"The invasion was framed as a primarily as a liberation operation, not an anti-terror campaign."

Hoohah, now THAT's funny, I don't care who you are.

Youch! Harsh - but deserved - words from the retired General. From the universally awful hurricane Katrina coverage to the latest political propoganda piece ginned up as a scientific study, the media is very infrequently held accountable for their mistakes.

It worries the hell out of me, since the press is pretty much the 4th pillar of government at this point.

Ah, blame the media. I work with the police and the military all the time. Their constant biatch is this:

"Why don't you show our side of things?" The answer is, we let you speak all the time. ALL THE TIME.

Blaming the media is what government entities do. There is no competition, there is no real oversight, and when someone catches them bald faced in a lie, it usually goes nowhere. Unless it hits the media. They blow millions in corrupt practices and no one checks them. When they get checked, they blame the people who checked them, because if they stop people from talking about the crime, they can get away with it.

The police, government, and military are not interested in telling one fact that does not benefit them. Not one piece of information that does not promote them, or make them look like heroes.

I know of two police officers in my decade of covering news who have never said, "you can't report this," on situations that I know were released into public record. Look, if I get wind of an ongoing investigation, I won't run and screw up their work. I like and respect my cops, just from time to time, they get all crazy about things. They live in cop world. In cop world, everything is in neat little boxes. Innocents and criminals. Woe be to the camera guy that stumbles on to a cop acting like a criminal, because that breaks the box. That won't compute to them. They make you the criminal at that point. You're arrested, bucko.

I have seen behaviors that are downright hostile to the media when it is totally public information. I have seen photographers stuffed in squad cars for being at the same places the rest of the public is. Walk up with the public during a big ta-da with the cops? Look out, they're comin' for ya.

Trust me on this. That's cops. They've got nothing on the military, who just adore the current administration's freedom hating tactics. The US military, right now, is still probably considering making people sign 'loyalty oaths' on paper saying that they would give no negative press to Uncle Sam if they grant them access to a public institution.

They pretty much restrict access to anyone the second they don't play ball with their current crop of ideas. PR officers are interested in staffing media events with ex-military from the groups they invite. They also ask questions about your past, and feel you out with military jargon, to see if you're service friendly or raised as a military brat. These are all known behaviors.

That being said, the military is NOT evil.
Seriously, this isn't the evil military behaving that way, it's just the culture of the military, and it just looks evil from the outside, because of the life and death nature of the job. It isn't nasty. Soldiers gave up their freedoms for objectives the moment they walked into the service. Dissention kills militaries better than bullets. After years living the military way, they've forgotten that others outside of the uniform have freedoms, and they just act like civvies are below buck privates. It's a whole culture of 'no' that is necessary in military life, and they use it on you from time to time if you deal with them.

The service gets free passes that no one else in America gets. They also do a job that is dirtier than any other. Hence the free pass most the time, because they earned it. That being said, when some general gets rather egregious with his 'blame the media' moment, you should tell him to go away, because he won't be able to run for congress with that attitude.

He's been to long making the orders instead of taking them. He should shut his mouth, beause at that point, he's just inviting scrutiny that we would never give to a gunny.

I turned on Fox and Fiends this morning and they were biatching about Gore receiving the Nobel Prize.

In addition, I learned that one of the co-hosts is a "preacher" and a gospel "singer".

Show those legs; look pretty, talk trash about democrats, sing about "god" and Iraq will work out.

The average American has no spine. No one wants to speak up, outside the internet, for fear of the "surrender monkey" label. We'll be in Iraq for five or ten more years, maybe longer, if Turkey invades northern Iraq.

//Good times

If Rumsfeld meeting Saddam was bad...

SemperLieSuckah: Person: So basically, it's not the Military's fault that the Iraq war is a failure, but the media's?

No, it's the media's fault for sensationalizing the scandals of the war and failing to present it in a realistic manner. This has led to a public opinion that the war is futile, for money, and this silly idea that we're the problem there, not the insurgency/terrorists and if we would just go away so would they.

