldiers’ grim situation to make a good story. The job of reporting relies on other people to actually do things, to make the news, and reporters feed off of that. And to make matters worse, in the case of reporting on soldiers’ lives, we’re using the very possibility that they may not return home as our unspoken though implied sensationalistic appeal. And then we go back to our computers, type it up, edit and produce it until it’s pretty and attractive for mass consumption
Can it be any other way?
During our drive to the firing range, a female soldier had accompanied us in the jeep and turned the tables on Scott, pulling out a small video camera and asking him a few basic questions about his reporting on the war. Scott told me later on our way home, I need a better answer for the question of ‘Why do you want to cover this story?’ Because I could tell them but it would sound like just a bunch of rambling. That was one of the questions she had asked him.
And that’s really the pivotal question: Why do we want to cover this story? That I think is the ultimate question any soldier should ask a reporter.
As I was running the days events through my mind back at the radio station, I pictured again Scott on the receiving end of some mild disapproval from one of the soldiers. And I’d been trying to figure out for myself why I feel that reporting on these soldiers is justified and how it’s not purely parasitic in nature. And as the imaginary argument played out in my head, in response to the resentment and antagonism of a skeptical soldier, the imaginary reporter in my head replied, “I don’t want your life to be taken for granted.”
And that kinda was the click for me.
I can only speak for myself when I say that I don’t 100% comprehend what it means when I see “3 U.S. Soldiers Killed in Iraq” in the newspaper. I understand what it means, but the impact is so dulled, so vague. And that, really, is just the saddest thing. That three people can die, that three mothers lose their sons, and I can move onto another article with a small sigh and not look back. I am totally missing the impact of war.
As much for me as for other people, The Impact of War series is an attempt to not allow these soldiers lives to shrugged off as another statistic. And because it isn’t a once and done thing, because people like Scott are following the same group of soldiers and learning about their stories, the act of reporting isn’t just a telling of a drama and then picking up a paycheck. The story is a commitment to them that that their lives will not be taken for granted.