I understand the concept that good news won’t make the news (“Nope. No frost in Florida. The oranges just hung on the trees and grew.”) And I understand that bloody headlines sell news.
But I just fail to see why rescuing hostages doesn’t make more of a splash. I can see why opening a school or vaccinating children or building a bridge won’t really make the headlines (though Murdoc does think those types of stories are worthy of far greater exposure than they get) but isn’t rescuing a hostage held by terrorists BIG NEWS?
A cordon and search operation in southeastern Mosul June 9, conducted because of a lead provided by an Iraqi citizen, led to the rescue of a local reporter who was being held hostage.
To rescue the hostage, the Iraqi Intervention Force overcame a small-arms fire attack from terrorists leaving the house. The IIF also detained an individual suspected of being involved in the kidnapping. [emphasis mine]
This was a shootout, folks. Soldiers (Iraqi soldiers, even) won a gun battle to rescue a hostage.
Please explain why this isn’t news.
I noted a rescue previously that only made the local paper of the unit that performed the mission. I never did see any other mention of it. This story is via the Army News Service and probably won’t surface anywhere else, either.
Check out the article. It’s basically a summary of terrorism suspect captures and weapons cache discoveries over the past week or so in the Mosul area. One cache apparently included some 5,000 pound bombs. Wow. Maybe they meant 1,000 or 500 pound bombs.
In any event, I’m not holding my breath to see reports of the hostage rescue (made by Iraqi soldiers off a tip from Iraqi civilians) in Legacy Media. But don’t call them biased. (via FR)