You can't honestly believe that. If anything, the media has underplayed the scandals in Iraq.

You don't even have to look past Abu Ghraib or Black Water to see that there has been minimal reporting on the scandals and it's only when a whistleblower or the Iraqi government itself brings the issues to the surface that the media reports on it. And even then, it's quickly forgotten for the next Britney Spears or Lohan scandal.

The military is in a shiathole and rather than take responsibility, they want a scapegoat.

"It's their fault we farked up."

pogopogo:
That massive consensus was wrong. Massive consensus is not the truth. One person is responsible for finding the truth before sending a soldier to war. That person is not a member of the media.

Even so, not everyone was fooled by all the pre-war hype. Walter Pincus at the Washington Post wasn't fooled. Just because most of the media was complicit in their lack on investigation doesn't mean that people weren't fooled into believing what they wanted to believe.

Bush (who I assume you were implying) doesn't sit down with a laptop and a venti Mocha and do his own research. He is an executive, he makes decisions based on evidence presented to him. That's why we have a CIA, NSA, FBI, State Dept, etc.

I don't understand what you are saying with the rest of that. It's just a statement that some people were skeptical. How does that fit into this argument? Bush should have somehow miraculously know to listen to Pincus because he's the divine newsman?

Person:
You can't honestly believe that. If anything, the media has underplayed the scandals in Iraq.

You don't even have to look past Abu Ghraib or Black Water to see that there has been minimal reporting on the scandals and it's only when a whistleblower or the Iraqi government itself brings the issues to the surface that the media reports on it. And even then, it's quickly forgotten for the next Britney Spears or Lohan scandal.

The military is in a shiathole and rather than take responsibility, they want a scapegoat.

"It's their fault we farked up."

Those are minor scandals and they did get WAAAY more press attention than they warranted. Treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was not indicative of how they were treated everywhere all the time. It was a few douchebags having fun at the expense of even greater douchebags who a few weeks prior were praising beheadings and kidnapping journalists. But we're the bad guys because a few douchebags at Abu Ghraib were torturing hazing prisoners.

The Blackwater issue is a complete load of shiat, and they have nothing to do with military strategy. Blackwater has a better record than our own military does in handling incidents, but they are being intentionally scrutinized in the media as part of an effort to give further appearance of scandal in Iraq by leftist activist groups like MoveOn. They came under fire in Baghdad, and as anyone would do, they fired back and killed the shooters. They are being blamed for this, as if they shouldn't have fired back. There are some reports that are being given additional attention that they killed "innocent people". Bullshiat, even when I was over there they would send kids out to pick up weapons off of dead fighters, then when the cameras arrive have people crying that there was a massacre of unarmed men. It's bullshiat.

This is all being sensationalized as a weapon to undermine the Bush administration on a level that appeals to the voting publics' conscience. You are being manipulated.

Person:

"It's their fault we farked up."


No one said "It's their fault we farked up." What he is saying is that the information coming out of the war is being manipulated to support ideological sides, not to present the objective truth.

Instead of hearing, "Blackwater employees opened fire during an attack in Baghdad today killing the attackers (and maybe, occasionally some bystanders)." You hear "Are unsupervised Blackwater mercenaries ruthlessly slaughtering Iraqis? Film at 11..."

The media tends to have a liberal bias. More at 11.

Yet, Americans still think that they know what's going on in the world because they watch TV.

ScubaDude1960: Yet, Americans still think that they know what's going on in the world because they watch TV.



FTW.

When you watch "news" about Iraq, is it something thats happened, or is it a talking head jaw jacking?

It seems like most news is just opinion anymore, wouldn't it be great if someone made a website that satired news headlines?

more importantly, Anna Nichole Smith is still dead

dittybopper:

I see it, but it's extremely rare compared to the likes of Fox News and CNN (CNN's better though). While his show can sometimes be boring as f*#), Neal Conan's "Talk of the Nation" I think does a pretty good job. He rarely ever presents a point of view, but coaxes information and perspective out of people and his guests.

