Military

By
Max J. Castro                                                                      Read Spanish Version
majcastro@gmail.com

The
Bush administration has made a mess of many things, from the Iraq war
to Katrina. Yet there is one area in which Bush and his people have
met with, at least, limited success — namely the manipulation of
public opinion, especially when it comes to the “war on terror.”

In
this regard, the selling of the Iraq war by exacerbating the fears
and channeling the rage of the American people after 9-11 was a tour
de force. Much of the mainstream media collaborated, in one way or
another, with this endeavor by failing to examine dubious
administration claims, passing on propaganda as fact, embedding its
reporters with American troops, adopting the official language, and
shamelessly cheerleading. While even in the mainstream media there
always have been individual journalists who questioned the
administration’s story, overall the media’s complicity in the war
began to wane only when the debacle of Iraq became too obvious to
ignore.

Now,
a fresh New York Times
investigation has revealed an outrageous and previously unreported
Bush administration campaign to influence public opinion on Iraq and
the war on terror through the media (“Message Machine Behind
Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand,” by David Barstow, April
20, 2008).

The
Times
story details how the administration and the Defense Department have
and continue to use the talking heads that appear on television in
the guise of unbiased military “analysts” to shape the portrayal
of the war in the media.

Based
on extensive interviews, the Times
uncovered what amounts to
a massive and well-orchestrated psychological warfare operation
perpetrated by the administration and the Pentagon. In this case,
however, the targets of the psychological warfare operation were not
citizens of an enemy state; the target was the American people.

Here
is the gist of the story presented in last Sunday’s edition of The
New York Times:

“To
the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented
tens of thousands of times on television and radio as ‘military
analysts’ whose long service has equipped them to give
authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues
of the post-Sept. 11 world.

“Hidden behind that
appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information
apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate
favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime
performance… ”

In
order to ensure that the retired military officers used as analysts
by the television networks and cable channels to do its bidding, the
administration not only has employed the granting or denying of
access to officials and information — a tool frequently used to
influence reporters — but a powerful financial weapon as well. “Most
of the analysts,” the New
York Times reports, “have
ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are
asked to assess on air.”

The
conclusions of the Times
examination, which used both records and interviews, reveal the
workings of a propaganda campaign the paper describes as still going
on. The following are verbatim extracts:

• …the Bush
  administration has used its control over access and information in
  an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan
  horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from
  inside the major TV and radio networks.

• …military
  analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as
  lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants.

• …the
  companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller
  companies…scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business
  generated by the administration’s war on terror.

• …Analysts
  have been wooed in hundreds of private briefings with senior
  military leaders, including officials with significant influence
  over contracting and budget matters…

• In
  turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking
  points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false
  or inflated.

• Records
  reveal a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines
  between government and journalism have been obliterated. Internal
  Pentagon documents repeatedly refer to the military analysts as
  “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who could be
  counted on to deliver administration “themes and messages” to
  millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.”

This
latest Bush administration attempt to shape and distort public
perceptions of the realities of the wars it has engineered is one of
the most outrageous of all. Yet, while shocking, it is not really
surprising given the track record of the Bush-Cheney regime. The
question that arises, however, as a result of these new revelations,
is where was the media — during this campaign of disinformation rife
with conflicts of interests and other transgressions which often
serve as its fodder — when all of this was happening under their
very noses? How could they have missed this story of such a colossal
propaganda campaign being waged on the American people through them?
What is their explanation?

It
comes down to the same reason most of the media used to explain
failing to inform the public regarding the huge holes in the
administration’s weak case for attacking Iraq: ignorance. According
to the Times,
“…some network officials…acknowledged only a limited
understanding of their analysts’ interactions with the
administration.”

It
is a sorry excuse. But maybe there is another explanation. Perhaps
too many in the mainstream media are still willing to look the other
way when fed propaganda for fear of being stuck with the dreaded
labels of liberal or unpatriotic. Perhaps, also, some anchors and
reporters have been too busy uncovering such momentous news as how
the candidates really feel about their faith or why Barack Obama
doesn’t wear a flag pin on his lapel to notice the huge Trojan
Horse camped in their midst. 

The
good news in all of this is that all the perfidy and skill of the
administration and all the collusion by some sectors of the media
have failed to prevent most of the people of this country from seeing
through the administration’s lies, albeit only belatedly and
partially. According to a new Washington Post ABC News poll, six out
of ten Americans now reject the official Bush line that winning in
Iraq is necessary to successfully fight the war on terrorism. The bad
news in all this is, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, that you get news
about a presidential campaign or about a war from the media you have
not the one you would like to have.