Posted on 05/16/2006 11:53:54 AM PDT by knighthawk
In the early months of 2003, as the coalition offered Saddam Hussein's regime a final opportunity to comply with the United Nations Security Council, an Iraqi nicknamed "Baghdad Bob" served as a spokesman for Iraq's Information Ministry. He was not exactly a poster child for accuracy.
When coalition troops took control of Baghdad's airport, this spokesman was on television denying they were there, saying such reports were "lies" or "a Hollywood movie." Even when shown video footage of U.S. soldiers on Saddam's parade grounds, just around the corner from where he was standing, "Baghdad Bob" said, "There is nothing going on." So outlandish were his assertions that he became a ridiculous celebrity of sorts. Some enterprising folks even set up a Web site and sold CDs with some of his statements.
Of course, reporters' experiences with Iraq's regime were usually not amusing. Iraqi journalists had to be members of the ruling Baath party as well as an organization called the Journalists' Union, chaired by one of Saddam's sons. Any reporting considered insulting to Saddam was punishable by death. On occasion, journalists' tongues were cut out. In 2000, in what must have been a bitter joke to the Iraqi people, Uday Hussein -- a butcher and tyrant and one of Saddam's sons -- was "elected" Journalist of the Century.
Even in a region of the world known for tightly controlled societies, Iraq consistently ranked as one of the most oppressive when it came to the press. That included foreign journalists as well. A CNN executive much later admitted that he had downplayed the crimes of Saddam's regime to avoid getting kicked out of the country.
In light of such a history, it was particularly encouraging to see what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and I witnessed recently on a joint trip to Baghdad. We had occasion to meet with a large group of Iraqi journalists. Reporters asked know- ledgeable questions about matters ranging from the possibility of incorporating militias into the Iraqi armed forces to asking how ministries might improve their support for a free press to questions about Sunni participation in government. I was impressed by their obvious pride in taking part in what can be a noble profession.
For those seeking tangible signs of how Iraqis are embracing a culture of freedom, there may be no better measure than the satellite dishes -- once restricted -- that now appear on nearly every rooftop. Or the more than 90 radio stations. Or the roughly 300 newspapers -- able to publish whatever information they want and having to compete for readers.
The Iraqi people appear enthusiastic about the variety of information they are now receiving. According to one survey, about three-quarters of Iraqis have trust and confidence in three Iraqi television stations, while far fewer Iraqis -- only half -- trust the reporting they see on Al-Jazeera, which tends to glorify terrorists and slander coalition forces.
Recently the Washington Post published an interesting news story about the Arab news channel al-Arabiya. The channel's executive editor sounded as if he were running a newspaper in any American major city. He said, "You worry about content, about being fair, the competition, being accurate, being good in the eyes of viewers, being good in the eyes of management, the views of colleagues."
For decades, the majority in the Arab world have collected only the information that their governments wished them to have. This has skewed many people's views of the world, America and the West. It has contributed to a notion that outside forces are responsible for their ills -- a notion that terrorists and extremists exploit to their advantage.
A free press is essential to the health of a truly free society. Freedom of the press is, as Adlai Stevenson once put it, "the mother of all our liberties and of our progress under liberty." Once people start to enjoy the benefits of freedom, they tend to want more of it. Today, Iraqis are some of the few people in the Middle East who can say, read and watch whatever they want, however they want. And that should make it all the harder for enemies of free societies to succeed in their goals of turning their country back.
Journalists can play an indispensable role in defeating the ideology of terror and extremism. They have the power to influence millions by telling the truth about what is happening in Iraq. One hopes Iraq's fledgling journalists take their responsibilities seriously. They are showing every sign that they will.
Donald H. Rumsfeld is U.S. secretary of defense.
Ping
A very fine mind, indeed.
Donald H. Rumsfeld 08 (((PING)))
Hopefully the slimes at the NYT read this, but doubt it.
"Journalists can play an indispensable role in defeating the ideology of terror and extremism. They have the power to influence millions by telling the truth about what is happening in Iraq. One hopes Iraq's fledgling journalists take their responsibilities seriously. They are showing every sign that they will."
Sure would be nice if our MSM would really take this seriously.
ping for later
Or in defending it as in the dinosaur media.
Rummy said something quite powerful a few weeks ago on Rush. He said that Al-Qaeda does a better job of manipulating our media that the administration does. I've been dying to hear an MSM response to that!
. . . but as is all too clear to American conservatives, having the "power . . . to tell the truth" is not the same as having the desire to tell the truth. Certainly not the whole truth . . .One hopes Iraq's fledgling journalists take their responsibilities seriously. They are showing every sign that they will.
Americans are so accustomed to the idea that responsibility must not be divorced from authority that we tend to interchange the words and say "responsibility" when "authority" is what we really mean. The First Amendment does not say that the press is free to tell the truth; it says that the press is free. Period. If the press were "free to tell the truth," that could be taken as a legal responsibility enforcable in court. As it is, the press has authority without responsibility. They can print what they want.The only responsibility journalists have is their desire to get paid, which leads them to work to convince the public which buys newspapers that their product is informative.
The fact that journalism is responsible only to its readers is a good thing, but the general public would be well advised to take account of Adam Smith's trenchant dictum that
It is age and experience alone that teaches incredulity. And they seldom teach it enough.Ouch.
Poor guy will be exhausted by then. The SecDef is one smart man.
The natural disposition is always to believe.It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough.
The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing. The Theory of Moral Sentiments - Adam Smith
Rumsfeld's right. Great article.
American reporters gave that up years ago...
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.