Monopoly is a memory-by Elizabeth Jensen

I never realized that CNN has had the most extensive ongoing Iraq presence of U.S. networks in the past few years. The CNN International channel reaches 170 million households outside the U.S. This network has really grown. The Iraqis at times are difficult and have issues with western reporters sometimes even expelling them and throwing them out of the country! In addition, they stopped some people from renewing their short term visas talk about control! We should give credit to CNN for being a “trail blazer”, since then other networks have grown. We also read how Al Jazeera wanted CNN to become a minority stakeholder in its company and then declined. Did CNN turn them down because they felt they could have a negative connection with them?

Al Jazeera's Effect

"If I want my blood pressure to go up, I watch Al Jazeera. They always insert their point of view."

Al Jazeera's point of view is considered to be completely anti-American and solely based on the need of Baghdad's propaganda. Anyone that opposed of spoke of anything other than Al Jazeera's major issues (civilian casualties and not placing any blame on Mr. Hussein), was cut off during broadcasting or edited out of the program. This network has continued to affect the public opinion. They are the most graphic network and many people turn to them. With a direct effect on the public's emotions Al Jazeera continues to focus on all their issues on civilians and the fact that "Americans are hurling bombs against Iraq." Why is it such this such an issue? I feel that if the Fox news network can focus on republican views and issues addressed by the bush administration, every other network should have the right to side with any political party they'd like, including Al Jazeera's. If the public is being shaped by their message this just means they have successfully done their job in selling propaganda and persuading the minds of the public. Today networks still compete to have the same success. I think we forget that these broadcasting networks are still businesses/corporations and their major goal is to make money.

Double Edged Sword

"Apparently, the American government has forgotten that freedom of press is a
double-edged sword that can be as dangerous for the big democratic powers as it
is for dictatorial regimes."

Al Jazeera delivers broadcasts that plays up to the emotions of the Arabic people, by displaying children and civilian casualties of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. But this is no different than the American networks. They report images that move Americans and the western cultures. Both Arabic and America networks report biased views of the war, each reflecting their own peoples ideas and sentiments. Both Al Jazeera and American networks offer a service to it's clients. Their clients are the advertisers, government leaders and viewers. Their service of news reporting must cater to the needs of their clients in order to stay in business. To do this, stories and images must show what the people want to see based on the emotional connection to their side of the war.

"The business of reporting and interpreting the serious news of war has
been transformed into a mishmash of emotional cheer leading, expressions of
primordial tribal and national identities, over ideological manipulation by
governments, and crass commercial pandering to the masses in pursuit of the
audience share needed to sell advertising."

Inside Al Jazeera

In Rick Zednik's review on the Al Jazeera network he notices that the journalists are not any different from the one's in the U.S. They are sociable, easy-going, and diverse. He felt as though he was stepping foot into an American newsroom at first. Zednik describes how popular the network has become and how far it has expanded. Al Jazeera even has bureau offices in Washington, NY, London, Paris, Brussels, Moscow, Djakarta, and Islamabad. However popular the network has become, the U.S. actually was not aware of it until after the attacks on September 11th. Zednik states:

"Suddenly, Al Jazeera was not only delivering the news to its thirty-five million viewers, including 150,000 in the U.S., it was telling the world's top story to billions of people around the planet via international media that had little choice but to use Al Jazeera's pictures. It was not simply covering
the war; it became an important player in the global battle for public
opinion."

The U.S. government has not been thrilled with Al Jazeera's so-called tactics. The Bush Administration has stated that Al Jazeera is "the mouthpiece of Osama Bin Laden." Al Jazeera news producer Dana Suyyagh states that Bush actually gets more airtime than Bin Laden. The network does not believe they are biased because they give both sides opportunity to give their point of view. There is no doubt that Al Jazeera has become a notible source of world news and is only going to grow in marketability.

