Remember

Just a week ago, my class blogged about editorial decisions regarding whether it's appropriate or not appropriate to publish certain photographs (pretending to put ourselves in the situations that arise for gatekeepers).

But that type of filtering occurs naturally when stories are chosen every day, too. And to be blunt, something needs to be pointed out. What is being under reported -- and maybe what has always been under reported -- is the "war" in Iraq ("war" is in quotations because the occupation is technically not a war, but it might as well be considered a war based upon all the deaths).

How many personal stories of the 4,181 Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice do you really know? How many of their names do you know? How are their families being helped? Has there been a truthful explanation as to why the deceased were put into harm's way in the first place? Is there any accountability?

The point is that, ironically, even when it was popular to report on the war in Iraq (now it is not; it's all about the silly season of politics and the economy), it was still not being reported on correctly and definitely not reported on appropriately. Each life should matter; each life should count. People only live one life.

A newspaper ought to care. More soldiers died a few years ago per day, per month, and per year than the rate going on now (thus far, five U.S. soldiers have died in October of 2008), but has there been a nationalized profile on any of the recent deaths? Do people know about the 25 departed American lives from September of 2008? Are the deaths in vain because we do not know they're occurring since they're not on the front pages?

Seriously, the editorial decisions are embarrassing. It's embarrassing to still have people dying without a true, solid explanation as to why we are in Iraq in the first place (pretty much all the initial reasons turned out to be unfortunately not based on reliable information). Individuals matter. The United States is about quality, not quantity. American heroes have names, faces, families. They all deserve the thought we'd give to pictures, money, and commas -- and obviously much, much more. It's important for us to think about whether to publish pictures and how to best edit this great language of ours, but it's also important to be making decisions that indicate we care about those dying for us.

Even if other events are more popular, such as writing about Wall Street executives losing their gold watches or contemplating the importance of Barack Obama or John McCain being up or down by a point or two in some poll, we still cannot forget what the current reality is for brave Americans. But see, even at the height of the reporting for this war, people did not focus on what mattered. There was little specific reporting on the literal lives and deaths of far too many Americans.

What about the terror someone might have and surely has gone through as he or she was in sheer pain and about to die? What about his or her family? How is the family affected financially? Was there a profile done on the most recent American that was killed in Iraq? Who was the most recent American killed in Iraq? I certainly haven't heard about him or her.

With editorial decisions, reporters are filtering out the lives of individuals who deserve just the opposite. If the news media do not care, then neither will anybody else. When people are fighting and dying, the approach to reporting and investigating and caring must be appropriate and honorable -- which has not been the case for a long, long time, if ever.