Mourning Losses At CBS News

Two CBS employees were killed, and CBS reporter Kimberly Dozier was badly injured when the vehicle they were riding in was blown up by an IED.

A car bomb explosion in central Baghdad Monday killed two CBS News crew members, an Iraqi interpreter and a U.S. soldier, and severely wounded the news team's correspondent, in one of a string of attacks that killed dozens of people in Iraq over the course of the day.

Paul Douglas, a cameraman, and James Brolan, a sound man, died in the blast, CBS News said in a statement. Both men were British citizens based in London. Kimberly Dozier, an American correspondent who has covered the war in Iraq for nearly three years, was taken to a Baghdad hospital for surgery. The network said she was listed in critical condition and that doctors were "cautiously optimistic" about her prognosis.

[CBS reported Tuesday morning that Dozier had been transferred Landstuhl Medical Center in Germany, the U.S. military hospital, where she remained in critical condition.]

My condolences go out to the families.

Some of the media coverage on the morning television shows focused on the number of journalists killed in the Iraq theater of operations and claimed that this was one of the deadliest wars for journalists. I think that they're forgetting about World War II. However, comparitively speaking, it would appear that journalists are being killed in greater numbers as compared to the number of soldiers killed in this current conflict. This may be a function of terrorists and insurgents targeting journalists knowing that their deaths will be covered far more than those of individual soldiers. Killing journalists would be a bigger media coup for them; further influencing the media war against the US by undermining efforts to eliminate the terrorist and insurgency threat in Iraq. The terrorist strategy would go something like this - make the media focus on the journalists' casualties and the further negative spin would put pressure on the Administration to move towards withdrawal. Thus, the terrorists would gain a cheap media victory, when what they did was kill civilians who were reporting the events of the day in Iraq.

This might also have a chilling effect on those journalists in Iraq, and reduce the likelyhood that they'll venture out of the Green Zone to cover news in the rest of the country where the level of violence is far lower. Again, that affects the media coverage and makes it appear that Iraq is far more dangerous than it is. This isn't to say that Iraq is safe, but it is safer than the media has made it out to be - the violence is largely focused on the same places it has been since 2003 - the Baghdad environs, Sunni Triangle, and Anbar region.

UPDATE:
This report notes the deaths of journalists in Iraq and references to a Freedom House report saying that only 68 journalists were killed in the course of World War II. If that number holds true, then this is indeed the deadliest conflict for journalists. The report also notes the circumstances of those incidents if known:

Responsibility:
• Insurgent action: 45 (Includes crossfire, suicide bombings, and murders.)
• U.S. fire: 14 (CPJ has not found evidence to conclude that U.S. troops targeted journalists in these cases. While the cases are classified as crossfire, CPJ continues to investigate.)
• Iraqi armed forces, during U.S. invasion: 3 (All are crossfire or acts of war.)
• Iraqi armed forces, post-U.S. invasion: 1 (Crossfire)
• Source unconfirmed: 8

UPDATE:
Dozier's condition is still quite serious, but she is responsive and can wiggle her toes.

James Joyner makes the same point I did earlier today, though he does so far more eloquently.

The fact that the lion’s share of the reporters killed in this war are Iraqis specifically targetted by the guerrillas precisely because they are Iraqi is a unique aspect of this war. We’re facing an enemy that considers journalists legitimate targets, something that has not been the case in past conflicts.

More importantly, though, this war is simply different from most wars of the past in that there is truly no front line anymore. One is almost equally likely to be killed well into the rear area as out on patrol seeking to engage the enemy. In past wars, even as recently as the first Gulf War, most reporters were able to camp out at headquarters or in cushy hotels away from the fighting, and still do their job. In a war where the enemy deliberately targets civilians, there is no safety zone.