I'm overall very satisfied with their hourly news summaries. A few days ago I heard a lady almost blurt something opinionated about Blackwater during the 7 AM cast, but they're usually so objective that it sticks out like a sore thumb whenever someone's been meddling.

Wait Wait Don't Tell Me is HILARIOUS, but DRENCHED in liberal bias. Peter Sagal might as well wear a MoveOn.org t-shirt when he does the show.

I

It's true, the media got it all wrong about Iraq. They said:

-Saddam had WMD

-Jessica Lynch fought heroically and had to be bravely rescued from evil captors

-they found a whole bunch of WMD several times over (ok, just Fox said that)

-the mission was accomplished (ok, oops that was just Dubya who said that)

Christian Bale:


Oh yeah, I forgot about Jessica. I think she actually spoke out against this bullshiat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0OyihqYfF4

People act like the media should be on some sort of holy mission to discover the truth. In reality, newspapers are in the business of selling newspapers - TV is in the business of selling advertisement - the internet is in the business of enlarging your penis. Ultimately, their only job is to move as much product as they can - and that means giving the people what they want.

If you're going to blame the media, you might as well blame society - because that's who they're catering to...

Sanchez said there was lots of blame to go 'round. A docile media was only one component. That's what happens when the country's media outlets go the Murdoch-Fox/NBC-Welch route and echo the corporate-interest line. The "liberal" media disappeared around 10 years ago. The NYTimes under Punch Sulzberger and The Washington Post under Katherine Graham's son aren't the Times and the Post of fond memory. They were the war's biggest cheerleaders. Only the McClatchey group of newspapers does decent government reporting anymore and they're in smaller markets.

Unlike public TV, commercial TV is fundamentally different in the way it regards it's viewers. Most people don't realize this, but it should be repeated over and over again until the last person realizes what it means:

"We are not the customer, we are the product"

We think we are customers of a commercial radio or TV station because we can call and complain. That is wrong. We are not paying anything for programming, the ones that are paying are the advertisers. The advertisers are the customers of a commercial station, and we are the product that is being sold.
We are a finicky product, like a racehorse or a pet, but in the end we are the ones who are being sold to the highest bidder in the advertisement industry. The only thing that counts is to keep us watching the inane commercials every 15 minutes, and the TV stations will do whatever it takes to keep us watching.

There is no honor, there is no truth, there is only ratings. If they can keep more people watching by telling the truth, they'll do it, but usually it's more profitable to simply tell stories that sound good and come with flashy graphics and confirm our prejudices. Also, anything complicated (like everything that happens in real life and isn't black and white) is a ratings killer.

Therefore:
- OJ Simpson
- Missing white women
- Terry Shiavo
- Anna Nicole Smith
- etc.

The truth is bad for business. Anything mindless that keeps us watching because it addresses our lowest emotions is good for business. Don't expect any truth from TV news, it's purely accidental.

The media has it's own agenda?
They don't tell the full story?
They use their stories to manipulate public opinion?

Surly you jest. =)

Seriously, that should be common knowledge but it would seem that the majority of my fellow Democrats take everything they hear at face value. Ignorance is bliss.

It was brought up earlier, but has to be said again. THE MEDIA HAS ALWAYS DONE THIS SORT OF THING. And they more than likely always will. But of course it's ok when Pulitzer and Hearst get us involved in the Spanish-American war, because hey, we got stuff out of that. Of course it was ok when they were sensationalizing the hell out of Communist schemes in the '50s and '60s, 'cause hey, the evil Commies were out to get us.

I don't know why people are shocked about this now. The media railed FOR the war when popular opinion was on the war's side and it made ratings, and the media rails AGAINST the war when popular opinion was against the war and it made ratings.

