Skip Navigation
Matthew Yglesias

Matthew Yglesias - Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
More

Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress. His first book, with the working title Heads in the Sand: Iraq and the Strange Death of Liberal Internationalism, scheduled to be published next spring by John Wiley and co., deals with the Democratic Party's struggle to find a post-9/11 foreign policy, focusing primarily on the rise and (hopefully) fall of the liberal hawk movement.

Previously, he was a staff writer at The American Prospect and an Associate Editor at TPM Media, where he contributed to the group blogs Tapped and TPMCafe. His main blog, now at The Atlantic, has existed in various forms since the dark ages of the blogosphere in January 2002.

His writing has appeared in The Guardian, Slate, The New Republic, and The Washington Monthly, and he is a regular on BloggingHeads.tv and makes the occasional radio or television appearance.

Desperately out of touch with the American mainstream, Yglesias was born and raised in Manhattan and studied philosophy at Harvard where he was editor in chief of The Harvard Independent, a campus alternative weekly.

His latest writings can be found on the Matthew Yglesias blog.

The Success of the Surge

By Matthew Yglesias
Mar 14 2008, 12:42 PM ET Comment

coverage.png

The Pew Center has a new survey out offering definitive evidence that the "surge" has, in fact, been a success in terms of its main goal of boosting the odds of an indefinite American military commitment to Iraq. Here we see on the left, for example, that coverage of the war in Iraq has plummeted in recent months. Stories like this one about how "the body of a Chaldean Catholic archbishop who was kidnapped in the northern city of Mosul last month as he drove home after afternoon Mass was discovered Thursday buried in a southeastern area of the city" aren't getting the kind of play they used to. After all, the war's over and there's nothing to write about or put on television.

Similarly, an item like "Iraq: Car Bomb Kills 11 in Baghdad" could be bad for home front morale, but thanks to the surge and to general Petraeus' surge of savvy press management, people don't hear as much about that kind of thing as they used to.

Similarly, depressing "downer" stories like "3 Fort Hood soldiers killed in Iraq bombing " aren't as big a deal in the media as they once were. And that's important, because for all the talk of the surge working, according to its proponents it's going to need to keep on working for something like ten years. Over time, that can add up to an awful lot of body bags so you don't want people to hear about that kind of thing.


And according to Pew, increasingly people aren't aware of how many soldeirs have died in Iraq. Isolated findings of public ignorance of some or another subject usually aren't as meaningful as they first seem, but Pew is showing a clear trend here. The public used to have a good handle on how many troops had died in Iraq, but ever since the surge started "working," people's understanding of the issue went into decline even as the body count kept creeping higher:

knowledge.png

In August 2007, 54% correctly identified the fatality level at that time (about 3,500 deaths). In previous polls going back to the spring of 2004, about half of respondents could correctly estimate the number of U.S. fatalities around the time of the survey.

In the current poll, more respondents underestimated than overestimated the number of fatalities. A plurality of 35% said that there have been about 3,000 troop deaths, and another 11% said there have been 2,000 deaths. Just under a quarter (23%) said the number of fatalities is closer to 5,000.

In fact, these days the correct answer is around 4,000 but the surge has succeeded in making sure that relatively few people are aware of that fact.

Controlling the information landscape is key, because the public continues to have mixed feelings about the underlying issue. People think the war was a mistake, and think it hasn't been worth the costs. But rather than quit right now, the median voter seems to want to let things play out for a little while longer. The challenge for people who want to end the war is to make people see that that's not a viable option -- that the real policy choices are between leaving in as quickly a way as is safe and practical or else staying for many years. The challenge for those who want to see the war continue indefinitely is to obscure the length of commitment they're talking about, and to obscure the ongoing costs of an open-ended U.S. military presence in Iraq.

Judged by those standards, the surge is working pretty well.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Why Israel Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worthwhile Why Israeli Leaders Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worth the Effort
A Brief History of the to-do List and the Psychology of Its Success A Brief History of the To-Do List and the Psychology of Its Success
translating the Bible—Into an E-Book That Works on Any Phone Translating the Bible—Into an E-Book That Works on Any Phone
Sarah Palin Brings Out the Barbs at CPAC Sarah Palin Ends CPAC With Rousing Speech
Video Shows Syrian Anti-Aircraft Tank Firing Randomly Into Peoples' Homes Video Shows Syrian Anti-Aircraft Tank Firing Into Random Homes

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Submit Your Photos of America at Work AP Submit Your Photos of America at Work
Send us your images of friends, family, and neighbors on the job. We'll publish the best. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

The Civil War, Part 3: The Stereographs

Feb 10, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)