Propaganda & Mass Persuasion: 04/30/2006 - 05/07/2006

Thursday, May 04, 2006

War's Hidden cost

This article is written by John H. Cushman Jr. it is an article that jumps at a person among the rest. We all know about wars hidden cost. It’s the poor civilian casualties. Every time we go to war thousands and thousands of people, die. Innocent people who have nothing to do with these wars die. Cushman says that sometimes we don't even know how many people have died. Do these people not matter? We get pissed or sad every time one of our soldiers dies. What about the innocent people who die every day from the bullets and the bombs. Why aren’t there pictures of them all over our TVs? Our gov't gets pissed off at Al Jazeera for showing horrible images of dead bodies lying in the street. I’m not saying that they are good by any means but they do show the horrors of war. We as Americans only seem to care about our troops but what about the Iraqi people who are also dying every single day along with our brothers and Sisters?

Feet to the Fire: Thomas Curley

Thomas Curley

Thomas Curley is President and CEO of a major news company responsible for providing millions of people with up to date news stories and up to the minute coverage of action. Curley is very committed to the issues he wasn’t to discuss and very aggressive on what he perceive to be the most controversial issues.

Curley works for The Associated Press- a source of news that is worthy of both praise and hatred in the eyes f viewers-depending on the day, hour, or even minute ii is consumed. It is often criticized for doing its job-putting out the story as soon as it happens. Curley explains that this is a very difficult and stressful task. It is information that is easy to get wrong. And example that Curley sits is the Jessica Lynch story. When news on this story first came out it was said that she was captured by Iraqi’s and saved by the US Special Forces. She was supposedly found with wounds from being stabbed and shot and it was said she was beaten and interrogated in the Iraqi hospital. This story was not only just a little false, it was almost completely false. Yes a girl named Jessica Lynch was captured; however, she had no wounds whatsoever and says she was treated quite nicely at the Iraqi hospital.

Curley is very dedicated to his journalism. When traveling in 2003, he noticed that there seemed to be a reluctance to go after information as aggressively as before. Perhaps this was because of case like the Jessica Lynch scenario. Or maybe it was due to the aftermath of September 11th almost two years ago. He states that with the attacks and their being so much unknown about what was happening before after and even during, the press stepped back a bit.

Curley speaks out a bit against Fox-in its defense. He says that he thinks that Fox is an important voice because they present a right-wing point of view. He discusses the diversity of voices, and how Fox is a great news source because it's part of that.

Curley also discusses People and the media. When asked about his thoughts on whether or not people trusted the press he said that he thought people did-just as the trust their doctor, or a local magazine. He says that his belief is that people have a high satisfaction with the media and the reason why they protest against I sometimes is because it hits close to home. Take for instance the pictures of the coffins of US soldiers killed in Iraqi coming into Dover. Pictures of this created controversy, but Curley says that it would not have been right to deny people the pictures. He says the people viewing it deserve the coverage, as well as those who are in the coffins draped under American Flags. People object to news such as this because they feel these things should be private grieving and don’t want their family members, family, etc, exploited.

Curley says he believes there is a study out saying that the closer someone is to a story, the more likely they are to trust it. The further away, the more difficult to understand. However, he feels the story can be told in a way that it can be illustrated and really hit home-no matter how far away you are from it.

spinning the wheels

it's interesting to notice the subtle change in wording for the enemy over the years without foundamental alteration in nature. In order to reveal both the new characteristics of the special war condition and the White House successive governor's strategy, propagandists rack hard their brains to devise new terms that are suitable for the specific government. But if you put all wars on a straight line and look them through, basic strategies haven't changed at all.
when the era comes that seems to be the "end of ideology", war is sheerly materilized. so-called democracy, liberty and freedom are mere camouflage . national economic interests are the hidden but real drive for the war. people hate the war but at the same time are afraid of "terrorism" termed by the government, however, no matter what, the true victims of every war are the majority of the innocent.
what do we believe in contemporary world? God or our strong military force? do we have a standpoint to keep balance no matter what happens in our life? when war becomes the pop culture and top agenda of our daily life, we are facing the most serious belief crisis in modern society. war makes us just like the clowns in the circus spinning on the wheels, dizzy...

