While the United States military prepares for a new war on Iraq and while United Nations inspectors search for evidence of weapons of mass destruction, the US media seem to be readying itself and the public for another prime time television war.

Part of the evidence is in the massive promotion in the US media of a new made-for-TV movie, Live From Baghdad, scheduled to debut on Home Box Office (HBO) on December 7, recounting the heroic work of Cable News Network (CNN) correspondents and producers in providing live TV coverage of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

The US$20-million HBO movie, based on a book by Robert Weiner who was the CNN producer of the field coverage of the war from Baghdad, is a reasonably faithful account of what actually happened according to a New York Times report of November 18.

The war established CNN as a global player in international news and advanced the TV journalism careers of star reporters such as Bernard Shaw, Richard Roth and Peter Arnett who had already earned his reputation as a war correspondent in Vietnam.

According to the Times report, HBO executives originally planned to launch ‘Live From Baghdad’ next February but advanced the premiere so it would air it before the much anticipated Gulf War Two begins. Obviously, a hit movie about covering the first war would give CNN a competitive edge over other networks covering the sequel.

Co-ordinating schedules is not difficult since HBO and CNN are offspring of the same giant parent, AOL-Time Warner – one of only six media and communications conglomerates that control most of what the people of the world see, hear and read for information or entertainment.

Another piece of evidence of media preparation for a new war was the rush by scores of news organisations to participate in war-coverage training exercises put on by the US military for selected representatives of the world press.

The Washington Times on Thursday reported details of a crash course in warfare offered at various US military installations along the East Coast. Some 58 reporters and photographers from 31 different news organisations including one Russian news-service reporter and one television reporter from the United Arab Emirates, participated in the camp.

The week-long “media boot camp” was designed to raise “the comfort level” of journalists seeking to be placed with troops, US defence department spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said.

The boot camp was supposed to teach reporters how to take cover under fire, first aid and other military basics. Pentagon officials created the camp in response to media criticism about limited access to troops during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, in which journalists were placed in the field with troops. Other boot camps are being planned, including one in Britain or Germany.

The Pentagon “is committed to placing reporters with troops in the field if war with Iraq occurs”, the spokeswoman reportedly said.

Movies, practising under fire and the cosy relationship between the US press and military aside, there are some other issues about a possible war with Iraq that should be exercising journalistic imagination and energy at this time.

One of them, touched on by a CNN news executive Chris Cramer at an international conference in Dublin this week is the fact that journalists working in hostile environments now face more dangers because they are perceived as “representatives of the governments of the countries we come from”.

I share Cramer’s lament over the death of at least 13 reporters and camera crew this year. Indeed, journalism has always been a risky business and reporters have been killed by despots, drug lords and other purveyors of crime and totalitarianism.

But perhaps what is qualitatively different for the US and many western reporters now is the ‘us’ and ‘them’ policy of the George W Bush administration as the US government and people search for reassuring answers to the September 11 trauma.

Writing in USA Today, professor Howard Myrick of Temple University, Philadelphia said: “Until most recently the news media industry has been a near collaborator in fomenting a fundamental agreement between the public and the Federal government in determining what the nation’s response to the threat of terrorism should be and who the perpetrators are”.

Not wanting to be seen as “harbouring or displaying unpatriotic sentiments” the news media has been largely unwilling to question the effectiveness, appropriateness and legality of some of the government’s actions in the war against terrorism.

The news media largely determines what the public should think about and how they should think about Arabs, Muslims and even Arab-Americans, the Arab-Israeli conflict and any conflict in the world in which there is a US interest.

With most Americans wanting to blame and punish someone for inflicting the searing pain of 9/11, many journalists “would not like to find themselves in a widely discordant position with the prevailing sentiments of their viewers, listeners and/or readers” commented Myrick.

The case for war against Saddam Hussein is not nuanced. President Bush says he is evil-and indeed, he is. He has dangerous weapons. He probably does. He has ignored lots of UN Security Council resolutions.

But many others are guilty of the same transgressions. Indeed the North Koreans say they have the bomb. So does Israel. And Israel has ignored more Security Council resolutions than anyone, including apartheid South Africa. Of course, impoverishing the population is the daily diet of many who lead developing countries. In making the case against Saddam, the US press must be careful not to make a case against Islam.

So the press should be helping the public to think more clearly through the issues. Can the world disarm Saddam of weapons of destruction without a war? What are the links between 9/11 and the Arab-Israeli conflict? How will a war impact Arab regimes throughout the Middle east and Islamic countries throughout Asia and Africa?

While these questions remain largely unanswered the press is getting ready to win prizes in war reporting. But Baghdad will not be as accommodating. “This time the Iraqis are going to be much more concerned with their own survival than keeping CNN on the air”, Weiner told the Times.

Claude Robinson is senior fellow in the Research and Policy Group, Mona School of Business at UWI. crobin@uwimona.edu.jm