| Old Articles | | Friday, February 08 | | · | |
| Wednesday, February 06 | | · | |
| Tuesday, February 05 | | · | Savage Capitalism or Socialism: A Conversation with Luis Britto Garcia |
| Sunday, February 03 | | · | Canada vs. Venezuela: The Background Gets Even Murkier |
| Thursday, January 31 | | · | |
| Monday, January 28 | | · | The History - and Hypocrisy - of US Meddling in Venezuela |
| · | Canada Is Complicit in Venezuela's US-Backed Coup D'état |
| Wednesday, September 26 | | · | Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide |
| Friday, September 21 | | · | US Disregard for International Law Is a Menace to Latin America |
| Saturday, August 25 | | · | How Long is the Shelf-Life of Damnable Racist Capitalist Lies? |
| Thursday, August 09 | | · | Martial Law By Other Means: Corporate Strangulation of Dissent |
| Wednesday, August 08 | | · | North Korea and The Washington Trap |
| · | Venezuela Assassination Attempt: Maduro Survives but Journalism Doesn't |
| Sunday, May 20 | | · | The British Royal Wedding, Feelgoodism and the Colonial Jumbie |
| Friday, May 04 | | · | |
| Monday, April 09 | | · | The Bayer-Monsanto Merger Is Bad News for the Planet |
| Tuesday, March 20 | | · | Finally, Some Good News |
| Thursday, March 15 | | · | Zimbabwe Open for Business, Code for International Finance Capitalism |
| Friday, January 12 | | · | Shadow Armies: The Unseen, But Real US War In Africa |
| Wednesday, December 13 | | · | The U.S. is Not a Democracy, It Never Was |
Older Articles
| |
 | |
World Focus: US mainstream media: A clear and present danger
Posted on Friday, May 30 @ 15:09:31 UTC
Topic: USA
|
 By Ben Roberts
Think the Jayson Blair dust up at the New York Times is our big problem? Think again. When it comes to mainstream media, and what they force feed us, we are in big trouble. Forget about Blair and his piddling nickel and dime claims of being where he was not, interviewing whom he did not, and quoting what people never said. Yes, he did misinform us over time, but did his distortions of the truth significantly impact our lives? I would have to say no. However, on a grander scale, mainstream media, the masters of Jayson Blair, are distorting and contorting news and truth to such an extreme that it is having an untoward effect on our daily lives and the decisions we make. Today the Associated Press carried a story of another New York Times reporter, a female, who did a series of stories leading up to the war on Iraq, outlining that nation's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction. The extensive source of her information was, believe it or not, Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress.
Stay with me now. Don't faint away. Can you conceive of a major paper like the New York Times, that a huge audience relies on for their information, feeding us as fact what is served up by Ahmed Chalabi. The man has not been in Iraq for close to two decades. He has been convicted in absentia in Jordan for criminal financial activity.
He made no secret of his aim to see the back of Saddam Hussein so that he could return and be swept into power in his home of Iraq. He has been championed by the Pentagon as the obvious choice for this role. Given Chalabi's dubious resume, why would a major NYT reporter have no qualms about feeding us as fact what this man has to say about the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. What a rip off. How absolutely misleading and dangerous. Dangerous because many Americans had serious reservations about war on Iraq, and supported action only if they thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. In effect, this dubious and distorted reporting got many citizens to get behind a war resulting in the death of innocent Iraqis. Absolutely shameful.
So despite the firestorm, fingerpointing, and ridiculous accusations implicating affirmative action, Jayson Blair's antics pale alongside this revelation. But get this. In the story, the reporter's superior expressed his confidence in her reporting. Can you give the same endorsement? If we are talking about a Blair distorting truth, plagiarizing the work of others, and misleading the public we don't have far to look. Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, and sometimes referred to as the United States Foreign Minister, lifted word for word a student research paper from years ago, and presented it as his 'dossier' outlining the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program. How deceitful. How much of an outcry did you hear from our mainstream media on this issue?
CNN is viewed all over the world, and is a major source of information for the viewing public. Wolf Blitzer is the leading man for this outfit, a paragon of truth and information. And if you believe that you will believe anything. For months before the war in Iraq, Blitzer snagged interviews with major Bush Administration officials. If memory serves me correctly, he on one occasion described an impromptu overseas interview with Donald Rumsfeld either in Qatar or Pakistan. During Blitzer's many interviews with Team Bush, claims of weapons of mass destruction dominated the agenda, and Blitzer constantly trumpeted Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in his reporting. Yet, within days of the attack on Iraq, Blitzer was on WTOP News radio, a Washington station, and said the following, 'After all, we know that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction.' My jaw dropped in disbelief when he said this. The interviewer seemed just as floored because she said something like, 'Wait. Are you saying that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction?' Blitzer reiterated this point. (call WTOP. They should have this interview in their archives). What deception. So many viewers rely on CNN and Blitzer for their information, yet he religiously touted weapons of mass destruction in his TV reporting in the run up to war, only saying words to the contrary after the decision for war was in the bag, and on a small local radio station that does not enjoy national listenership? 'Smart, Wolf. You duped Americans to get behind a bloody enterprise then took the higher ground.'
