« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
Maybe we'll eventually get to the bottom of just what the Pentagon was up to when it cultivated the TV networks' supposedly independent military analysts as part of a massive PR push to support Bush Administration policy in Iraq. Well, it's pretty obvious what it was up to. But maybe we can better learn the full scope of the domestic PR effort undertaken.
The New York Times' April expose on the massaging of public opinion through "message force multipliers" (a term only the Pentagon could come up with) has now prompted at least two investigations. The program was suspended following the initial NYT report.
The Department of Defense inspector general announced last Friday that it was undertaking a investigation of the program, and the Congress' own General Accountability Office has "already begun looking into the program and would give a legal opinion on whether it violated longstanding prohibitions against spending government money to spread propaganda to audiences in the United States."
The investigations come after the House last Thursday passed an amendment to this year's military authorization bill mandating investigations by the DOD IG and the GAO. Democrats argued that the program amounted to illegal domestic propaganda. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) called the program part of "a military-industrial-media complex" (with apologies to Eisenhower).
Meanwhile, the TV networks have remained largely silent, as their credibility and transparency have been tarnished by the revelations about the program. As Media Matters has documented, the military analysts named in the Times piece appeared or were quoted more than 4,500 times on broadcast networks, cable news channels, and NPR. One minute they were giving ostensibly objective analysis, the next they were fawning over Rummy in private as "the leader."
Josh
Zachary
The media who so readily absorbed and uncritically reported this propoganda, dished out by the ex officers, is the same media that absorbed and uncritically reported the propoganda for the Iraq war.
Same gang, same poor excuses for journalists.
May 26, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Q: Does the propaganda provision have the same penalty as the presidential records act?
If we go through all sorts of hearings on this propaganda and there is no criminal penalty, what will we get out of it?
A: Absolutely nothing.
We all know all these Waxman hearing are a joke/ The only solution is impeachment and the Democrats don't have the stomach for it.
None of these hearings matters cause they won't impeach.
When are you going to finally understand that?
May 26, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mark Yudof, the new University of California Chancellor, wrote a book back about 1980 that suggests how to use the First Amendment to address this kind of attempt to manipulate public opinion. The premise of the book, "When Government Speaks," was that the drafters of the Constitution didn't forsee that government would develop a voice so powerful that it could control public opinion.
The drafters tried to protect individuals against government attempts to stop them from speaking. However, he argues, that is not good enough when government is the only source for accurate information and speaks so loudly and manipulates and manufactures a false consent. The result is as undemocratic as when a tyrant uses bullets to subjugate the people. He suggests ways of interpreting the First Amendment to control such abuses.
One thing he didn't anticipate was that technology would create alternate sources of information like blogs and bloggers that could challenge the government's information monopoly.
May 26, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
If two or three entities investigate it, you have a ready-made talk show. All three can disagree, effectively neutralizing any single one's findings. Perfect way to stall and stonewall.
May 26, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
So...they have yet another Pentagon investigation. And then what? This too will die a quiet death.
And what of the roll of the mainstream media in this? Well, not too much, if anything, will be said about the mainstream media; just as the illegal spying on Americans by the telecom industry, we may need the mainstream media again to help with the propaganda in the next war.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
May 26, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
One of the Federalist Papers discussed the concept of the president exaggerating and/or lying to Congress when reporting on war efforts.
Funny, though... the letter was discussing whether the person should be impeached or hanged. None of the congressional actions being used currently were even mentioned.
Of course, those folks were actually interested in forming a democracy, not destroying one.
We have different people in charge now days... with much different goals.
If they had been around in the mid 1700s, we would have never progressed beyond the Animal Farm that we are today ... IMHO
May 26, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
puunjab -
There are criminal liabilties associated with propagandizing We the People . And these criminal liabilities are both here stateside -and at the Hague .
Like you my preference would have been to impeach this bunch - but since we have an apparently complicit Congress we will have to be taking our chances with justice with the new administration & new congressional leadership .
Meanwhile Rummy has been indicted as a war criminal -in the hAGUE I belive - And Gen Karspinski has been deposed by the German Courts - This ain't over til its over ...especially overseas ...
May 26, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS ,
Can anyone confirm Rumsfeld has been indicted by the Hague - (or is that just wishful rumination on my part ? )
But General Karpinski did give testimony in a German Court regardin war crimes committed by Rumsfeld -any one know the status of that particular proceeding ?
May 26, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al in Austex:
The case against Rummy was dismissed by the German Federal Prosecutor's Office in April 2007.
May 26, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"One of the Federalist Papers discussed the concept of the president exaggerating and/or lying to Congress when reporting on war efforts.
Funny, though... the letter was discussing whether the person should be impeached or hanged. None of the congressional actions being used currently were even mentioned."
The Federalist Papers were not "letters". They were newspaper articles.
May 26, 2008 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a story that's not going to get much traction in the mainstream media...
May 27, 2008 6:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I saw the story on World News Tonight.
May 27, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink