|
Where
Is The Government Going To Direct Its Propaganda Machine Now?
by
Bill Sardi
by Bill Sardi
Using established
news media as its front, the federal government has long used seemingly
independent news sources as conduits for propaganda. Different media,
ranging from The Reader’s Digest, major network television, radio
and newspapers, the most relied upon sources of public information,
have been tapped by the federal government to help soften the public
for war, malign contrived enemies and villains, promote a pet piece
of legislation, cover for a poor economy, etc.
For example,
the CNN report "Beneath the Veil," which graphically displayed
atrocities perpetrated by the Taliban on Afghani women, preceded
the events of September 11, 2001 that resulted in a U.S. military
assault on Afghanistan. The Taliban were being demonized a month
prior to the war so public attitudes toward them would be negative.
CNN obviously had foreknowledge months prior to 9-11. On the evening
of 9-11, CNN even aired the overthrow of a leader in Afghanistan
and showed smoke and fire over the Kabul, Afghanistan night sky,
long before any alleged link between the Taliban and the World Trade
Center had been aired.
The Fourth
Estate: Checks and balances?
It has been
said that government generates most news stories and that the news
media is often too eager to obtain favor for breaking reports. While
American government was organized with checks and balances divided
among three branches of government, the so-called Fourth Estate,
the press, has been charged with keeping tabs over all branches
of the government and reporting events to the citizenry. It is the
press that has been "willingly coerced" into often over-cooperating
with government and its hidden agendas.
The cozy relationship
between government and industry has led agencies like The Centers
for Disease Control in Atlanta to issue its annual alert to get
vaccinated during the flu season, and the news media to mindlessly
parrot CDC press releases, despite the fact there is little or no
scientific evidence that the flu produces a significant amount of
mortality or that flu vaccines reduce mortality among high-risk
groups like infants and the elderly. Is flu vaccination good for
the public, or just for vaccine makers?
"We interrupt
this government-sponsored propaganda for………"
The use of
major TV networks has been a paramount force in delivering government-backed
information. Even with the plethora of new broadcast channels, more
than 70% of Americans tune into the major networks – ABC, CBS, NBC
and now FOX and CNN – to obtain information about daily events and
issues facing the nation. It’s been relatively easy for government
to co-opt a semi-consolidated news media. That was in the past.
Suddenly the
number of sources of public information is broadening. Consumers
now have iPods, digital TVs, video recorders, multimedia PCs, cell
phones, says Eric Auchard, Reuters columnist, who notes there are
the new options "many households and consumers are considering
now in an effort to find a range of cost-effective online substitutes
for broadcast, cable or satellite TV."
The worldwide
economic downturn is forcing many consumers to find less expensive
ways to be entertained or obtain information. Even TV programming,
"not just short-form entertainment, is now served up on video
sites in markets around the globe at Google Inc’s YouTube, Daily
Motion, Joost or at Hulu in the United States," says Auchard,
who asks "Could 2009 then be the year we seriously ask ‘What’s
on the internet?’ rather than ‘What’s on television’?"
According to
a recent survey, a majority of consumers already see their PCs as
more of an entertainment device than they do TVs. Even a surprising
42% of the "reading generation," people aged 62 and above,
see PCs as more entertaining than TVs. U.S. "millennials"
typically spend 18.8 hours a week online, nearly twice as much time
as they spend on TV, according to the survey. This means many Americans
may soon be unplugging the government’s primary propaganda machine.
Major TV
networks may go the way of dinosaurs
The downward
spiraling economy may force major TV networks, which government
has tapped to distribute (mis)information, into nonexistence soon.
NBC Universal CEO Jeff Zucker has been quoted to say: "Without
radical actions it won't be long before the medium and the U.S.
auto industry look identical – on the verge of extinction."
(Simon Applebaum, "Broadcast Waterloo," online blog, Dec.
15, 2008)
A visible sign
of the upcoming change in broadcast TV is the acquisition of TV.com,
a website that will now become a video destination for CBS Corp.,
which will showcase thousands of new and old television episodes.
Many recent episodes of its shows are also shown at CBS.com. It
is no wonder the TV Guide, which was sold at grocery store
counters, has gone out of business. Hulu.com is now one of the top-viewed
sites on the internet, and has sprouted up practically overnight.
Military
propaganda
In the past,
government just handed film footage of World War II to NBC (1952)
and it created the Victory At Sea TV series to the beat of
Richard Rogers’ spine-tingling music, orchestra music that surged
with onscreen views of swelling ocean waves and pounding blasts
from a battleship turret. Victory at Sea certainly glorified
war, and the series is still being sold by NBCUniversal as a DVD
set. But now conduits to the public’s mind may not be so easy to
tap.
Already the
US Army is seeking non-conventional ways to reach young men for
recruiting purposes. Reuters reports that the US Army is wooing
young American males with videogames, Google maps and simulated
attacks on positions from an Apache helicopter, in a $12 million
U.S. Army "Experience Center" located northeast of Philadelphia.
The center has 60 computers loaded with military videogames that
glamorize war. The video arcade is filled with rock music and staffed
by 33 full-time soldiers. Super Bowl recruiting ads for the military
will likely continue, but obviously the military is being challenged
to find ways to reach recruits other than television.
Digital
TV conversion: a major turning point
A major change
is about to occur with the conversion of TV from analog to digital
signals. About 40 percent of American households are currently stuck
watching a limited number of stations (Fox, NBC, ABC, and CBS) because
they don’t have cable TV boxes. This major TV network audience will
drop off significantly once the digital switch is made. This is
because 40 percent will either get a converter box and upgrade to
cable which provides at least 30 stations at the start as opposed
to rabbit ears’ five or six, or they will simply not elect to get
a converter box to access television and solely rely upon internet
sources of information and entertainment.
So one can
imagine the government’s concern when it became apparent there is
a last-minute glitch in the planned switchover to all-digital television,
scheduled for February 2009. The switchover to all-digital transmission
will turn screens blank in about 8 million U.S. households that
rely on outdoor antennas or rabbit ears to get a picture on every
set bought before 1998 and most bought before 2004. The glitch is
that the government program to supply $40 coupons to buy digital
converter boxes ran out of money, placing more than 1.1 million
Americans on a waiting list.
The news
stories you never hear or see
Sometimes it’s
not what you hear or see on major electronic news media, but what
goes unreported. For example, only Al Jazeera, the Qatari TV network,
which broadcasts to approximately 140 million English and Arabic-speaking
viewers, is airing live images of bombings and tanks rolling through
Gaza in the current conflagration there. Hundreds of other news
reporters from around the world are stuck at the border between
Israel and Gaza. But even with the news blackout, many back channels
exist today and Americans who are eager for an inside view of the
events in Gaza can download Livestation, a free program that will
let viewers watch Al Jazeera English among other international networks.
Is it a coincidence
that none of the three major U.S. television networks now have a
news correspondent stationed in Iraq, a withdrawal by the Fourth
Estate that coincides with a new President, even though 130,000
U.S. service members remain on duty there? The news media has the
ability to turn the war "on" or "off" in the
public’s mind. Does the news media get its marching orders from
Washington DC?
News reporters
embedded with troops in Iraq, who followed government orders not
to show dead bodies or military caskets, would be an example of
how government censorship is imparted by the news media. During
the Iraq war, question arose over some journalists who may have
been placed in "Harm’s Way" because they were deviating
from the planned censorship, and went home in a casket themselves.
Other news
media
Television
networks are not the only media outlet being threatened economically.
Newspapers are being called the "buggy whips" of
2009. (Modesto Bee, Jan. 9, 2009) The number of major newspapers
that are about to fold up operation will only be known at the end
of this challenging year of economic chaos. The Seattle Post Intelligencer
and the New York Times are at the head of the list. There
is now discussion over the formation of "hyperlocal" websites,
where websites will cover local news in place of community newspapers.
If you are a government propagandist, you are probably scratching
off newspapers from your future list of news media outlets.
Imbed government
agents in news agencies
Another strategy
has been to embed government propagandists into the very offices
of the news media. In March of 2000 Fairness & Accuracy in
Reporting (FAIR) asks "Why Were Government Propaganda Experts
Working On News At CNN?" This was first reported by the Dutch
newspaper Trouw and France’s Intelligence Newsletter that "several
officers from the US Army's 4th Psychological Operations (PSYOPS)
Group at Ft. Bragg worked in the news division at CNN's Atlanta
headquarters last year, starting in the final days of the Kosovo
War."
