I forgot to write about this, but I thought this was a great compromise:
The Pentagon will lift its ban on media coverage of the flag-draped coffins of war victims arriving at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday.
But the families of the victims will have the final say on whether to allow the coverage, he said.
President Obama asked Gates to review the policy, and Gates said he decided after consulting with the armed services and groups representing military families to apply the same policy that is used at Arlington National Cemetery.
“I have decided that the decision regarding media coverage of the dignified transfer process at Dover should be made by those most directly affected — the families,” he said at a news conference.
My only concern about this when the debate was hot and heavy was the possibility that coffins of American dead would be shown in the media somehow before families were notified. That possibility just horrified me. If families have to be asked prior to the photographing, then clearly they have been notified, so my only concern has been met. This seems to me to be an excellent compromise, with one caveat- I hope something is done to make sure families are not pressured. I’m assuming this could be easily avoided by having the DoD serve as the intermediaries between the families and the media.
The Grand Panjandrum
I also think it would be important to allow the filming of how the caskets are treated. Show how they are removed from the plane at Dover. Those unauthorized photos taken by a worker a few years back really were quite moving. The great respect and dignity the graves registration show the remains of our fallen troops is remarkable. The people in those units are to be commended for their professionalism.
I think Gates made an excellent decision by letting the families decide. It really should be their choice.
Because of how notification is done now the family knows of the death before the remains arrive at Dover. Most notifications are done within 24 hours.
tim
John, I’ve never understood how it can hurt "families" to have the general populace see pictures of anonymous coffins covered with flags containing remains that no one will be able to identify as anyone in particular.
Perhaps you could enlighten me.
It seems ridiculous to me that these soldiers are sent off with great public fanfare in alleged "service" to their nation, and all are encouraged to watch the spectacle in the bright light of day, but should they die in same service to nation, the return of their dead and lifeless bodies somehow becomes the private domain of their loved ones.
Let those who publicly cheer the departure also bear public witness to the return.
This "new" policy will be used by the Pentagon to hide as many dead soldiers as possible.
Persia
@The Grand Panjandrum:
Our military does some things remarkably well, and that’s one of them.
Cheers to the Obama administration for prizing openness, but not at the expense of the families who lost their beloved sons, daughters, spouses, parents.
wilfred
Amen. Well said.
Dave
I don’t think this could have been handled any better.
John Cole
@tim: The media could always go to the funerals. That hasn’t changed.
And for me, it was always an issue of notification. There is a reason the media never release the name of DUI victims or accident victims until the families have been notified. This was the same thing for me.
Now, if you are going to argue that the government was using this policy to “hide” the cost of war, you will get no argument from me. The reason for the implementation of the policy stems back to the Bush split-screen a couple decades ago.
This is a good policy now. The decision is left to the families.
Laura W
OT but sobering enough to fit in with many of this morning’s posts and far more interesting to me than anything being said or done at CPAC.
Got this in email last night but just viewed it now. Maybe it’s old news to most of you, but it’s the first time I’ve seen it.
An articulate and passionate 12-year old "child", Severn Cullis-Suzuki, (Environmental Childrens Organization) spends 6:41 minutes educating the "adults" at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 19 freakin’ 92.
If you don’t know how to fix it, please stop breaking it.
mm
@Laura W:
Her dad is David Suzuki, of course she can give a great speech about the environment! Are you amazed when a young Kennedy can give a great political speech too? LOL
chrome agnomen
what tim said. my thoughts also.
the caskets are anonymous. if they were open, i’d understand a reticence. i also understand the propaganda angle, but if the sight of these dead does anything to dissuade the country from the temptation to enter upon conflicts posited on dubious premises, then those dead will truly have again served their nation in a wonderful way.
Krista
It may seem ridiculous to you, but like it or not, when someone dies, the family’s wishes trump all else. It’s basic human decency.
Laura W
@mm: I appreciate your insightful comment.
John Cole
@Krista: Thank you, Krista.
The Other Steve
My God, you were a dumb wingnut, weren’t you?
Tsulagi
Excellent intelligent and compassionate compromise giving the decision making to the families. Where it should be.
The Canadian gets it.
John Cole
@The Other Steve: No, you stupid fuck, I was someone who spent ten years in uniform and was mortified at the possibility that someone’s loved one could be shown in the media before they were notified.
Well, actually, I was a dumb wingnut, but my concerns were and are valid.
Skepticat
As Tim does, I wonder how photos of unmarked flag-draped caskets coming off a plane and being handled with great care and respect could hurt a specific family or invade anyone’s privacy. The families don’t have to be shown.
Coverage of anonymous–but numerous–coffins arriving at Dover AFB had an incredibly strong impact on the public’s perception of the war in Vietnam. Each of us was able to identify with each family’s pain even if we didn’t know who they were, and the ceaseless drumbeat of pain in the photos led to pressure that shortened if not ended that disaster.
