Election2008 Home
NO I am not OK with this.
What is so insidious and disturbing about this story is the fact the Bush/Cheney administration went into office in 2000 with a plan to control the media.
As the NYT article reported:
"Torie Clark, the former public relations executive who oversaw the Pentagon's dealings with the analysts as assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, had come to her job with distinct ideas about achieving what she called 'information dominance'. In a spin-saturated news culture, she argued, opinion is swayed most by voices perceived as authoritative and utterly independent.
And so even before Sept. 11, she built a system within the Pentagon to recruit 'key influentials'-- movers and shakers from all walks who with the proper ministrations might be counted on to generate support for Mr. Rumsfeld's priorities".
Now if they doesn't sound like the Bush administration was planning for a military action before 9/11 I don't know what does.
This is what media consolidation has wrought. The once respected "Fourth Estate" has been sold to corporate interests like Rupert Murdoch's news corp and Time Warner and became a political tool. Now the broadcasts that most media outlets counted on for unbiased "news" are serving up infotainment and propaganda in order to boost ratings.
Pentagon Propaganda and Media Compliance. Are we o.k. with this?
|
April 24, 2008 -- Posted by Catherine Morgan
When I saw this, I was infuriated. Are we living in America or The Matrix? I think the worst part about this news, is that it's no surprise. We are living in a world where we expect and accept that we are constantly being lied to by our own government. When did this happen? When did we become o.k. with it? From BlueBloggin... In a stunning 11 page article, David Barstow of the NYTimes exposes generals who were and still are the Pentagon's propaganda puppets for the war and threats by Iran. These so called expert military analysts appeared on all the major networks, cable news and radio promoting a positive message for the Pentagon and White House. Of course, Bill O'Rielly and Fox is their favorite forum for the propaganda puppets. From ABC News... The article raised some good points -- particularly on the heavy-handed way former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon tried to control the message -- but it made no mention of a far more ambitious propaganda tool: the Pentagon Channel. From The Huffington Post... The Department of Defense ran an elaborate "Psy-Op" against the American people when it was selling the invasion of Iraq. The New York Times' David Barstow penned a superb front-page story on Sunday based on thousands of newly released Pentagon emails. Like everything else Iraq-related we learned that it is far worse than even the most cynical among us expected. Cynthia from Don't Gel Too Soon has a very interesting perspective on this issue... In 1971, when I worked at CBS News in Washington, the network aired a documentary called The Selling of the Pentagon. The Museum of Broadcasting website says: "The aim of this film, produced by Peter Davis, was to examine the increasing utilization and cost to the taxpayers of public relations activities by the military-industrial complex in order to shape public opinion in favor of the military." The Congress tried to cite CBS for contempt - it was a real drama. In his book The Place to Be, my mentor Roger Mudd tells the whole story better than I ever could - he was the correspondent on the award-winning program. Despite all that happened, there was real satisfaction in knowing that the film had made a difference - that our defense dollars would go to protect and support our soldiers, not a military PR campaign. Also See: Blog for America What do you think about this? Does it make you mad? Sad? Indifferent? |
Tuesday April 29, 2008, 9:59 PM