So, the military has been paying some Iraqi media to produce positive stories. The question is, are any of the stories false? No? Well, daaaaammmmmmmmmn! How about that.
U.S. Army officers have been secretly paying Iraqi journalists to produce upbeat newspaper, radio and television reports about American military operations and the conduct of the war in Iraq.
U.S. officials in Washington said the payments were made through the Baghdad Press Club, an organization they said was created more than a year ago by U.S. Army officers. They are part of an extensive American military-run information campaign – including psychological-warfare experts – intended to build popular support for U.S.-led stabilization efforts and erode support for Sunni Muslim insurgents.
Members of the Press Club are paid as much as $200 a month, depending on how many positive pieces they produce, according to the U.S. officials.
So, what’s the problem? The stories are true, they are pro-American…..oh, yeah, there’s the problem to the Leftie Surrender Monkey’s. They are pro-American. Cannot have that, if you are one of the Kool AId drinkers. Nor do they want the truth to get out. That would be a blow to the Left’s insane arguments.
Over at Ankle Biting Pundits, bulldogpundit states
Have you ever seen a bigger MSM-driven controversy than the one about the military paying Iraqi journalists to put pro-American stories in their papers? Let’s be real here folks, does this bother you at all? Me neither. But what’s really funny is that the MSM, other liberals and some politicians are more angry at this than they were about Dan Rather and Mary Mapes using phony documents to try and influence an election, and not being up in arms about their "fake but accurate defense".
So what is it we were trying to accomplish with this propaganda? We are spreading facts to "help our cause" and "further our cause" and damage "an opposing cause. For those of you who forgot, our "cause" is winning the war, and the "opposing cause" we are trying to damage is that of the terrorists. Anyone got a problem with that? And need I remind anyone that we are at war? Propaganda is a tool to win the war. This isn’t some freaking journalistic ivory tower.
They idea is to win the war, not, as so many on the Left and in the US and international media want, to lose it. To give the Iraqi people a chance for a good life, and a stable, democratic government. The media often tends to take the negative view, so adding the positive into the mix is a good idea. Except to the Left.
Paying to have stories planted in newspapaers doesn’t bother you. That alone is very revealing.
“So, what’s the problem? The stories are true, they are pro-American…..”
Huh? Nowhere in the article is a statement that specifies that the articles were true. Where do you get the idea that they are? I can’t help but think that what you’re saying is that they must be true since they’re pro-American…
“They idea is to win the war, not, as so many on the Left and in the US and international media want, to lose it. To give the Iraqi people a chance for a good life, and a stable, democratic government.”
If the Iraqi people are to have a chance at a truly democratic government, then the establishment of a free press that isn’t for sale to the highest bidder is an absolute necessity. On the other hand, if the idea is to create a semblance of democracy so everyone (read US voters) can feel better about the whole situation, then buying off the press would likely be a good idea.
The question is, are any of the stories false? No?
It’s not simply a matter of whether or not the claims made in the story are true or not. Frequent viewers of Fox News might not understand this, but real journalism presents all sides of the story to give the reader a full understanding. From the accounts by the reporters who broke this story, the stories planted in Iraqi media were told from a singularly pro-American point of view, and were described as “amateurish propaganda” (I’m paraphrasing) in their transparent slant. The fact alone that the US military wrote the story is actually an essential part of the story that was purposely omitted.
Paul, perhaps you could explain that “all sides” thing to such bastions of one sidedness such as the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, etc. They do not bother to show “all sides.”
And, no, it does not bother me that some stories were paid for to be included. If they are not false and fake, what’s the harm? We are in a war. Propaganda is part of the war. Todays US media should be thankful that there is not Office of censorship like we had under FDR during WWII.
“Paul, perhaps you could explain that “all sides” thing to such bastions of one sidedness such as the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, etc. They do not bother to show “all sides.””
Eash one of those news sources failed to to their jobs by buying Bush’s BS as he took us to war in Iraq. The only reason right-wing nut jobs like yourself think they lean to the left is becuase they don’t represent your narrow and deluded viewpoint like Fox does.
What you don’t understand is that good reporting will show all relevant perspectives. Great reporting will then analyze the situation to get to the truth of the matter.
What you are really upset about is that the fantasy conservative worldview is slowly crumbling around you and the truth makes you look like an ignorant fool. Take the blinders off, you’ll feel better.
So you wouldn’t have a problem w/a foreign government paying members of the US press to write positive stories about that government and having these stories disseminated here as news.