Last June I was at a small private airport in Florida when a soldier’s casket was returned. Seeing that family waiting by the hearse as the plane taxied in was agonizing, and yet there was a part of me that wished many more people thus could see firsthand the high cost of this obscene, senseless debacle.
gypsy howell
I will join the chorus wondering how showing anonymous closed caskets with flags draped on them somehow violates the privacy of specific family members. Unless I’m missing something about what the coverage would consist of.
It’s complete bullshit to hide the horrors and costs of war (human and otherwise) from Americans. That’s how we so blithely get into these wars. We sure don’t have any problem showing blown up kids and anguished loved ones from other countries. Their privacy is never a problem for us. Only our own delicate sensibilities matter.
Good lord, I grew up during a time when on any given night you could tune in to NBC’s evening news and watch 20 year olds being choppered off the battlefield minus a few limbs. Did the media ask those families for permission to run the tape?
The newspapers report the names of accident victims once the families are notified, but I don’t think they have to ask for permission to do so. Are you telling em that by the time the caskets are coming into Dover, the families haven’t been notified yet?
OK, maybe I’m missing something here.
JR
John, do caskets ever arrive at Dover before NOK are notified? The notification is pretty quick (and has been since the telegram), and my understanding is that names of deceased service members are not released prior to family notification anyway. As the caskets are unidentifiable and uniform, it seems like there’s not any information to be gleaned from a photograph of one. Can you please explain (because I’m not the only one who’s confused) how you think that allowing the photos of anonymous, flag-draped caskets would constitute a threat of families finding out their loved ones have perished from CNN?
One other thing: how do you figure having DoD serve as an intermediary is going to alleviate the risk of families facing pressure? I’d think it would just subject them to a different form of pressure–one where they’re encouraged to follow DoD’s preferences rather than those of the media.
Karen
The video brought up a good point about who will make the decision for the families. If it’s a split decision, I see trouble.
Another concern would be IF the press is allowed to be there, could the nutcases from Topeka find a way to be there as well? That’s one group that should be no where near Dover. (They were demonstrating at our church last year. That’s the most horrendous group I’ve ever seen or heard.)
Tsulagi
Simple solution to that wonderment. Default to the families’ wishes rather than your own. These returning service members have given all; their country owes them a debt. The least that could be given to that service member is to allow his/her family to deal with their loss and grief as they see fit.
If their wish is for public display, let the strobe lights flash. I’m guessing enough would opt for that to satisfy those who want to see photos and film of caskets returning.
jenniebee
@John Cole: are there some identifying marks on the coffins as they’re transported? I’m not sure I understand the concern, if the remains are reported simply as "remains of servicemen, killed in —–" there’s no way a family would find out about the death of their loved one through the newspaper.
I’m still of the opinion that this "compromise" isn’t really a compromise at all. If a photographer has to find out who is in each of the caskets that are incoming and contact each of the families prior to the arrival of the caskets and get permission from every single one of those families (because that’s the only way to be sure that the pictures he’s taking are all in compliance without interfering in the process and asking the guys unloading the caskets to sort them, which is invasive), this is a non-compromise compromise.
I compared it yesterday to getting permission to use "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald" – the rights belong to the families of all the victims, so in order to use the song, producers would have to track down all of the owners and get permission from all of them, and because one "no" effectively trumps everybody else’s "yes" the probability of success is very low – so low that nobody ever bothers. This is not going to open things up and show the cost of war, even if families want it shown. It’s a sharp political move, but it won’t change anything.
Mike in NC
Yet another stupid and self-serving policy of the Bush era overturned. Can’t get enough of that.
keenanjay
John, I never saw the issue with showing anonymous caskets being unloaded. Identities are not revealed. Personally, I consider it the last service the soldier performs for his country – to serve as an example of the consequences of war, illconceived or otherwise. Allons.
John Cole
@jenniebee: None that I am aware of. And no, I do not know if whether or not bodies arrive in Dover before families are notified, and I would doubt it considering the lengthy transit time, but I don’t want to chance it.
Here is what I don’t want. I don’t want a mom, who has a kid in the military, watching the news and seeing flag draped coffins, and a couple hours later getting the call. I just don’t. Maybe it would never happen, I just don’t want to chance it.
And likewise, I fully recognize that this debate has been shifted to the “right,” because before BUSH 1 no one would ever have questioned showing the caskets. I also fully understand the notion that we should be showing these pictures both as a tribute and because we should not be able to hide from what we have caused when we start a war.
But I think this is a good compromise. It leaves the decision where it should be- with the families.
jenniebee
@John Cole: I understand that, and it sounds awful. She would probably never know if that picture had included her kid or not, but she might wonder.
Still, bigger picture here – if showing the caskets changed public opinion about war and made us more prudent and made us not fall for the "nobody’s going to be killed" line and influenced us in a way that made us choose policies that kept more mothers’ sons alive, I have to think that would be worth it. In a lot of ways, this is like rape/abuse statistics. Public knowledge is a difficult thing to countenance, but the bad behavior thrives in concealment.
