Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

With the war less popular than ever, increasing numbers of war supporters are blaming the media for Iraq's bad news.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Blaming the Media for Bad News

By Norman Solomon, AlterNet. Posted March 23, 2006.


With the war less popular than ever, increasing numbers of war supporters are blaming the media for Iraq's bad news.
Advertisement

Top officials in the Bush administration have often complained that news coverage of Iraq focuses on negative events too much, and fails to devote enough attention to positive developments. Yet the White House has rarely picked direct fights with U.S. media outlets during this war. For the most part, President Bush leaves it to others to scapegoat the media.

Karl Rove's spin strategy is heavily reliant on surrogates. They're likely to escalate blame-the-media efforts as this year goes on.

A revealing moment -- dramatizing the pro-war division of labor -- came on Wednesday, during Bush's nationally televised appearance in Wheeling, West Virginia. On the surface, the format resembled a town hall, but the orchestration was closer to war rally. (According to White House spokesperson Scott McClellan, the local Chamber of Commerce had distributed 2,000 tickets while a newspaper in the community gave out 100.) It fell to a woman who identified herself as being from Columbus, Ohio, to give the Wheeling event an anti-media jolt.

Her husband -- who was an Army officer in Iraq, where "his job while serving was as a broadcast journalist" -- "has returned from a 13-month tour in Tikrit," she said. And then came the populist punch: "He has brought back several DVDs full of wonderful footage of reconstruction, of medical things going on. And I ask you this from the bottom of my heart for a solution to this, because it seems that our major media networks don't want to portray the good."

She added: "They just want to focus … on another car bomb or they just want to focus on some more bloodshed or they just want to focus on how they don't agree with you and what you're doing, when they don't even probably know how you're doing what you're doing anyway. But what can we do to get that footage on CNN, on Fox, to get it on Headline News, to get it on the local news?… It portrays the good. And if people could see that, if the American people could see it, there would never be another negative word about this conflict."

The audience punctuated the woman's statement with very strong applause and then a standing ovation. But rather than pile on, Bush adopted an air of restraint.

"Just got to keep talking," he advised. "Word of mouth, there's blogs, there's Internet, there's all kinds of ways to communicate, which is literally changing the way people are getting their information. And so if you're concerned, I would suggest that you reach out to some of the groups that are supporting the troops, that have gotten Internet sites, and just keep the word moving. And that's one way to deal with an issue without suppressing a free press. We will never do that in America."

In effect, Bush is holding the coat of those who go after the news media on his behalf. Many pro-war voices constantly accuse the media of anti-war and anti-Bush biases -- with the accusations routinely amplified in mass-media echo chambers. Cranking up the volume are powerhouse outlets like Fox News, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the New York Post, the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, legions of high-profile loyalist pundits, and literally hundreds of radio talk-show hosts across the country who have political outlooks similar to Rush Limbaugh's.


Digg!

Norman Solomon is the author of the new book, "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Here's a way to think about Iraq
Posted by: rollo on Mar 23, 2006 1:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, there's "medical things going on". How about that! And "they just want to focus on how they don't agree with you and what you're doing, when they don't even probably know how you're doing what you're doing anyway." Hey Abbott, who's on first?

Are YOU confused by the media? Tell ya what, just ignore them. You want a window into Iraq, here's what any American can (and should) do:

Turn off your TV. Then go the airport. Buy a ticket to New Orleans. Rent a car and drive around the city. Get a good look. Talk to some people down there. If you can come home thinking that Bush and Co are leaders, that they have a plan and know what they're doing, I'll eat this blog.

While you are taking in the wreckage of New Orleans with your own eyes and your own ears and your own nose (free of the media, free of spin) ask yourself this question: "Could things over in Iraq possibly be going better than they are right here?"

After all, New Orleans is here in the USA (the Homeland!) where we speak the language, print the money, and know how things work. And it's a disaster. A SNAFU. A complete fuck-all.

So, could Bush and Co possibly be working things out more effficiently and effectively in a foreign nation we don't understand at all? It's a serious question.

If the answer is YES, then there's some explaining to do. How could we possibly put our own country, our own people in second place?

Therefore, I think you know as well as I that the answer is NO. Things in Iraq must be at least as bad as in New Orleans. And probably much, much worse.

But really, go see New Orleans. You need to see it once in your lifetime anyway. This time, bring an extra carry-on bag of supplies for the people down there.

And vote smarter next time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No offense meant to Idaho
Posted by: Bizby on Mar 23, 2006 5:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I cannot quote the source at the moment, I recall reading a report that placed bombings and other attacks in the country of Iraq as a whole at comfortably above an average of 200 per week.