U.S. Courts Network it Once Described as All Osama' & Images of Destructio Inflict Settback for U.S. Propaganda War

The Pentagon and the Bush administration decided that instead of scorning the network they should woo it. The Pentagon has offered Al Jazeera reporters choice spots with American military units. The Pentagon has assigned a special media liaison offer to Al Jazeera as it has every other media organization planning to cover what was going on (Perlez & Rutenberg, 1). The Administration has formed tactics to deal with the challenge that was presented to them by the Arab television covering the war. The administration formed a “strike force” and “rumor patrol” system in order to deal with the Arab world. The “strike force” was formed to book high ranking U.S. officials such as Powell and Wolfowitz on Arab media outlets for interview to “influence opinion both at home and abroad (Dobbs & Allen, 2).” The “rumor control” focused on catching false stories before they aired on the Arab news media (Dobbs & Allen, 2).”

"War's Hidden Cost" by By John H. Cushman Jr.

This article is basically saying, that during war, many innocent people die. Also, many times we never know the correct number. The Doctor Without Borders said 80 died and 50 wounded had been taken out of the area, including women and children. Also, many were left behind. This is just tragic. "A SENIOR officer in Tampa, where Central Command directs the war said, could only speculate that terrorist leaders had brought their families to their mountain redoubt, or that the local villagers had chosen to live next to the target." It shows that there is no concern for these innocent peoples’ deaths. They just attack wherever they think their target is. I think this goes back to the question of war in general. War always kills many innocent lives, so why engage ourselves in war? The only result is destruction of countries and people. Many times the outcome isn't very admirable.

The Things We Do to Prevent More Bad Press

As a direct result of the negative feelings towards Americans in the Arab world and the Bush administration in America, the administration, according to Dobbs and Allen’s Images of Destruction Inflict Setback for U.S. Propaganda War, had formed counter-propaganda actions called “strike force” and “rumor patrol” in which the “strike force” would book high ranking U.S. officials such as Powell and Wolfowitz on Arab media outlets for interview to “influence opinion both at home and abroad” and the “rumor patrol” would “prevent false and inflammatory stories” from circulating in the Arab news. One of the only smart moves on the part of the Bush administration pertaining to the Iraq war, sadly it failed just like the entire operation.

The Things We Do for Good Press

With the Iraq war polarizing United States citizens continuously and the likes of Al Jazeera steadily influencing Arabs with there anti American sentiment and hardcore images of Iraqi civilians dead or wounded by American forces, the Bush Administration had to recognized the power of the Arab news network has in the Middle East and globally. Instead of alienating the network that continues to cause Bush's large disapproval ratings at home and abroad, they decided to court the network for good press. Jane Perlez and Jim Rutenberg describe in U.S. Courts Network It Once Described as 'All Osama', how the administration is trying to create a bond with Al Jazeera by offering the network choice spots with the military units, access to interviews with Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfield and by appointing a special media liaison to the network. All huge leaps made for a network that has created many bounds for the Bush administration.

When Images Compete as Fiercely as Armies

This article shows just how important the governments view their media as a tool during the war. The foreign media shows their viewers the images of carnage and mass destruction that the war has created in their homeland to create a feeling of disgust about the war towards the American government while the American media shows their views more stories of how well we are doing and the importance of us doing our job over there. Both governments use their media to help gain support about the war.

Images of Destruction Inflict Setback for U.S. Propaganda War

Images of Destruction Inflict Setback for U.S. Propaganda War
By Michael Dobbs and Mike AllenWashington

Post Staff Writers

Sunday, March 30, 2003

"Yet another massacre by the coalition of invaders," blared the front-page headline yesterday in the Al Riyadh daily of Saudi Arabia.

The Arab based news world is creating a huge anti-American sentiment throughout the world with their biased reporting and horrific images of the war in Iraq.
The United States is losing support all over the world and even here in the U.S. due to the reporting going on in the Middle East.