Feet to the Fire "We're Not Mother Teresas in Flak Jackets"

Chris Hedge is the journalist who believes that since war images and stories were sanitized, war became easy to wage because people don't understand the tragedy of war and the cost of war. He says that the warmakers manipulated war and carried out current war in Iraq that should have never been fought. "War is packaged and sanitized the same way the poisons of tobacco or liquor are packaged and sanitized. We see enough of the titilation and excitement to hold our interest, but we never actually see what wounds do to bodies"(Hedge, p521). He also believes that minimal of censorship is needed in war, but only in terms of troop size and armaments and where they are and etc. He feels that majority of the journalists today are not doing their job right. He believes that they act as "stenographer for people in power", not journalists who report real stories. He says that journalists today are "celebrities with a lot of makeup on", pretending to be journalists". (Hedge, P531) He believes that good journalists should speak for the victims and write honest and true stories of war. He says that good journalists are people who are against the athorities. But, reality is that when journalists report a war where their country is actively involved, they need to search for "mythic narrative". Create heroes, and look out for evil deeds that the enemy committed against "our people". "Most effective medium that we have to create heroes is the press. That's what the press does in war and has done in war since the creation of modern war correspondents in the Crimean war."(Hedge, P525) This is the reality of journalism at war today. Although there are journalists lik Hedge who tries to change that.

9/11 Government Conspiracy Film

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

There is a film circulating the internet claiming that the government was responsible for the attacks on 9/11. The video claims that bombs were placed in the Twin Towers days before the attacks and set off to knock the buildings down demolition style because simply the jets crashing into the buildings would not be enough to bring them down. How valid is this video? Is it propaganda for the extreme left?
From watching the video, I believe it is possible and almost probable that the government - and I say government instead of the Bush Administration because I associate "Bush Administration" with "incompetence" and a conspiracy such as this leaves no room for incompetence - did plan 9/11.
However, buying into this theory - that many are buying into because of an hour and twenty minute film -would be buying into propaganda. I'm trying to look at the bigger picture instead of thinking in circles about conspiracy theories - however valid a case they may make.
The capitalist society that is the United States is a system that keeps the ruling class in charge and the worker bees working. It is the society that Americans know and are comfortable in. If the government planned out and executed 9/11 in order to go to war or create a "New World Order," what can the general public do about it? Protest? Hundreds of thousands of Americans protested invading Iraq before the war started and all that was accomplished was 45 seconds of coverage on nightly network news programs. If those in power want to do something, they are able to do it despite public opinion by manipulating the case as in the Spanish-American War and Vietnam and the First Gulf War.
I don't know if the government planned 9/11. Nobody knows if the government planned 9/11. Journalists can do all the investigation possible, but there will never be a clear answer until it doesn't matter anymore. To be honest, how much does it matter now? Would it get the U.S. out of Iraq? Would it stop Iran from making nuclear weapons? Would it end our society's dependence on oil from the Middle-East? I believe the answer to all questions would be "no."
Everything in the video may be true, but expert propagandists work with truths. Conservative think tanks would be more than able to refute every point made in the video - and have already begun doing so - and any argument made against the government would be muddled into credibility issues and smoking guns.
I'm not saying that there is nothing the general public can do to change things, but the system in place would require drastic sociological change. For example, if Americans really don't want to be in the Middle East, Americans need to stop using oil. It's possible, but very difficult and life-altering.
A teenager may view the film and get angry and start spreading the message that the film delivers. However, that teenager will get a job and will need gas for his or her car to get to work. That teenager will go to college and have to worry about paying for it. That teenager will meet a girl or boy and fall in love and get married. That teenager will have children. If the government planned out 9/11, that teenager will still grow up to be a worker bee keeping the system together.

Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Chris Hedges in Feet to the Fire

The interview of Chris Hedges in Feet to the Fire was very informative. He really knows how to get and report useful information on foreign wars. Hedges feels a “deep distrust for authority” he also feels that authority abuses its power, and that it is more or less the reporters job to bring truth to the people. I like his way of reporting and his free thought on our authority in our government. His hanger for authority is something that fueled him to keep reporting and doing what he felt was right. He feels that you have to have anger for authority to be a great journalist, that anger can drive a great reporter to do anything to get the real story, even put themselves in danger. He is a reporter that just does not sit around Washington waiting for a leek or for someone with a somewhat reliable source. He digs and reports news he knows is true. I think that his idea of what he would do if he owned his own news network is great; he would give cameras to the Iraqi Muslim people so that American can see what is really going on over on the other side of the war. His thoughts on his own news network remind me of Al Jazeera, “I had a great deal of respect for them”, “them” meaning Al Jazeera. Hedges’ thoughts on censorship are also very powerful. He feels that to understand a war one needs to see it through the eye of the victim, and this is something we as Americans never see in the war we are fighting today. We are told by our government that we are doing a good thing by fighting this war, yet Hedges brings up the fact that America is not well liked around the globe due to the war. “I don’t think Americans yet have a clear view of how hated we are” Those are some scary words to hear when we are being told we are doing something great.