Suppose a car bomb exploded in say, Boise, just one bomb, and it killed a couple of people. News coverage in the U.S. would be nothing but that car bombing, 24/7, cable and network, for weeks and weeks, no matter how many schools were built in Idaho that month.

There are any number of reasons why this mess is not the media's fault, but high among them must be the sheer number of attacks and deaths going on in Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pollyannish expectations
Posted by: brunowe on Mar 24, 2006 6:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's not forget that it was the Administration that raised expectations that this would be easy. Wolfowitz said he couldn't imaging that the occupation would require more troops than the invasion. Shinseki and Lindsey being punished for giving what turned out to be accurate estimates regarding exactly how many troops and how much money would be required. The "greeted as libertors" line from Cheney. Administration supporter Ken Adelman saying that it would be a "cakewalk". Bush, doing is best G.I. Joe impression, saying "Mission Accomplished" two years ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Business as usual in the White House
Posted by: TKO on Mar 24, 2006 3:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is the same old mirrors and smoke from the White House. It is revealed that Shrub and the NSA are breaking the law and spying on Americans WITHOUT WARRANTS. The $1.6 Billion Spin Machine comes out attacking and urging investigation of the “leakers” and not investigating our Misleader's crime. Some of the same crimes that caused Nixon to resign. I am not that up to date on computer technology and the internet, but I think that the reason Shrub doesn't want to confront that crime in the daylight is because of the way data moves in packets, can be fragmented and can take multiple routes between client and server computers, it is not possible to SELECTIVELY read emails and other types of data sent on the internet. It would be necessary to read everything to determine what you want to keep. Now that Bush's war in Iraq is souring the Rove/Cheney antidote is to attack the media that dared to bring us an inkling of the truth. All of the talking heads are spouting that it's not a “Civil War” because you don't see large groups of people holding ground and attacking other groups. I wonder why. With all of the Predator and other imaging systems we have deployed over Iraq, any group of people seen massing together would either have the US forces or the Iraqi police show up. Any resistance would result in “Shake and Bake” (500 lb bombs and napalm). This guarantees that this non-civil war will last indefinitely. Or maybe until the oil contracts run out. Does anyone know when that is? In the meantime the Shia militia/Iraqi police will continue their daily death squad activity under the umbrella of our military power or more accurately, firepower. Attack the messenger or anyone else that points out your incompetence. Business as usual in this White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My, how things have changed
Posted by: Grouchoman on Mar 25, 2006 4:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A year ago, we couldn't get anyone except the liberal press to discuss the war in reasonable terms. The same media the right now bashes as negative was willing cheerleader for this mess.

And today, look at your local tv station. Those boobs still generally treat war stories from a rah rah perspective, because any chance they get to discuss, interview or cajole a member of congress or the administration is their chance to hit it big and shine in their market. Why would they blow that by being Mike Wallace?

The right is insane over this war and now, because they are losing the media in addition to the war, they must find someone to "blame." Surely it is not themselves!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shoot the messenger? Please...
Posted by: sgtmartin1 on Mar 25, 2006 2:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...what are we going to do about the damn dogs!

(A bit o' Rummy Satire)

The Canine Conspiracy

EWM- (March 22, 2006) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld flummoxed the Pentagon press corps and ignited a political firestorm today by blaming the dog pictured menacing an Iraqi prisoner in Abu Ghraib that led to handler Sgt. Michael J. Smith being convicted of prisoner abuse.

“I mean come on, look at that taut leash, the dog’s lunging posture, its snarling zeal. That dog is out of control. It’s something we don’t like to talk about, but the fact is you go to war with the dogs you have, not the dogs you wish you had. This is clearly a case of rogue mutts soiling an otherwise perfectly executed war plan,” said Rumsfeld during the testy briefing.

Rumsfeld’s denunciation of the dog was immediately seized upon by Bush supporters seeking to blame anyone but the President for failings in Iraq and beyond...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Press Not Accussed of Bad Iraq News
Posted by: 2xl on Apr 1, 2006 7:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unless living in another world, what “alternative media” readers all agree on, is that the “mainstream media” collaborates by publishing paid (by the taxpayers) gov propaganda & do not provide “true” & well researched information. We are living in the times of “Illusion”, where the “masters of illusion” think that by feeding “lies & disinformation” they can change the “reality we all live in.” All the are creating is a “fictitious world of their own.” And all they are doing is “delaying everyone’s destiny,” including their own. The “truth,” although hidden, is still there, it’s still the “truth,” & the “true & only master”, is still watching.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]