[jbour13]

Originally Posted by Utah Bob

I've given this a lot of thought. In WWII they would simply describe casualties as light or heavy without giving numbers generally. Starting with Vietnam the media was given a daily count. That continues to this day. A breathless anchor with sad eyes describes June as "the deadliest month".
50 kia. In a month. True it's the most so far but hardly a military catastrophe. Constant reminders of casualties can eventually sap the public's (and Congress') commitment to a campaign.
It's happened before.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the fallen don't need to be honored. I just don't know what purpose numbers flashed across the screen serve.

Your post falls on the timeline in which America witnessed one of it's most difficult times. Casualties were high on this day in 1863. July 1st through the 3rd of that year saw some many thousands killed, wounded or captured.

So is there a comparison, or is it just the media's continued exploitation of numbers and a lack of considerable benefit for them? I think so.