by D. Cupples | Last year, Bill Moyers exposed media complicity in the Bush Administration's falsely selling the Iraq war to us Americans. Fear of losing "patriotic" viewers (and ad revenues) seemed to be what compelled journalists and editors to parrot the Administration's highly questionable talking points.
Today, the New York Times exposed evidence from newly released Pentagon documents indicating that even the so-called "independent" military analysts who helped shape public opinion on the war likely spoke in support of the Administration's agenda simply because doing so would promote the analysts' own financial interests.
No doubt, the late Republican President Dwight Eisenhower is sadly shaking his head and saying "I warned you." The Times reports:
"To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.
"Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
"The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air. (NY Times)
No doubt, the people who stood to make millions off the Iraq war -- for themselves or their clients -- would have us believe that when they faced the TV cameras, they switched hats and temporarily forgot their monetary interests in selling the war. The Times continues:
"Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants.
"The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.
"Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks." (NY Times)
I urge you to read the Times article, which includes many details and names.
In his farewell address to the nation, delivered in January 1961, President Eisenhower warned:
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development.
"Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted."Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
Given how well two financial interests came together to mislead the public about the war -- defense contractors and the commercially driven media -- how can we citizens ever expect to be truly well informed about our government? Glenn Greenwald (via Memeorandum) has interesting commentary.
Related BN-Politics Posts:
* Blackwater et. al.: the High Cost of Private Contractors
* Media Bias Bigger than the Presidential Race
* "Billions over Baghdad": Poor Accounting Enabled Waste & Fraud
* State Dept. to Renew Blackwater's Contracts?
* Inspector General Blocked Investigations re: Waste and Fraud?
.
The Times article outlines some of the Psy-Ops employed by the Pentagon and the Administration, not against the enemy, but against the American public.
This level of media manipulation is unprecedented in American politics. We'd probably still be in Vietnam if they'd perfected this sort of propaganda machinery in the 1960's.
I'm glad you are picking up on it here, D.
Posted by: Bill | April 20, 2008 at 06:20 PM
Bill,
I've been upset with the media since 2001. None of this surprises me.
Posted by: D. Cupples | April 20, 2008 at 10:19 PM