Now onto private Jessica Lynch's story. Two nights ago, on May 26th, Public Radio International show 'To The Point,' hosted by Warren Olney, did an archive edition of the show that previously aired on April 5th. I enjoy this show. It is quite informative and delivers, as the name implies. However, I was flabbergasted that for a huge segment of the show Olney repeatedly referred to the prevailing stories of how private Lynch, in her capture in Iraq, displayed unprecedented bravery, firing her gun to the very end, warding off her captors. The saga included the daring Special Forces operation that resulted in her rescue. The British 'Guardian' newspaper carried an article outlining the entire story as falsehood. American media reported that Lynch suffered both knife and bullet wounds. Both Iraqi doctors and physicians in Germany where she was treated reported no such wounds. Her broken legs, arms, ankles, and various other injuries have been diagnosed as being consistent with an automobile accident. There was no daring rescue. Iraqi forces had left the hospital area well before Special Forces arrived. Iraqi witnesses to the exercise reported how the Special Forces antics included what appeared to be the use of blanks and barked orders 'Go! Go! Go!' as cameras rolled. Moreover, the hospital staff had earlier attempted to deliver private Lynch to nearby American forces. The ambulance carrying her was shot at by US troops, almost killing her. They rushed back to the safety of their hospital where the 'daring rescue' later went down.
These illuminating facts have been, for the most part, absent from mainstream American media. The Bush Administration, the US military, and US media prefer the bogus story. It is good for morale. Good for patriotism. Good for Bush war on terror election prospects. Good for TV ratings and newspaper sales as the smarmy bogus story saturates the American landscape. However, it is bad for Americans, because it misinforms them into believing that the Iraqis are brutal monsters, and that our soldiers are infallible. In addition, it also justifies relieving Americans of their money to finance a war effort. It is somewhat of a surprise that given the stellar performance of 'To The Point' Warren Olney did not, at the conclusion of the program, offer a correction, or clarify that subsequent reports have put in doubt the initial story. As it stands, the American mind has been reinforced into thinking that the initial story is credible fact, when it clearly is not.
Remember, the recent bombing in Saudi Arabia. What puzzled me is that right after the explosion news reports from Saudi Arabia divulged that there were close to ninety two fatalities. The Bush Administration came out and strenuously challenged this count. That seemed odd that the story was being challenged by the Administration even as the facts were becoming available. Was it because Bush and cohorts figured they, and their successful war on terror, would be embarrassed if it was revealed that the death count was so high, so it would be in their best interest to suppress the death count? The count was later reported at twenty nine. Did more Americans die in that bombing than Team Bush wants us to know, because it would make them look bad and make us question their use of our money on their war on terror? How ghoulish if this were found to be the truth. But this is not so farfetched. It appears Bush is withholding September 11 information for similar reasons. Will our 'stellar' mainstream media come to the rescue, elucidate the facts, and deliver us from this 'fog of ignorance.'
In this Sunday 'Washington Post' one of the front page stories is titled 'Terrorists in Iran Suspected Of Role In Riyadh Blasts.' The story begins with this: 'The Bush Administration, alarmed by intelligence suggesting that al Qaeda operatives in Iran had a role in the May 12 suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia, has cut off once promising contacts with Iran and appears ready to embrace an aggressive policy of trying to destabilize the Iranian government, administration officials said.' Throughout this article the writer uses the phrase, 'administration officials said' more than five times. On one occasion he quotes one State Department official as saying, 'We're headed down the same path for the last 20 years.' It is incredible that, in the aftermath of Jayson Blair, we are getting these stories without knowing who the people are saying what is being said. This is gross lack of accountability. We have no idea whether or not the statements are accurate, and we cannot take the individual to task when something proves different from what is stated. In addition to lack of accountability, this is quite dangerous and very suspect. Within a week of FBI operatives going to Saudi Arabia to investigate the bombing, we have busted the case wide open and concluded that the principals of the bombing are al Qaeda operatives ensconced in Iran. How remarkable! These are the same people who for almost two years are unable to find the perpetrator of the Anthrax bioterror incident. Believe what you will, but my conclusions are that, in a democracy, a mainstream media that is 'in bed' with a sitting government is a danger to the citizenry.
Ben Roberts is a newsletter editor, freelance writer and published author. His book, Jackals of Samarra, was published in January 2001. Ben can be contacted by email at: grandt730@aol.com
|
|
| |
| Article Rating | Average Score: 5
Votes: 3
| |
|
|
