The Washington Times details the major media outlets that bungled their coverage of the war in Iraq with unduly pessimistic reports.
But why did so many media outlets get it wrong? When focused on grand strategy, the media coverage of the war was appallingly one-dimensional. For example, much debate was made out of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's push for a more technological, less manpower-intensive military, but little of that debate was useful. While Rumsfeld's critics were a dome a dozen, I recall hardly any interviews from those in favor of Rumsfeld's position outside of the administration. Now that Rumsfeld's team has delivered a smashing victory, one would expect a host of mea culpas? On this topic, I haven't seen one.
I think this a case of classic Red vs. Blue America. Blue thinks Red is stupid, and anything its does is intellectually suspect. After this appalling failure to get the story right, maybe Blue Americans ought to take the time to look at themselves.