Certainly the media focus on bad news, as they always have, regardless of political leanings; and if a particular outlet is anti-war they would foocus even more closely on the bad news. (I remember about 20 years ago thre was a bad forest fire season in BC - it was all over the news, and relatives from Ontario called to see if we were suurviving. They thought, from the news, that all of BC was on fire, when of course it was a very small percentage of the forests and aside from a little smoke it wasn't afffecting most people at all.)

That being said, I don't think any media outlet would be responsible if they didn't show the negatives - nor would they be in business for long, except as a "National Geographic" travelogue-type channel. More should be shown of the positives, but that unfortunately doesn't make "news", no matter the political biasses. The forest fires stories weren't done by the "anti-forest-fire" media.

More balance on both sides is needed.