Last week, when the anti-war protester "Jesse Macbeth" was "outted" for apparently impersonating a US soldier in a documentary and making false claims to have committed war crimes in Iraq, I was pretty angry, yet somewhat relieved that it wasn't true... but that was last week.
Unfortunately, it seems that by the time the American mainstream media finally decides to start covering a story like this, it means that they can no longer avoid it (because "bad news" is also bad for the morale of the troops and home front) and the "facts" that support it are usually irrefutable (ie. video evidence). However; I'm pretty sure that there will be efforts made to downplay the severity of the incident over the next few days, which is to be expected.
During every "Shooting War", there is a "Propaganda War" that accompanies it. It is every bit as important that this conflict is won, because it is from that propaganda in which "history" shall be written. If the media reports are negative and loaded with skepticism and second guessing, then regardless of the actual outcome of the conflict, it will always be viewed upon negatively by history.
In this type of conflict, the "fog of war" actually exists in the media coverage and is often used to prevent certain (often negative) stories from dominating the discussion and (potentially) shaping the history of events. This is accomplished by deliberately creating an atmosphere of uncertainty and confusion in the reporting through an expressed lack of knowledge, which is due to the mainstream media's reluctance to conduct any sort of investigative journalism into stories that may turn out to be harmful to the "Propaganda War Effort".