Here’s what your missing. The real scandal s bigger than the purchase of news, it’s about the awarding of huge contracts to companies that do very little but are run by Republican Party operatives. This company, The Lincoln Group, received a $100 million contract, but it seems the company is two 30-something Republican Party operatives who are doing very little for the money. (FYI – The articles go into Chalabi’s newspaper — Chalabi who has already received hundreds of millions in payments from the US.)
THAT is where the scrutiny is coming in — the number and size of such contracts, and who is receiving the money.
“Paul, perhaps you could explain that “all sides” thing to such bastions of one sidedness such as the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, etc. They do not bother to show “all sides.””
What nonsense. The NYT, WaPo, LA Times and CNN all have just as many right-wing voices as left-wing voices. Can you name a Fox News Liberal other than Alan Colmes? Even NPR and PBS have as many Right-wing voices as Left -wing voices.
Second, the NYT, WaPo et al aren’t using your Tax Money; unlike government funded propaganda.
We need a free press that isn’t controlled by the party in power. This is something the left and right should are with 100%. Not sure why people on the right are knee-jerk defending the administration.
I’m reminded of how outraged people were when VNRs were released under the Clinton administration, only to be silent when the Armstrong Williams scandal broke.
Sal, Bullshit. They have some token COnservatives, but the vast majority of stories, as well as the editorials and OpEd’s, are Liberal.
As far as foreign gov’t paying for press coverage in our papers, apples and oranges. We are fighting a war in Iraq. Big difference. Nice try, though.
Let me make one thing clear, though, since I cut off the last paragraph when I cut and pasted from Wordpad. Paying for some stories is one thing. If the military is paying for alot of them, and/or if they are false stories, then that would be an issue. How much is too much? Good question. But, some stories here and there are fine with me.
“We are fighting a war in Iraq. Big difference. Nice try, though.”
William – I agree with you. (Although I’d like to see it defined who we are fighting a war againt – the Sunnis?) My concern is whether corruption is undercutting our war effort. $100 million is a lot of money. I want it applied effectively, not squandered on cronies.
You’re all missing the elephant in the room. (For you Freepers, that means you’re missing the point.)
Now that it’s known that the US is paying for pro-US ‘news’, the Arab readers we were trying to reach are going to treat ANY pro-US story as propaganda. And I don’t blame them.
Would you put any faith in a pro-China story on Fox if you knew that a secret Chinese agency had paid for the story? Even if that story was true, you’d be leery of the next pro-China story you saw, wondering if it was real or made-in-China.
The Bushies have poisoned the well with their stupidity, once again. Bush keeps trying to be a dictator (secret prisons, torture, propaganda, imprisoning citizens without trial, etc.) but he’s no better at it than he was at being an oil executive. Unfortunately he’s not just destroying a little oil company, he’s destroying our nation.
Once again, the grown-ups are going to have to pick up little Georgie’s mess.
There are two scandals here. The first is cronyism. Hundreds of millions of dollars for PR work in Iraq has gone to a company owned by a Republican activist (Christian Bailey founder of Lead21) who has no experience in Iraq or public relations. The second is of the use of propaganda itself. Not only will this hurt the standing of any legitimate pro-American news, but it also makes journalists a target of the insurgency.
The White House is making OJesq claims about getting to the bottom of it (while everyone knows they were neck deep in it), so you can bet someone is gonna get their dick nailed to the wall.
I must have missed the part where the article you referenced states that the stories we paid to have published were true. If they were true, why did we have to pay again?
I’m tired of the kool-aid references from the kool-aid drinkers. It’s about as old as the anti-American comments from people who are doing everything they can to undermine America (read: fascist Republicans). By the way, fascism is defined as reactionary or dictatorial. Describes the Republican sound machine almost too perfectly.
To get to the point though: you don’t buy news in a free country. That’s called propaganda. If you can’t trust the media to tell you the truth, you have no way of knowing the truth. Everything becomes a “he said, she said” situation and anybody with money can get away with doing whatever they want. The sad part about all of this is that it’s happening here in America but that isn’t as big of a story.
You should be happy the focus is on another country. It gives your party leaders more of a chance to rape democracy here at home while we’re looking the other way.
My problem with the implanting of stories is that the Lincoln Group is recieving ONE HUNDRED MILLION AMERICAN TAXPAYER’S DOLLARS!!!
Why is that not a problem for you? Do you have information about why a 30 year old former hedge fund manager with zero journalism or public relations experience got the contract for the media manipulation project? Where’s the transparancy? Where’s the accountability? And where’s Osama?
The left’s arguments? How about some facts:
Anyone who supports a war but refuses to participate in it is a coward.
The Republicowards have a lot of brave words, but the reality is they are taking their cue’s from bush jr’s past… avoid backing up your words with action at all cost. Talk a lot, smear those who make sense, and do whatever they can to make sure someone else does their fighting and dying.
Freep in the dictionary means coward. Go out and shoot a squirrel. The thrill of the tiny kill might dilute the truth that you are spineless.
bok bok Chicken Hawks
Traditional propaganda left no doubts as to its authors. Ignore Godwin’s Law for a second, because I’m making an actual historical point — the Russian revolutionaries, the Nazis, and all other regimes famous for their use of propaganda at least did it honestly and openly. They didn’t distribute leaflets intentionally concealing the identity of the authors. They put their ideas on the table and took credit for them, trying to show them in the best possible light. There was no DECEIT.
What the United States is doing disrespects those whom it is trying to influence. Propaganda IS a weapon of war, and our use of it implies that we perceive the average Iraqi newspaper-reader to be our enemy.
Remember what happened to John McCain in South Carolina in the 2000 Primary? Karl Rove’s “black baby” push poll? Same principle. Treat the people you’re influencing like gullible fools incapable of receiving information and deciding for themselves. Distort the truth and leave out relevent information. And above all, pretend to be someone else, because your own credibility has been shot straight to hell by your demonstrable contempt for other peoples’ intelligence and freedom to decide.
This latest incident doesn’t help, by the way. Congrats to the administration for flushing away our remaining shreds of credibility — and dignity.
I just remembered I’m on a right wing blog, so I’d better “watch what I say, watch what I do” more carefully, as you guys like to say. It should be obvious from the context that I meant no deceit as to the identity of the distributor of the propaganda, not the contents, but I figured I’d better spell it out just in case.
Truth is not the issue, (although it would be nice if it were) neither is the fact that we’re at war and propoganda is ‘ok’ when we’re at war. We are not at war with Iraq. The legal Iraqi government is our ally here. The issue is that support of our latest excuse for being there, the democratization of Iraq, is undermined because a free press is one of the main pillars in a free democracy. For our government to try to subvert a free press from operating in Iraq regardless of the stories makes our governments claim they support democracy in Iraq ring hollow.
THAT is the issue.
BTW, The plural of monkey is monkeys, not monkey’s.
Democracy relies on free press, especially one that is fledgling.
What is paramount: the truth, or craven defense of Bush versus the press, the troops, the Iraqis, etc.?
Propaganda like this might be defensible as an act of desperation if there really were no positive news. The big risk with covert propaganda is that it will be recognized as such by the intended audience and discredit all of the genuine positive news. If the stories were true, so much the worse–the use of deceptive means to get the stories into print promotes the public impression that the stories themselves–and all similar stories–are also deceptive.
Why am I a “surrender monkey” because I want my military to perform well? Face it, Shrub is our little anti-King Midas: every thing he touches turns to sh*t. He and his cronies are incompetent at everything but spin and graft, and have not done one thing that has advanced our nations interests.
In fact the damage they are doing amounts to treason. Remember Powell’s “Pottery Barn” doctrine. Let’s follow it a little further.
Asleep at the wheel on 9/11, Shrub and his friends broke Afghanistan. They spit on our friends and allies. Then they broke Iraq. Now, while we’re trying to put the pieces back together, he’s still swinging his shriveled little stick at Syria, Iran, and North Korea. They’ve charged our credit cards up to the max. Meanwhile, they’ve shredded the Constitution and the Geneva accords.
#1. Get the spoiled brats out of the store.
#2. Give them all a good spanking. Send them for a time-out. Hopefully at Gitmo.
#3. Even with the help of our friends and allies, it looks increasingly unlikely we will be able to put the pots back together.
#4. Apologize for our brat’s bad behavior.
#5. Bring in some expert pot-fixers.
Etc. Easy for anyone but The Bush Crime Family. Never forget, they have no intention of EVER leaving. Everything they say and do is, and will continue to be, smoke and mirrors. They have got to go!! Impeach now.
The fact that the US has to use propaganda to be liked is just more reason to like it, right?
Who wouldn’t trust a man who says “Trust me”?
I would think that as a policy matter even conservative republicans would agree that if we plan on bringing the most important of our freedoms and liberties to others, we should not undermine them as so as we start. The issue certainly is not whether the stories that were paid to be publish were true or not, it is the act of our governemnt paying a newly minted free press to run certain stories. It Completely undermines the whole project in the eyes of Iraqis and the rest of the world.
I would think that conservatives that fear governemnt power would be outraged at this practice. Let’s not forget the administration was caught doing this domestically with the No Child Left Behind. I have a hard time believing any legitimate conservative woudl approve of our governmnet influence free press anywhere.