"Your unwillingness to accurately and prominently correct your mistakes and your agenda driven biases contribute to this corrosive environment"

Guess that whole embedded stuff you demanded hasn't worked out so swell for you.


There are two choices for this administration and neither are pretty...

1) We can let only the respected journalist cover this war



OR

2) We can just go shopping

That massive consensus was wrong. Massive consensus is not the truth.

HawHawHaw . . .

/Bet you don't think that about Glowball Warming.

Bush lied and people died is the most fallacious of bumper sticker politics, and it sinks in like a rock in a shallow pond.

Let's forget that every intel agency in the world believed saddam had or was trying to reconstitute his WMD program. Let's forget all the Democrats that made the same claim and then in cowardly fashion, said "Bush fooled us" which if true, makes them unfit for any office of power. Let's forget the fact that saddam was the one who up until the last minute lied to everybody(including his own commanders) that he indeed, had said WMD's and would "crush" the American forces with them, which prompted the reminder to him that Nukes were an option. Let's forget the 48 hours and the caravans of trucks under cover of darkness ferrying unknown loads into the Syrian desert. Let's forget the Iraqi general's book that admitted they flew large quantities of weapons materials out of the country. Let's forget all the weapons they did find, albeit not in "stockpiles" as claimed by saddam.

Easier by far to buy the medias hyper-ventilated claims.

While we're at it, let's swallow like a John Holmes facial shot, the UN's false claim that the war is an illegal invasion, rather than a sanctioned resumption of hostilities following their failed 17 resolutions to punish saddam for violating a legal cease fire of a UN sanctioned action, the 1st gulf war.

FredoLaredo: Let's forget that every intel agency in the world believed saddam had or was trying to reconstitute his WMD program. Let's forget all the Democrats that made the same claim and then in cowardly fashion...

1)Bush "cherry picked" the intelligece (see Downing Street Memos).
2)Intelligence agencies from both Germany and France (2 of the 4 largest allies we have)held contrary intel of this administration's intelligence and presented to Bush.
3) The intelligence presented to only the select members of congress remeber, was the "cherry picked" intelligence that has been totally discredited.
4) The democrats are still cowardly...even knowing the truth about BushCo lies

YELLOW CAKE FROM NIGER

MUSHROOM CLOUD

MOBIL BIO-WEAPONS LABS

UNMANNED AIRPLANES CAPABLE OF REACHING THE US

DIRECT CONTACT AND ASSOCIATION WITH al Quaeda

GREETED AS LIBERATORS

WAR WILL PAY FOR IT'S SELF

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

"Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."

"Iraq has also provided Al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training."

"Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda."
- Bush in January 2003 State of the Union address.

"The smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud."

"We have found WMDs in Iraq."

FredoLaredo:


THANK YOU. Very pithy. (not quoting Billo)

//Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.


pogopogo And maybe pink unicorns should fly out of my ass after I eat swiss cheese. (that has nothing to do with anything, i just wanted to say that) Saddam was a menacing figure in the middle east, and if there is reasonable speculation that he has WMDs, I am going to err on the side of that speculation unless presented with OVERWHELMING evidence. I haven't actually fully read Blix's reports, but I just bookmarked it in my read pile to cover that hole in my due diligence. Meanwhile, read FredoLaredo's post up a few. He did a very nice summary.

I got to sit in hans brix's desk when we were at the UN building in bagdad. Should have took the name plate from his desk =(


/the previous unit couldnt get into the inspectors side, I just walked onto the courtyard ledge out a window, and into a window on the other side of the blast door =) Weapons inspectors have some NICE equipment, brand new top of the line dells, German Gas masks and MOPP gear.

Gajim: That massive consensus was wrong. Massive consensus is not the truth.

HawHawHaw . . .

/Bet you don't think that about Glowball Warming.

There wasn't massive consensus on Iraq because there wasn't evidence on Iraq.

HTH.