The monopoly is a memory

In 1991, CNN became a powerful news network during the Gulf War. At this time CNN was the only real news network, now Fox News Channel, MSNBC, and a few British News stations has started. Recently, the Arab world has started a couple of their own news networks works, one of then being called Al - Jazeera.

Al - Jazeera has been considered very controversial in many ways. Many Middle Eastern countries and Washington has been very upset with the network. Viewers have stayed loyal but many leaders of the world will not support the network. The viewers also see the network as objective to most subjects. BBC network as also been gaining a good deal of viewers and is now seen on U.S. Television and heard on U.S. radio. With nations having their own news networks other nations such as, France are considering creating their own networks.

CNN once ruled the new network air ways but now with technology and so many different opinions is the world their monopoly of cable news is now over. Not only is CNN not number one outside the U.S., they aren't even constantly number one in the U.S. anymore.

Shaping Public Opinion

"Some producers say the Bush administration keeps a looser rotation than the Clinton White House, and makes its top officials available more often, particularly since September 11. 'The Bush administration is more likely to want to put people out, since September, to discuss the war effort than the Clinton administration was willing to put people out to discuss [Clinton's] troubles."

I find this passage from Sunday Morning interesting because although it may appear that the Bush administration is offering greater transparency by allowing its members to be more available to the press than the Clinton administration did, it seems an interesting tactic in controlling the information provided, in my opinion, creating a simulated transparency. With the actual members of the administration being the ones disseminating information rather than experts and consultants, the administration can ensure its message is propagated in the way it intends it to be rather than dealing with speculation and interpretation (or facts they want to suppress).

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

War's Hidden Cost, By JOHN H. CUSHMAN Jr.

As we have learned with todays current war and this war, that casualities amoung civilians are inevitabile. It even states "In a survey of Afghanistan two years ago, the International Committee of the Red Cross found that more than half those interviewed had a family member killed. One in three was wounded, two in five were tortured, one in five imprisoned. One in four were soldiers. One in four had heard of the Geneva Conventions.", We must out wiegh the risks to see if the positive out wiegh the negitave in this case it seems it really didnt work out. To the people of america they are suprised because we think our military weapons are extremly accurate. Viewers also cant handle the coverage of the casualities, as we have learned images are extremly powerful. In this case they would come as a shock to the american public. I dont understand how Rumpsfield can make that statement that "We know for a fact that these were legitimate military targets in that area that were struck," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said. "We know that there was terrific traditional, consistent planning to ensure that only these targets were struck. We know there were no off-target hits, so there were no collateral damage worries in this series of strikes." How can anyone be so sure of anything?, you would think this statement would make the public look negativally upon him. You really cant be that certain in wartime. As John D. Stufflebeem, deputy director for operations on the Joint Staff at the Pentagon:stated "As a pilot, I can do everything perfectly with a perfect weapons system and still cannot account for every weapon going exactly where it's supposed to go". This is very true but some people dont take this into account. The Rumsfeld policy really doesnt draw any attention to the Iraqi dead which is smart because it keeps the public unaware. But it seems he should be cautious because he is contracting himself. The ovious solution would be to keep casualities to a minimum this would be the best for us because innocent casulities never play well in the media, thats why alot of these examples are kept away from the americain people.

Feet to the Fire: John MacArthur

In John MacArthus's "Everybody wants to be a Versailles," one of the main thing he pointed out was why CNN was the only network that was allowed to stay in Baghdad during the first Gulf War. He explained the reason for this is because had a business deal with Saddam Hussein, were they stated "You let us stay and we'll guarantee that what you say makes it to the outside world. I also get to report what I see, up to a point we'll negotiate that later." CNN made this deal was to run a four-line cable all the way from Baghdad to Jordan. I think this was a great idea because obviously they will be the first one to get the message direct and to broadcast to the world.

Monopoly is a memory

In there article there was one part that really stuck with me and that was the last paragraph of this article, and that waswhen the ABC news correspondent siad that " Al Jezeera in particular is "chaing the Stakes" for western repeorters". "Saddam doesn'y need CNN this time. "I think we seen our last safe war. I had to think to myself for a minute about what was meant by that statement, and i came to the conclusion that now or days wars has become a big part of the media, and thats how most of there messages get across to americans, sooner or lata we wont need them because they will come to us, and when that happen it really wont be safe anymore

Images of Destruction Inflict Setback for U.S Propaganda War

"The political damage is very severe,""i think utimately the US will prevail militarily. But the real issuse will be what are the consequences of that victory, and how people in the region perceive the United States after this is all over". I have to agree with the satement 100% because yopu have to think of the consequences after the war. Look how many people have lost lost their live over this, and for what. the US always had a problem with sticking their nose the someone elses business. do you really think that something will accomplished when everything is said and done?

