The U.S. military's practice of embedding reporters with frontline military units can have its flaws: shifting ground rules, questions about access, and the limitations of the "soda straw" view. But when the system works, it provides an unfiltered view of war -- and a unique chance to record the stories of men and women who are risking their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq.
But that uncensored view of a military at war, it seems, is a bit too much for the Australian Defence Force's top brass. The Australian military just took a trial run of a new embedding system in Afghanistan -- and according to journalists who took part in the experiment, the results were less than spectacular.
Defense writer Ian McPhedran described the Australian military's "media embed trial" as more of an escorted battlefield tour, not a 24/7 immersion in the life of troops at war. He describes arriving at a combat outpost, only to be informed by higher headquarters that they would not be allowed off base.
"We had traveled 10,000 km, endured 10 days of 'training,' briefings and dodging Defence PR fluff stories, only to be denied access to a real story at the final hurdle," he wrote. "After a tense stand-off, we eventually joined several patrols and they yielded some of the best stories of the month-long exercise, but such 'near embedding' was limited."
Gary Ramage, an experienced combat photographer, was also on the trip. In a recent photo essay, he compared an embed with U.S. troops, who took him out on lots of patrols, to the chaperoned tour given by the Australians.
"I have to say this was a very disappointing experience after the access that the Americans had granted me," he wrote. "The Commanding Officer of the Australian Task Force was risk averse and denied us access to the stories on the front line. It was an opportunity that the ADF has misjudged."
[PHOTO: Gary Ramage/The Punch]
ALSO:
