“This is a military program initiated with the multinational force to help get factual information about ongoing operations into Iraqi news,” [Lt. Col. Barry] Johnson said in an e-mail. “I want to emphasize that all information used for marketing these stories is completely factual.”
Are you wearing your rubber boots?
Details about the program were first reported by the Los Angeles Times on Wednesday. It marked the second time this year that Pentagon programs have come under scrutiny for reported payments made to journalists for favorable press.
Two other federal agencies have been investigated in the past year for similar activities, leading Congress’ Government Accountability Office to condemn one, the Education Department, for engaging in illegal covert propaganda.
John Schulz, a former executive with Voice of America who is now dean of the Boston University College of Communication, called the military program scary.
“The Bush administration, and some elements within the Defense Department, do not seem to grasp the irony that, in their efforts to create, impose or inspire democratic society in Iraq, they are subverting the very core of what democracy means and are instead, by example, undercutting the very thing they are attempting to instill in Iraq,” Schulz said.
An LA TIMES reporter on MSNBC’s Countdown, Wednesday, said the “contractors” would pay from $50 to $1500 to have the stories published. His investigator on the scene asked one editor if he realized the Americans were behind it? He replied, “No — otherwise I would have asked for more!”
This is a waste of our tax dollars becaust it won’t work.
People in this part of the world are used to a controlled media and get very good at reading between the lines.
Obviously, if our military had to pay them to print the stories, then those newspapers had the freedom to not print them if they chose not to. There is no real story here except in observing the silliness of the U.S. media’s commentary. The government funds PBS too, does that mean “freedom of the press” is being subverted here too?
What war have we not used propaganda? If it only costs $100, that’s money well spent, I say.
And Al Jeezera is a whole lat better? This is war – forget the PC!
It’s scary that people commenting on this just don’t get it.
When you pay to have something nice said about you, that’s called “advertising,” not “news.”
And when you’re trying to teach a country the concept of a free press, bribing to say how great you are is more like the old regime than the democracy you’re trying to create.
In other words, you don’t show the world you’re The Good Guys by employing tactics of The Bad Guys.
Kate
Thank you for saying so well what I was going to say. Only I would have been more long winded and verbose.
Didn’t we just go through this a few months ago, when it was disclosed that certain radio shows were being paid for by the US government? So why is it news that we would pay for propaganda overseas?
Besides, we need all the ‘good’ press that we can get, since things are so bad in Iraq that without some good news, 100% of the population would want us out, instead of just a measly 80%.
umm, the “bad guys” would just censor you or make you a political prisoner when you published something they didn’t like.
This whole non-issue has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of the press in Iraq.
Who thought of this idea first … Microsoft or the U.S. Gov’t? When will we see that, a new co-sponsored study revealed that all Iraqis will be better off with the U.S. gov’t and Microsoft in control than with Sadaam and Linux? : )
It’s ironic that we are concerned for the “deception” of the Iraqis but don’t seem to realize that our own media has/is shifting significantly towards a linear conservative POV and is basically and steadily losing it’s stance as an objective and “liberal” mouthpiece. Of course, the conservatives will keep harping on the old and outdated idea that our media is liberal so that we don’t realize this controlled shift is occuring until the people have lost their “trustworthy eyes, ears & voice” and the most powerful tool of Democracy. Remember the days of investigative reporting (and I’m not talking about what Britney Spears did last week)?
Your saying the media is touting a ‘conservative’ line. If by that you mean pro-Bush, then how come soldiers that come back are always saying the media is getting the story wrong, that they’re only focusing on American casualties, and not reporting any successes?
AB CD,
Success and failure is relative in this context. You’ll especially see an example of it when Bush pulls the troops out early and claims complete and unquestionable victory. It isn’t surprising that the military wants to see this situation as half-full but the reporters usually get perspectives from all sides including the bystanders which would explain why it isn’t reported in a positive light. Of course, I haven’t seen any major network reports of these failings but I did see a dedicated FOX news documentary on how great everything is over there. The effect is the same if objectivity is pushed into obscure and short lived broadcasts.