Alert # 1: Iraqi Casualties and Other Costs of War

Here's our first alert!  (issued Sunday, May 4)

THE PROBLEM:  On the front page of the its Friday (May 2) edition, running along the side of an article and photo about Bush's Thursday night speech to the nation, the Kansas City Star printed an inch-wide summary of statistics titled, "The Cost of Iraqi Freedom."  The "costs" included the number of U.S. military personnel deployed, three different figures about U.S. military deaths in different contexts, British casualties, and the numbers of aircraft, sorties, tomahawk missiles, and precision-guided bombs used.  Five different sources were listed for the compilation of the statistics.  To read the complete list, see the bottom of this e-mail, or go to http://www.kansascity.com/multimedia/kansascity/archive/FRIDAY.pdf

There was no mention -- not even a rough estimate -- of Iraqi military or civilian deaths, estimated by some sources to be over 2,000 civilians (Education for Peace in Iraq Center).  No mention of the humanitarian costs of war, including outbreaks of cholera and dysentery that are putting hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children at risk.  No mention of the lethal delays of water, electricity, and other essential services.  No mention of the loss of the national museum and archives in Iraq.  No mention of the additional $75 billion Bush asked Congress for just five days into the war, the pre-war deficit of close to $600 billion, or the millions, and in some cases billions, of dollars in current state deficits. 

A front-page article in today's (Sun. May 4) Kansas City Star states that at least 1,101 Iraqi civilians died in Baghdad, and hospital records indicate the total could be twice that.  And more than 6,800 civilians were wounded, according to a Knight-Ridder (owner of the Star) survey of archives at Baghdad's 19 largest hospitals.  Good information -- but why didn't it appear among the "cost of Iraqi freedom" stats on Friday?  Plus, the last 12 paragraphs of this 51-paragraph article are spent putting "The numbers in context," essentially downplaying the tragedy of Iraqi deaths.  A link to the article appears below. 

THE ACTION:  Contact the Reader's Representative of the Star and write a letter to the editor asking why Iraqi civilian and military casualties and other consequences of war, in Iraq and in the U.S., were not included among the "costs" in Friday's front-page list.  Isn't it ironic to list the very devices that killed Iraqis among the costs of Iraqi "freedom"?  Does the Star think the war was costly only for the Americans and British?  Is the use of 800 tomahawk cruise missiles worth more than the loss of easily twice as many Iraqi lives?  Why was the Star neglecting its mission to "Build our community through knowledge?" by leaving out such cornerstones of information? (Feel free to use statistics you find on your own.  Ones that have appeared in "mainstream" media sources are most likely most compelling to the Star.)  Also mention that Sunday's article about Iraqi deaths in Baghdad is necessary, but why was one-fourth of it to devoted to minimizing the severity of Iraqi casualties?  Would the Star ever run an article that included analysis putting U.S. casualties "in context" in such a way?  

HOW TO DO IT:   

1. Contact the Readers' Representative, Doug Worgul, at readerrep@kcstar.com, (816) 234-4487, or fax (816) 234-4940 (8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. weekdays). 

2. Send a letter up to 150 words to letters@kcstar.com or write Kansas City Star, Letters, 1729 Grand Blvd., KCMO 64108.  Include your name, address and daytime phone number.  Or call (816) 234-4497 to leave a 30-second commentary.  Leave your name, address and daytime phone number. 

3. Drop an e-mail to kcmediawatch@yahoo.com  so we'll know how many responded.  Feel free to include the text of your e-mails or letters to the Star if you wish. 

 Thank you!!