Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

In bed with the army

'Embedded' reporters ate and slept with the Allies, but the working relationship was bound to result in a clash of working cultures, says Terri Judd

Monday 21 April 2003 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Whether through optimism or plain arrogance, I listened little to those who warned me that being "embedded" with the British Army would be frustrating. My time with the 3 Regiment Army Air Corps – one of the fighter helicopter units of 16 Air Assault Brigade – in Iraq was the most exasperating experience of my career. But it was also the most fascinating and rewarding.

To say that the embedded media were given incredible access would be an understatement. We lived in the same uncomfortable and perilous conditions, dug the same protective bunkers, endured the same gas alerts, ate the same inedible food and witnessed the soldiers' fear and grief first-hand.

Much to my surprise, the soldiers welcomed our presence. As is often the case in societies where people have little, they shared all they had without hesitation.

Throughout the war, one was constantly reminded of the two-tier media system – those of us with the forces and those working independently as "unilaterals". It was only upon emerging from the regimental cocoon that I appreciated the equal frustrations the unilateral reporters were enduring. While we had been jealous of their freedom, they had been jealous of our access.

For many of those embedded with the British forces there was a frustrating 48-hour news blackout before we crossed the border as we listened to US journalists broadcasting the beginning of the war, convinced the unilaterals were having a field day. It was only later that I realised the difficulties they were having, blocked from crossing into Iraq as we moved forward as part of the invading force.

So it was a system that created a strange rivalry. On one occasion, I was among a handful of embeds taken to speak to Royal Engineers who had been tasked with checking the giant gas and oil separation plants in the Rumaila oilfields for booby traps. We arrived, a bedraggled bunch, only to realise that a group of pristine TV reporters had been brought in by helicopter that morning from Kuwait. Their arrival was a bone of contention. Ironically, some of the independent reporters felt the same, having struggled through hostile terrain to get somewhere interesting, only to watch the embedded media sweep into town.

Censorship was obviously a big fear, with the insistence that all copy be checked by assigned media officers in case information should jeopardise operations. However, my "minder" never once asked me to delete anything he considered negative, although I understand other embeds were not so lucky. The frustration lay in simply accessing information in a rigid system. Details of attacks were initially drip-fed, deadlines ignored and perfectly reasonable questions left unanswered.

In fairness, I am sure they were as frustrated by my initial failure to appreciate their systems as I was by their lack of understanding of my requirements. We were two diametrically opposed worlds attempting to coexist. Repeatedly, when I challenged the wisdom of decisions, I was reminded curtly that I was privileged to be an embedded journalist. It was a statement that irritated intensely and failed to grasp the concept that this was meant to be a mutually beneficial relationship. But after hours of bartering, we did develop a modus operandi.

Would I do it all again? Definitely.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in