Planting of
news stories by officers from the 4th Army PSYOPS group
apparently began in the 1980s. According to FAIR, an unofficial
strategy paper, written by an Army officer and published by the
U.S. Naval War College in 1996, urged military commanders to find
ways to "leverage the vast resources of the fourth estate" for the
purposes of "communicating the [mission's] objective and endstate,
boosting friendly morale, executing more effective psychological
operations, playing a major role in deception of the enemy, and
enhancing intelligence collection."
But now the
Fourth Estate has broadened into the F – o – u – r – t – h E – s
– t – a – t – e, much less of a networked conglomerate and more
a patchwork of localized, independent sources of information that
flows on many avenues. How does government think it will keep control
over public information now? True, fiber-optic cables that enter
the home or business now consolidate TV, internet and telephone
transmission, but cable companies are not sources of news or entertainment,
at least not yet.
Is news
media complicit?
Jeff Cohen,
founding director of the Park Center for Independent Media at Ithaca,
writing about the Pentagon planting former generals on TV news shows
to promote war, says "The biggest villain here is not Rumsfeld
or the Pentagon. It’s the TV networks. In the land of the First
Amendment, it was their choice to shut down debate and journalism."
Cohen goes
on to say: "No government agency forced MSNBC to repeatedly
feature the hawkish generals unopposed. Or fire Phil Donahue. Or
smear weapons expert Scott Ritter. Or blacklist former attorney
general Ramsey Clark. It was top NBC/MSNBC execs, not the Feds,
who imposed a quota system on the Donahue staff requiring two pro-war
guests if we booked one anti-war advocate – affirmative action for
hawks." (May 26, 2008) … As for the major TV networks, they
were not hoodwinked by a Pentagon propaganda scheme. They were willingly
complicit, and have been for decades."
Cohen said
he wasn’t shocked by the recent New York Times report (April
20, 2008) exposing how the Pentagon junketed and coached the retired
military brass into being "message-force multipliers"
and "surrogates" for Donald Rumsfeld’s lethal propaganda.
Military intelligence
departments spent months to enlist popular support for the Iraq
invasion. The Administration even went so far as to secretly pay
Iraqi journalists and news organization to write positive stories
about the war, says Kevin R. Kosar of History News Network.
But just how
will the federal government be able to continue propaganda like
this once the news media becomes so diluted with a plethora of options
for consumers?
Inside border
propaganda
Domestic misinformation
is of greater significance to a constitutional republic like the
United States where public opinion must be formed for governments
to remain in power. In this regard, the Federal government doesn’t
just aim propaganda at overseas audiences. For example, conservative
commentator Armstrong Williams had received funds from the Department
of Education to promote the No Child Left Behind Act.
Another
example was when the Internal Revenue Service issued a press release
reminding taxpayers to pay their taxes and informing them that "America
has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new
jobs as the President’s policies are doing, or it can raise taxes
on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery
and future job creation." In other words, don’t go along with
the government’s plan and you get taxed. ("Is Government Propaganda
Legal?" Kevin R. Kosar, History News Network)
Kosar says
a century-old law (5 U.S.C. 3107) prohibits federal funds from being
"used for the compensation of any publicity expert unless specifically
appropriated for that purpose." And annual appropriations acts
often include provisions stating "No part of any appropriation
contained in this Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda
purposes not here to for authorized by Congress." But specific
prohibitions against propaganda, and the word "propaganda"
itself, are difficult to find in any federal law.
Laws may not
stop propaganda, but the dissolution of major news media outlets
and their replacement by less controllable, more independent, more
varied information sources may pose problems for the reigning propaganda
state.
January
16, 2009
Bill
Sardi [send
him mail] is a frequent writer on health and political
topics. His health writings can be found at www.naturalhealthlibrarian.com.
He is the author of You
Don’t Have To Be Afraid Of Cancer Anymore.
Copyright
© 2009 Bill Sardi Word of Knowledge Agency, San Dimas, California.
This article has been written exclusively for www.LewRockwell.com
and other parties who wish to refer to it should request permission
to link rather than posting at other URLs.
Bill
Sardi Archives
|