I'm actually quite strongly in favour of having the press with the forces. It strikes me that much of the reporting has carried a great deal more reality than in other recent conflicts, where war really has been presented as antiseptic, clean high-tech jousting with TV graphics and gun camera footage presented by friendly PIOs a long way from the battlefield. It's probably better for all concerned if the bull**** level is kept down. One thing which it certainly has shown up is the distinction between different papers and broadcasters - some of Sky News's coverage has been frankly sickmaking, reams of rubbish about "roaring spectacularly across the desert" and the like, and the BBC have been a sight better. The broadsheet press is doing a good job, but the redtoppers have managed to top even their own recently increased standard of vulgarity. The "Mid Market" papers - i.e. Mail and Express - have been deeply poor. Headlines like "SURRENDER!" in the Express a few days ago had no place at that time. (Bet the bloke who wrote that one feels like a right arssenow..) The Slime Trail hasn't been much better.