Monday, May 01, 2006

Ted Koppel

I felt optimistic about American journalism after reading Kristina Borjesson's interview with Ted Koppel. His outlook on media coverage leading up to the war in Iraq was fair to both the media and the media watcher.
I don't believe that the media did a fair job of asking the right questions, but Koppel explained why he believed that it did. I may not agree with that, but Koppel brought up good points. He says, "..put them in front of the television set with a newscast on and ask them at the end of that newscast what was reported, and for the most part, they pay little attention."
This is a good point. Perhaps, the media was asking the right questions, and only the audience was not paying attention.
Koppel goes on to talk about the excellence of American journalism. I agree with his opinion that American journalism, at its best, is the best in the world. The reporters on the BBC seem to me to be completely nonpartisan. I can't say that for American media, but I can say that for some American media, such as Koppel, Brian Williams, and Jim Lehrer. I would say that these particular anchors have more influence over their audience than the BBC journalists. I don't know that for sure, because I don't live in England, but journalists such as those mentioned stick out in a slew of biased, opinionated journalists like Bill O'Reilly and Anderson Cooper.
I enjoyed reading the interview and am making it a priority to tune into Nightline.

"War's Hidden Cost"

In the article “War’s Hidden Cost” by: John Cushman, we read about something that is not often in the news about the war we are now fighting, casualties on the other side. We can sometimes be blindsided by our high tech weapons and think that the only ones that loss their lives are the brave heroic men and women that are on the front line. This is far from the truth according to this article, “the Red Cross found that more then half those interviewed had a family member killed. One in three was wounded, two in five were tortured, one in five imprisoned. One in four were soldiers.” These numbers are crazy to me, I feel that they are way to high. I don’t support the war for many reasons this is juts another, we are not fighting a war against the innocent people so there is no reason for these numbers to be so high. “But to an American public that has come to expect pinpoint precision from 21st century weapons, it comes as a shock to see the images of widows and orphans hospitalized by an American air raid”.

Destruction sets back U.S. Propaganda

In the reading "Images of Destruction Inflict Setback for U.S. Propaganda War" we read how the U.S. feels it has fallen behind in its propaganda war in Iraq. It is difficult to try and explain to a foreign country that the military which happens to be occupying your land, is there to help set you free after it has killed numerous civilian even if it was accidentally. The U.S. is experiencing this dilemma because what ever they do, the only message which is portrayed on television is how the Iraq people are suffering with the invasion of the U.S. The main message was to be "liberation not occupation", but the U.S. has yet to capitalize on this theme. The government wanted to show pictures of towns, villages, and cities being freed, instead they find themselves
responding to questions such as "The regime has not collapsed immediately, and the Iraqi army is fighting back. Why is that,do you think?"

Media , Hearts, Minds And Satellites

In the Reading By Jim Ruetenburg, he explained the pressure of having to get a top story for your network during war, Particularly when you work for a news newtwork such as CNN. According to the reading , "There is intense pressure to win the story and be No. 1 with it, said a CNN domestic correspondent. " The new management at CNN explored all avenues to try to gain more viewership like adding new news anchors such as Paula Zahn and Aaron Brown. Apparently the moves that CNN have been making are working because the reading states that "CNN is drawing an average of 1.8 million viewers up from about 330,000 in august". The management of Cnn has also recongnized that more young people have tuned in to there network since the they have made these changes.

When Images Compete as Fiercely as Armies

In the reading " When Images Compete as Fiercely as Armies " we read how the television networks are not so different, in that they only televise half the story. It is obvious that each will televise what is in the best interest for that station, which is usually the negative acts committed by the opposing factions. The media stations will exploit the human side of individual by showing horrific pictures and any atrocities committed to soldiers or civilians. Arab stations are expressing their concern that in the past U.S. media stations hads only shown negative pictures about them, now these stations are showing pictures which contain horrible clips of how the Arab people have suffered. A description of " a small Iraqi child who had died during an American attack, with the back of the child's skull and head missing " (page 1) was shown on Arab television, but not U.S.
"Apparently the American government has forgotten that freedom of press is a double -edge sword that can be dangerous for the big democratic powers as it is for dictatorial regimes." (Page 2) This is an interesting statement because the United States believes in equal press, but they do not want to have negative press coverage against them during war time. The final outcome is that you will usually get the news media portraying the war one way, which depends on what side they are on.