Network VP Dismisses Military Pundits Scandal: ‘Everyone Understands’ Pentagon Spreads Propaganda»

[bigtree]

from Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/17/pentagon-propaganda-media/


YESTERDAY, the Department of Defense Inspector General released its report on the military analyst program first revealed by the New York Times last April. The report said there was “insufficient evidence to conclude that OASD(PA) conceived of or undertook the type of disciplined public relations effort” alleged by the program’s critics. The report concluded that the program “was not a secret or covert effort,” and thus not propaganda, which it defined as activities that “are covert, that is, the communications do not reveal to the target audience the government’s role in sponsoring the material.”

However, the report never addressed the fact that the news networks never disclosed that their military analysts were being briefed by the Pentagon. Indeed, the report seemed to accept such non-disclosure as business as usual: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/08/delauro-cnn-abc/

As a network vice-president with 40 years of media experience told us, “Everyone understands that the Pentagon gives out information that is not harmful to its interests. It can’t be expected to put out information that is harmful. I consider that fair.”

The point, seemingly lost on the network VP and the DoJ IG, is not whether the Pentagon is expected to distribute negative news; it’s that everybody did not “understand” that the Pentagon was the source for the analysts’ knowledge. The public did not know this because the networks were hazy on the details themselves and, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon discouraged the analysts from volunteering the information: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?pagewanted=print

Some network officials, meanwhile, acknowledged only a limited understanding of their analysts’ interactions with the administration. They said that while they were sensitive to potential conflicts of interest, they did not hold their analysts to the same ethical standards as their news employees regarding outside financial interests. The onus is on their analysts to disclose conflicts, they said.

The access came with a condition. Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.

Even after the story broke, the media refused to acknowledge its complicity in the scandal. ABC News head David Westin insisted, “I am satisfied that ABC News has acted responsibly and has served its audience well.” Most media outlets — likely out of embarrassment, according to media critic Howard Kurz — ignored the story completely. A Project for Excellence in Journalism story found that “out of approximately 1,300 news stories , only two touched on the Pentagon analysts scoop — both airing on PBS’s ‘NewsHour.’”

read: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/17/pentagon-propaganda-media/


related:

Retired Officers' Media Role Deemed Appropriate
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/16/AR2009011604562_pf.html

Inspector General Sees No Misdeeds in Pentagon’s Effort to Make Use of TV Analysts
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/17/washington/17military.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

[babylonsister]

1. This is infuriating to me.

So everyone gets a pass for lying to Americans for their own financial benefit and to pass on the propaganda.:grr:

fwiw, here's another.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x417379

[bigtree]

4. information warfare

another set of links: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=723730&mesg_id=724348



U.S. Military Has No Problem with Propaganda

Source: New York Times, March 22, 2006
http://www.prwatch.org/node/4622

The New York Times reports that the U.S. military's review of a PR firm's covert propaganda program in Iraq, led by Rear Adm. Scott Van Buskirk, has been completed but not made public. According to military officials, "The findings are narrow in focus, and conclude that the Lincoln Group committed no legal violations because its actions in paying to place American -written articles without attribution were not expressly prohibited by its contract or military rules." The report "did not deal deeply" with such issues as how the small, young, well-connected firm received large government contracts, or whether its work was effective. It also did not address how, "in a modern information world connected by satellite television and the Internet, misleading information and lies could easily migrate into American news outlets." The Lincoln Group's Iraq work, on "a contract estimated at several million dollars," remains "fully in effect." The firm continues to bid for U.S. government contracts.

[blm]

2. Dan Rather admitted Networks protected Bush for favorable rulings on media expansion, too,

and networks refuse to discuss THAT news. They really control what news the people hear. The only reason Obama is president today is because the news media could find no way to spin Social Security privatization, Schiavo and Katrina FOR Bush and the GOP. If they COULD have they WOULD have.

[JackRiddler]

3. This is the semi-final stage of all media lie scandals...

1)

"We're just reporting the story, consulting the experts, doing an exhaustive job, being balanced. And we're always highly critical of the government/establishment, perhaps too much so, so don't you worry! Now on to sports and weather..."

2)

"Oh noes! The conspiracy theorists are at it again with their laughable accusations of government abuses that we in the Mighty Corporate Media missed.* Ha ha ha." (*corporate abuses, media abuses, bad things about the rich fucks who own everything, etc.)

3)

"The idea that the government committed any abuses, or that we would fail to report on them properly if so, is outrageous. Anyone who says so is demented, contagious and mildly criminal."

4)

"We have discovered certain limited abuses by the government. Certainly nothing as bad as what those conspiracy theorists thought. Great work by us!"

5)

"Those abuses? Old news, man! Boring! Are you on a vengeance kick? We've got other issues now, like...." (insert whatever the media concern trolls are pumping as the threat of the moment, like "entitlement reform" or self-made cell-phone porn).

6)

Anyone who reported on the now admitted abuses properly in the first place sees their career stall. The assholes who got the story wrong in the first place are promoted to higher positions at the media company, precisely because they've shown what cautious and serious people they were.

7)

Repeat forever.

One day you may hear this:

"Come on, man, everyone knows 9/11 was an inside job, so what? It's OLD NEWS."

[JackRiddler]

5. Kick: And "everyone understands" the mafia extorts payoffs. So?

[spanone]

6. this is how rogue nations control the media and dupe the people

[Solly Mack]

7. That's bullshit....because propaganda doesn't have to be a secret or covert effort

And the military well knows that...they teach about white, black, and grey propaganda..



Of Propaganda and the Truth

White propaganda: comes from an acknowledged source and often is aimed at sympathetic audiences

Grey propaganda: is anonymous "Some say..."

Black propaganda: pretends to be from a source it is not and is usually aimed at an enemy audience.

[chill_wind]

8. I wish I could still rec this--- but here's a kick.

and another article today:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=417702&mesg_id=417702