The Chronicle of Higher Education has an important piece today on the study released but in October which estimated that Iraqi deaths since the start of the Iraq War were likely over 100,000, and discusses the failure of the news media to cover the story. It writes,
When more than 200,000 people died in a tsunami caused by an Asian earthquake in December, the immediate reaction in the United States was an outpouring of grief and philanthropy, prompted by extensive coverage in the news media.
Two months earlier, the reaction in the United States to news of another large-scale human tragedy was much quieter. In late October, a study was published in The Lancet, a prestigious British medical journal, concluding that about 100,000 civilians had been killed in Iraq since it was invaded by a United States-led coalition in March 2003. On the eve of a contentious presidential election - fought in part over U.S. policy on Iraq - many American newspapers and television news programs ignored the study or buried reports about it far from the top headlines.
The paper, written by researchers at the Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University, and Baghdad's Al-Mustansiriya University, was based on a door-to-door survey in September of nearly 8,000 people in 33 randomly selected locations in Iraq. It was dangerous work, and the team of researchers was lucky to emerge from the survey unharmed.
Neither the Defense Department nor the State Department responded to the paper, nor would they comment when contacted by The Chronicle. American news-media outlets largely published only short articles, noting how much higher the Lancet estimate was than previous estimates. Some pundits called the results politicized and worthless.
Les F. Roberts, a research associate at Hopkins and the lead author of the paper, was shocked by the muted or dismissive reception. He had expected the public response to his paper to be "moral outrage." On its merits, the study should have received more prominent play. Public-health professionals have uniformly praised the paper for its correct methods and notable results.
"Les has used, and consistently uses, the best possible methodology," says Bradley A. Woodruff, a medical epidemiologist at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Indeed, the United Nations and the State Department have cited mortality numbers compiled by Mr. Roberts on previous conflicts as fact - and have acted on those results.
This study may have been the most important put out this year. When we undertake a war, we must have a good idea of how many civilian lives will be lost. Without this information, we risk sacrificing the moral justification for what we are doing.
That is exactly what has occurred here. To this day the Bush claims we've made their lives better, an odd thing to suggest when virtually every person in Iraq has lost someone dear to them. Sadam may well have killed 100,000 people, but he did it over a twenty-five year period. We did it in a year and a half.
It is a sad and shameful thing that our press has failed pay adequate attention to this story. Once again, as has been the case throghout the Iraq War episode, they failed where it really mattered.