Why We Need A Blogosphere

[babylonsister]

Why We Need A Blogosphere
Filed under: Censorship, General, Propaganda — Mark @ 4:29 pm


Television news was a great idea. Just think of it: A box that sits in your living room and brings you important information from around the block or around the world. Sounds too good to be true. And apparently it is.

Whatever value television adds to the distribution of news must be weighed against the harm it produces through its incorporation of bias, selective editing, and the pursuit of its own self interest.

For example, last year David Barstow of the New York Times wrote a meticulously well researched and documented story that should have sparked a national uproar. The story described how the Pentagon in the Bush administration conspired to train and deploy former military personnel to spread propaganda in support of the war in Iraq. And if that weren’t bad enough, the program also permitted them to use their high profile media platform to enrich themselves and the defense contractors to whom they were attached.

Barstow’s story was received with what some call a “deafening silence,” particularly from the TV news community. Then, last week, Barstow won a Pulitzer Prize for the story. The silence built into a crushing whisper. Even progressive media icons like Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow only glanced over this story. Obviously there are strong arm tactics being employed to prevent the public from learning that our government purposefully and unlawfully engaged in propaganda directed squarely at us. The TV news networks are simply covering their own asses since it was primarily their facilities that hosted the phony military analysts.

Yesterday, Barstow was interviewed by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now to discuss the announcement that the Pentagon inspector general’s office had withdrawn its own report that had previously exoneraed the program. In the interview Goodman asked Barstow to comment on the lack of reporting on his story. Barstow said…

“You know, to be honest with you, I haven’t received many invitations—in fact, any invitations—to appear on any of the main network or cable programs. I can’t say I’m hugely shocked by that.”

“On the other hand, while there’s been kind of deafening silence, as you put it, on the network side of this, the stories have had—sparked an enormous debate in the blogosphere. And to this day, I continue to get regular phone calls from not just in this country but around the world, where other democracies are confronting similar kinds of issues about the control of their media and the influence of their media by the government.”

“So it’s been an interesting experience to see the sort of two reactions, one being silence from the networks and the cable programs, and the other being this really lively debate in the blogosphere. “

When an important and newsworthy story that exposes government wrongdoing at the highest levels - a story that appears on the front page of the New York Times and wins a Pulitzer Prize - cannot get the attention of television news outlets, there is something seriously wrong with that medium. When a respected journalist has to console himself with having his story get traction only on the Internet, it tells us a great deal about how corrupt the corporate-run news divisions of America have become.

more...

http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=1264

[Ohio Joe]

1. K&R

“There is no ‘news.’ There’s the truth of the signal, what I see, and there’s the puppet theater the parliament’s jesters foist on the somnambulant public. Monkeys taught to say the word ‘monkey,’ lead story on thirty-two planets.” — "Mr. Universe," in Serenity

[Berry Cool]

2. I do agree we need a blogosphere

but I see no reason for them to shame Olbermann and Maddow in the process and imply that their "corporate masters" are frightening them or forcing them into silence on some stories and that's why we need bloggers. I wish the blogosphere could just once blow its own horn without having to diminish the work of the MSM while doing so.

[babylonsister]

4. Do you recall KO mentioning this story? I don't think Rachel

had a show when this was first known/written about.

A thoroughly fact-checked story that won a Pulitzer, and no one brought it up?

I think there's a beef to be made about that.

[Berry Cool]

12. Actually, I DO remember this.

I guess a lot of people just forget when the MSM actually does something good, because remembering harshes their opportunity to rant.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Because "journalists" suck

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, babylonsister.:thumbsup:

[babylonsister]

6. Kick 'cause we need one. This is proof positive. nt

[ColbertWatcher]

7. k+r for more attention. n/t

[bridgit]

8. ^rec5 ~

:kick:

[starroute]

9. Some day I'd like to get an explanation of the Stolen Honor connection

Let us return to those thrilling days of yesteryear aka the 2004 election. The first time I became aware of some of these Pentagon-sponsored analysts (long before we knew that was what they were) was by way of this thread about Stolen Honor producer Carlton Sherwood: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1024263

The original post quotes Media Matters as saying of Sherwood that he "is also executive vice president of the wvc3 group, a firm focusing on homeland security and counterterrorism."

A little further down, we get this quote from the Nation: "At Fox News, military analysts Lieut. Col. Bill Cowan and Maj. Robert Bevelacqua are CEO and vice president, respectively, of wvc3 Group, a defense consulting firm that helps arms companies sell their wares to the government. It recently inked an exclusive deal with New Zealand's TGR Helicorp and will help the company hawk its military aviation equipment to the United States. The firm trades on its inside contacts with the US military, and a message on its website reads, 'We use our credibility to promote your technology' (accompanied by the sound of loud gunfire)."

SourceWatch's current article on the Pentagon analysts lists Cowan and Bevelacqua as being among them.
http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pentagon_military_analyst_program

Now, it's one thing for these people to have been spreading the Pentagon's propaganda at the same time as they were reeling in the dough as military contractors. That's kind of par for the course. But the fact that they were also doing so in partnership with Carlton Sherwood, who was peddling the nastiest kind of off-the-books Bush election dirty tricks propaganda really seems beyond the pale.

Cowan in particular has some other dubious connections -- for example, with the Lincoln Group propaganda shop:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-22-poll-propaganda_x.htm

12/22/2005

Almost three-quarters of Americans think it was wrong for the Pentagon to pay Iraqi newspapers to publish news about U.S. efforts in Iraq, a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows. ... Others defend the Pentagon.

"I don't think there's anything egregious here. (In Iraq) they were just trying to get some good stories out," says Bill Cowan, CEO of the security-consulting firm WVC3. He's listed by the Lincoln Group, the public relations firm that placed stories in Iraqi media on behalf of the Pentagon, as one of the company's advisers. Cowan, though, says he's just an acquaintance of some of Lincoln Group's managers and has not worked with the firm.

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/09/27/firm_affiliated_with_fox_military_analyst_bill_cowan_gets_62_million_dollar_contract_with_us_military.php

September 27, 2006

Editor and Publisher is reporting that The Lincoln Group out of Washington DC has received another multi-million dollar contract to "monitor a number of English and Arabic media outlets and produce public relations-type products such as talking points or speeches for U.S. forces in Iraq..." If you'll recall, the firm gained notoriety last November when it was reported that they had been retained to help plant propaganda in Iraqi newspapers.

That was barely covered on FOX, with the most glaring omission being the relationship between FOX military analyst Bill Cowan and the Lincoln Group - he is an "advisor" and he is the founder/chairman of WVC3, a company which "does business with" the Lincoln Group. What a complex web!

Cowan is also a member of the Iran Policy Committee, which supports the terrorist MEK.

What it comes down is is that these were not just former military guys helping out the Pentagon on the side by putting a happy face on Gitmo. Cowan was also involved in Iraq propaganda via the Lincoln Group and possibly in domestic propaganda via his connection with Carlton Sherwood. Paul Vallely was another Pentagon-sponsored Fox News analyst with a deep history in propaganda operations.

Gee, it almost makes you wonder if Fox News is not just doing what it does to court ratings on the right but is somebody's bought-and-paid-for propaganda shop.

That's just speculation, of course -- but I'd really like to see someone with the resources to do it right look into just how deep this stuff goes and just how nasty it gets.

[crickets]

10. K & R

Thank you for posting this.

[SpiralHawk]

11. "Move along. There's nothing to see here." - American corporate media

Except the ugly truth about how Mass Corporate Media fails to serve either the truth or the citizens of the USA

[OhioChick]

13. K&R

:kick: