For reporting that is an embarrassment to the profession
of journalism, and for being beholden to corporate paymasters rather than
the citizens of America.
As the corporate mainstream media provides wall to wall coverage of
a retired minister's comments, it is remaining silent about its use of some
75 embedded
Pentagon television analysts. But the twist is that they were -- and
are -- supposed to appear to be retired, independent commentators and
experts.
As it turns out, however, The New York Times broke ranks and revealed that
the so-called military "experts" have really been parroting talking
points provided by the Pentagon. In short, instead of providing third party
insight, they have been peddling propaganda.
FreePress.net, an organization ever on the prowl for big media lapses, noted, "These
so-called experts went on the air to cover up bad news about Iraq with White
House spin. Many of these pundits work for private military contractors as
consultants, board members and lobbyists."
So the Pentagon and the pundits both win; the Defense Department disseminates
official government policy and the pundits get a fat paycheck.
And then there are of course the networks, which must have known -- with
a wink and a nod -- about the collaboration between their hired guns
and their White House connections. As FreePress.net reminds us, "The
Pentagon propaganda wouldn't have spread far if not for the administration's
cozy relationship with corporate media outlets like Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS and
CNN. Their failure to properly question the case for war -- to counter the
official version with dissenting views -- poses a fundamental threat to our
democracy."
The Pentagon has officially "suspended" the "independent television
analyst" propaganda campaign, but don't count on it. They've just learned
to be more discreet, we imagine.
According to PRwatch.org:
The Pentagon military analyst program unveiled in last week's
exposé by
David Barstow in The New York Times was not just unethical but illegal.
It violates, for starters, specific restrictions that Congress has been
placing
in its annual appropriation bills every year since 1951. According to those
restrictions, "No part of any appropriation contained in this or any
other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the
United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress."
As explained in a March 21, 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, "publicity
or propaganda" is defined by the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) to mean either (1) self-aggrandizement by public officials, (2) purely
partisan activity, or (3) "covert propaganda." By covert propaganda,
GAO means information which originates from the government but is unattributed
and made to appear as though it came from a third party.
So the Pentagon broke the law, while using well-compensated Media Putzes
to mislead Americans about the life and death issue of war.
Now that is more just Putzdom; it's a crime.
So the next time that you see a former general or admiral on television,
don't think that an American flag lapel pin means that they are being patriotic.
If they were being patriotic, they wouldn't just parrot message points sent
down from the DOD.
We are sure that there are some independent military analysts, but according
to The New York Times, you would have to look long and hard to find one.
|
