Embedded Journalists

Embedded journalists are reporters who work within and under the control of one side's army in a military conflict. They are attached to a specific military unit and permitted to accompany troops into combat zones. Embedded journalism allows reporters, sometimes referred to as “embeds,” a firsthand view of military action taking place in or around battlefields previously unattainable by pool reporters. While the term could be applied to other historical interactions between journalists and military personnel (e.g., during the Vietnam War), it first came to be used in the U.S. Iraq invasion in 2003. Embedded journalism was introduced by the Pentagon as a strategic response to news media who have criticized the low level of access granted during the 1991 Gulf War and in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.

Though professional journalists have covered wars by accompanying military units since the modern press evolved in the 19th century, embedded journalism added a new dimension to war coverage. It resulted in some intense coverage of real-time combat, including astonishing pictures taken by “lipstick” or tank cameras which have never been seen before in the history of warfare. As part of the U.S. Department of Defense's strategy to provide “the factual story—good or bad—before others seed the media with disinformation and distortions,” the Pentagon offered journalists the opportunity to join U.S. troops after undergoing boot camp–style training and accepting ground rules put together in the Public Affairs Guidance on Embedding Media. During the invasion of Iraq approximately 600 embedded journalists were permitted to join American forces. They represented primarily news organizations based in the United States and in countries that united in the so-called coalition of the willing.

The scholarly debate on the effects of covering combat operations by embedded journalists started while U.S. troops were still on their way to Baghdad. On the one hand it was argued that a new standard of openness and immediacy had been created for war coverage. Reporters directly involved in military action were believed to provide a more incisive account of events by shedding the inevitable speculation that might surface by keeping the media at a distance. Others though, viewed embedding more negatively, particularly raising concerns about bias in reporting. Even media organizations, who participated in the embed program, have described it as an attempt to present the U.S. side of the war in a sympathetic light by absorbing reporters into the culture of the military and tainting the objectivity that journalists are bound to uphold. Those holding this critical view have created the alternate term inbedded journalist to reflect this bias.

Recently, scholars started analyzing the relationships of embedded journalists and military units developed through interpersonal communication. Present key objectives of research include questions such as whether embedded reporters become part of the military culture, whether the outcome of interpersonal relationships help foster a more affirmative representation of the military, and whether embeds produce a more positive news coverage than unilateral correspondents.