Some wars are worth fighting, and I trust an informed public to figure out which ones those are – given our history, it’s hard to pick out any time when we were honestly educated about threats and really should have taken up arms but didn’t. We have also engaged in quite a few unjust and unprovoked wars, and the hallmark of those seems to be that our leaders lied to us, the media let them, and the costs of the wars were denigrated and hidden. Nobody hid the casualty lists in the Civil War – they were printed in the newspapers (and nobody then thought that that was an unacceptable method of notifying families). Nobody hid the coffins coming back from the World Wars, and nobody suggested then that it would be horrible for a picture honoring the fallen to be published before the family had been notified.
It’s funny, isn’t it – when we’re fighting a just war (one with a legitimate casus belli), there’s no controversy about this. Nobody would have your worries, because everybody would see those pictures as being a sign of honor and gratitude from the public for sacrifices made. It’s only in an unjust war that the pictures become controversial.
MNPundit
Someone brought up with, what if families on the same shipment disagree? Do they stop, remove those particular coffins then shoot the pictures?
Tsulagi
Probably have, but it would be very uncommon. Military does a very good and conscientious job of notifying next of kin. In Iraq when one falls, often internet access is cut at their operating base until his/her family can be quickly notified. So they can be notified directly rather than possibly second or third hand or on the local news after someone on base emailed or IM’d one of their family or friends at home.
For me prior notification is not a factor. That if the family has been notified of their loss then they have no privacy. It should be the family’s wishes respected. Period.
My understanding is that DoD will act as a buffer between the family and press. Photographers, news organizations or whatever will contact them to find if the family will allow the return to be public. That’s the way it should be. Right or Left can use something else to move the Overton window.
Don
Here is what I don’t want. I don’t want a mom, who has a kid in the military, watching the news and seeing flag draped coffins, and a couple hours later getting the call. I just don’t. Maybe it would never happen, I just don’t want to chance it.
How would this new ‘compromise’ solve that issue? Theoretically the news could be showing the 9 coffins from the notified and non-objecting family members and mom’s kid’s pine box is out of frame to the left.
I’m all for showing proper respect to the families and the people giving up their lives in service to our country, but as far as I have ever been able to tell the only identifiable fatalities in those coffin pictures are cotton and lumber. If it’s impossible to know who is in the shot then this new system is a sham – either no pictures will ever be denied (who can prove it was their loved in in that anonymous shot?) or every picture will (one of the coffins had an objecting family member – you can’t prove otherwise!).
This prohibition never added up and this new purported system doesn’t either.
Skepticat
I’m not certain, as I’m very grateful I’ve ever had to suffer that way, but it seems deep in my memory I’ve heard that remains are not returned to the states until the family is notified and has made arrangements for the remains to be returned to the states.
Bill H
I was with those who had the thought about the anonymous nature of a mass of flag draped coffins. And then this:
Exactly right. Thank you. That’s why the "depending upon permission of the families" is exactly the right decision.
So "compromise" is maybe not quite the right word, John, although I know what you meant by it. That word implies that the decision has elements of both right and wrong in it and with that block quote in mind, I see no element of anything but the right decision. More, perhaps, than anything the Obama Administration has done, this decision warms my heart.
ErinSiobhan
Canada has been using this compromise when the remains of soldiers killed in Afghanistan are returned and it seems to be working well.
The section of highway that the hearses travel when transferring the bodies from Trenton to the coroner’s office in Toronto has been renamed the Highway of Heroes. On days when the processions accompanying the hearses travel the highway, crowds of people line the overpasses to pay their respects. It’s a very sad, but moving, spectacle to watch.
I think that giving citizens the opportunity to bear witness and show their respect for fallen soldiers is a very good thing.
Don
So if, instead, she is asked if it’s okay and says no, then sees flag-draped coffins on tv, how does she know her request was honored?
I’m seriously not trying to be a jerk about this but I simply do not understand how this supposed permission (a) works and (b) eliminates that person’s potential bad feelings.
tim
Isn’t it inspiring and wonderful how honorably the military industrial complex treats young men and women in uniform, as well as their families, catering to their every perceived need and imagined comfort, taking extreme care not to violate any possible tender feelings or to cause even the tiniest distress?
Isn’t it awesome how they only do this once the kids are cold and dead?
The gaudy, maudlin military ceremonies engaged in by the U.S. are really revolting; all props and scenery and staging and lighting and music cued just so to whip the populace into cheap sentimental hysterics…"wishes of the families," my ass. This is all about the wishes of the Pentagon. For all we know the "coffins" are empty anyway; I’m sure parts and pieces of these poor kids get left in Iraq all the time.
Person of Choler
Coffin photographs, just like the good old days in Vietnam. What next, a Country Joe and the Fish revival?