Never, ever, ever, challenge the ministry of information.
Posted on 12/02/2005 4:30:57 PM PST by BMC1
CRITICS OF THE Iraq war are outraged over the revelation that the U.S. military has been paying millions of dollars to plant pro-American, Pentagon-written propaganda articles in Iraqi newspapers and to buy off Iraqi journalists with monthly stipends.
But in my opinion, it's about time. Information is a critical part of any war, and the U.S. has for too long — to its own detriment — ignored this powerful and essential tool, a tool especially well-suited to the globalized Information Age.
Even third-rate countries routinely use information and disinformation as an instrument of foreign policy, often against the United States. The U.S., in turn, cannot win the war of ideas by speaking softly or keeping its mouth shut. But we have been doing just that.
The United States Information Agency, the only open, global information organization run by the U.S. government, was abolished in 1999, supposedly because it served no purpose in the post-Cold War world. It has not been replaced. U.S.-sponsored entities such as Radio and TV Marti (which broadcast to Cuba) and Al Hurra, the U.S. television station broadcasting to the Arabs, have proven ineffective.
We need to be using all the means available in the war of ideas: public diplomacy, psychological operations, influence agents, disinformation and computer information warfare — from open and overt to clandestine and covert, from public explanation of policy to secret subversion of enemies. All of these must be well-orchestrated.
Our current situation is quite a turnaround from the Cold War years. In 1953, the CIA's celebrated Cold War information and disinformation arm — centered in the "Mighty Wurlitzer" propaganda offices of OSS veteran Frank Wisner — was an enormous operation, with thousands of employees adept at planting press and radio stories, engaging with labor unions,
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
LOL!!!! The liberal "news media" print anything that "critics of the war" spew. Critics of the war are ALWAYS outraged! Liberals are always outraged. Fortunately they don't know when to be outraged and when not to.
Thank God that the military is able to counter, to a very small extent, the terrorist's and mainstream media's propaganda.
"In the war against Al Qaeda and its sympathizers, aggressive, relentless and exhaustive attacks are needed, including arguing against the terrorists' theological heresies, rebutting their lies, undermining their popularity, blackening their reputations, ...."
This is all true, so why is it in the LASlimes? And, BTW, I see it's the old media that's most outraged by this, even though they admit what's being published is true. I guess it's the truth that offends them.
"LOL!!!! The liberal "news media" print anything that "critics of the war" spew."
How many lead stories involved Cindy Sheehan-every time she went to the bathroom or cried on camera? The MSM propagandists just can't stand the idea of anyone playing their own game.
It's time to use something right out of Mohammad's play book.
He said "War is deceit." We have got to stop waging a politically correct war.
I just had an email exchange with Shep Smith about this about an hour ago or so.
After he was railing against paying these papers on his Studio B show I sent him an email:
___
Shep,
Why do you insist our military should fight this war with one hand tied behind its back?
If they were printing lies that's one thing, but come on! We want our troops to finish the job and come home. If this helps then I'mm all for it.
___
Paying for story selection is something we don't do.
That's why the government is investigating.
Any journalist who accepts money to cover a story would be fired.
It's my hope that we'll lead by example as we help the Iraqis establish a democracy.
Buy space in the paper as advertisement, label it as such, and put out word of the good work the U.S. military is doing?
Sure.
Buy news stories?
No. We don't do that in America. Just as we don't torture, presume guilt or abuse.
Lead by example. We're America, after all.
___
I understand where you are coming from to an extent. But I feel the media is giving us half the story. What do these stories say?
You make it sound like the military is forcing these papers to accept money and to print stories. If the government offered you money to accept a story you would decline and you have that right. Do the Iraqi papers not have the right to accept?
From my understanding these are editorials are written by our troops.
As you guys in the media often say, "If it bleeds, it leads." That's well and good and an indication of human nature, but by the media only covering the bad news I feel it gives the wrong impression about the work our troops are doing and in turn puts them that much more in danger.
If paying these papers will save American lives then I've got no problem.
By labelling it as advertisements you undercut the validity of the message. This is a war, Shep. Psy-ops rule, baby!
___
In a democracy the press is free and independent from the government.
It's one of the hallmarks of democracy.
We're trying to help establish a democracy in Iraq.
We must lead by example.
Paying for "news" articles or accepting money to print such is unethical in a democratic world.
If money changes hands consumers of information must know that.
Period.
___
I hear ya...
it may be unethical... but is it illegal? The military didn't force these papers to print these stories or editorials or whatever they were. They were free to tell the military to go take a flying leap and they chose not to. What's more democratic than that?
I want to know... how many stories? what did the stories say? how much money? who wrote them? would our military give them money for infrastructure concerns whether they printed them or not? the military is handing money out all over Iraq.
can't we wait until this part of the GWOT has been won before we take all of our psy-op tools away?
You're right about torture, but compared to Abu Graib this is small potatoes.
Thanks for your time. Is this really Shep?
___
Yes. It's Shep.
May I respectfully suggest that you read up on the role of media in a democracy.
(Insert your comment here about the quality of coverage you get. That's not the point)
The media must be free of influence from the government.
It's one of the hallmarks of democracy.
We are watchdogs, among other things, for the people.
I take that responsibility very seriously and am honored to be serving you and the nation.
That's how I see it.
Should a government try to pay me for influence on story selection I'll report to you on that attempt.
You don't accept the money. You report on the government for trying.
As Iraq works, with our guidance and assistant, to establish a democracy we must lead by example.
Shepard
___
Thanks, Shep. Like I said before I understand where you are coming from and I'm very appreciative of your work and your dilligence to reporting the truth wothout receiving any influence.
I just feel, and I wished you understood this as I understand you, that we have a unique situation in Iraq.
I support the war in Iraq and by doing so I feel responsible for the American troops over there. To me this is a question of priorities. It is more important to protect our troops as much as possible than making sure there is a completely free press over there currently. As long as they don't lie to the people, of course. That would be as bad as Abu Graib.
We can tackle the free press angle after our troops have completed the job.
___
Then his next show started and I haven't gotten a response.
The dying socialist "mainstream" press is outraged (simply outraged!) that their lies are being countered by paid efforts to get the "factual" truth printed. Hilarious! Sounds like a story for Jayson Blair and the New Yoek Times to investigate, or maybe Dan Rather and CBS News.
By the way, who would have known about these malicious American military psy-ops efforts to make sure that the truth was heard over the negative din of the lying leftist liberal scumbags, hmmm? Who would have leaked this kind of damning information to the dinosaur press, hmmm? Could it have been the rogue Wilson/Plame wing of the CIA, perhaps?
I find it weird that the loony Lefties are whining and moaning that "positive" stories were published and that "the other side" (negative DemocRAT stuff) wasn't being told. Well, the loony Left's MSM never tells the positive "other side" in all the NEGATIVE stories they spew here in this country. Commie DemocRATS are such whining, crybaby losers.
Our liberal media continues to out themselves as anti-American mouth pieces for the left. It's insane that they complain about good stories reaching the light of day! Just insane! Unless it defeats their purpose of trashing America and harming the war effort.
How many readers of the L.A. Times or The New York Times or viewers of the evening news know about the underreported good news — such as 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces are virtually violence-free? Well, they could always buy an Iraqi newspaper.
mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.