The first edition of this book are an excellent read that takes one through the history of western war reporting but the segments appended since then are perfunctory and derivative, more the work of a polemicist than a historian. Since the recent cases are more familiar to me, it made me wonder if the earlier parts of the book would seem just as superficial to a historian of Korea, WWII or Spain.

I have a lot of issues with the book and I'm not going to list them here. Besides the lack of verifiable facts and the constant use of specific chosen stories, I would say what annoyed me most was the not so very hidden normative ideas. Let's just leave it here...