"You don't lose the propaganda war one week or the next," said a senior U.S. official responsible for shaping outreach efforts to the Arab world. "You win the propaganda war by doing the right thing. In the end, people will see that we have done the right thing."

Domestically here in the United States the news networks are trying to stay supportive of the Bush Administration and the war in Iraq but are increasingly losing the battle. "Operation Iraqi Freedom” is losing the “propaganda” war here at home and Especially in the rest of the world. Al Jazeera and other “Arab” based networks are winning the war, at least in the hearts and minds of many all over the world.

When Images Compete

When Images Compete as Fiercely as Armies
By Jefferson Morley

WashingtonPost.com

Thursday, March 27, 2003

"The business of reporting and interpreting the serious news of war has been transformed into a mishmash of emotional cheerleading, expressions of primordial tribal and national identities, overt ideological manipulation by governments, and crass commercial pandering to the masses in pursuit of the audience share needed to sell advertising,"

That sums it up, the establishment of Al Jazeera, and other Arab news networks has turned the current Iraqi war into a battle in itself. American and foreign media are fighting for the story. Unlike most of American networks however, these other networks are providing pictures and stories of carnage from the war.

The foriegn affiliates were showing bodies and various imagery that would make most Americans turn away. However these images seem to capture a large audience supposibly seeking both sides of the story.

The foreign based stories show what the Arab world wants to see, images that will bolster the anti-American sentiment that seems to be universal around many places in the Middle East. While Arab news networks argue that reporters in the United States are just as biased against them.

What is clear though is one thing. The networks whether American, Arab, or other foreign nations, depict the images and report the stories that they feel their people would want to see. They report the news to profit, not necessarily for journalistic integrity or even the sake of news at all, the all mighty dollar rules.

The Gung- Ho Morning Gang

"You want nuancee and ambiguity? Go watch CNN. You want subtlety? Well, there's always NPR or Matt 'n' Katie and Diane 'n' Zcharlie. But if you're after take-no-prisoners opinions and a lusty confidense in the American military effort, the early-morning "Fox & Friends" is your eye- opener."

The Gung-Ho Morning Gang
Cable's 'Fox & Friends' Prides Itself on Patriotic Patter
By Paul Farhi

I know that every news channel is unique in its own way or else there wouldnt be a need for all the different channels, but to see how they all differ on the same topic really explains it. The news channels clearly have their own opinion on war and based on how they air a story it is easy to determine their view. I thought that it wasnt allowed to state your view? I know they dont make it personal, but based on the article by Farhi, it was easy to identify what channel one should watch based on their views or opinions.

Bomb Remnants Increase War's Toll

In regards to the topic that we are discussing in class, it reminds me of the video that was seen a couple weeks ago when soldiers came to talk about their experience in the war. I think it is sad how people are fighting a war with no purpose. Soldiers are sent to fight with one thing being said to the such as the benefits but when they arrive they experience something totally different. Soldiers are sent over with intentions of getting back to their families in one piece. Instead some leave with a missing leg, arm, etc. Inncocent people are killed and they have to live life knowing that they took a life of another. In the article "Bomb Remnants Increase War's Toll," it starts off by mention the death and injuries of teenagers because of they picked up a undetonated remnants of a bomb. Death during war time is uncontrollable. Its crazy how war can be defined as a good thing because they are helping out another country, when all it does is destroy the lives of those fighting the war and the innocent people in their path.

With holding information doesnt better the country

The Persian Gulf War received a lot of publicity in the media just like any other war, but it seemed as if more information was withheld from the people rather then keeping them informed and up to date with accurate information. Media coverage on this war was very skeptical. Because so much information was disclosed from the people the information seemed to unfold in bits in pieces rather than a concrete presentation. In the article Manipulating Hearts and Minds by Herbert Schiller he states, “In fact, the United States, with its enormous media system operating with state-of-the art technologies, has been as closed as a society could be to information, facts and opinions which in the slightest challenged the national war policy (Schiller,23).”