How the Media is Selling Us Another War

M

mary collins

Guest
Media Coverage Helps Ahmajadinejad, Harms Us Public: How the Media is
Selling Us Another War September 28, 2007 By Danny Schechter

Mike Wallace was not in the best shape. He was wheezing and his eyes
looked like saucers as accepted his umpteenth Emmy award at the TV
Academy dinner in New York on Monday night for his 60 Minutes
interview with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmajadinejad, an almost
unpronounceable name to most Americans.

"Before that interview," he boasted. "none of us knew who this man was
or what he believed." There was incredulity in his voice as if he was
some modern explorer who went into the wilds and brought back the
elusive monster Bigfoot. The audience of nearly l000 TV journalists
applauded as if he had accomplished a daring feat by getting a big bad
guy on camera.

Sitting at my table in the Sheraton ballroom, three producers from
overseas marveled at all the international stories that were winning
recognition as if to say 'you Americans are lucky to get so much
coverage of the world." They of course didn't know that most of the
networks have long closed most of their foreign bureaus, cut back on
documentaries, and were deeply complicit in uncritically doing more
selling than telling in the run-up to the Iraq war.

They didn't know that PBS, which swept the awards won honors for a few
programs that have been on the air for 25 years, not for their news,
and that don't have a big audience relative to the commercial
channels. They don't know that, in fact, analytical and investigative
reporting is at an all time low. Surveys show most Americans know
little about the world despite TV's theoretical global reach.

They also don't know that many bloggers and progressive activists
spend more time bashing right-wing outlets like Fox (Example: all the
hype around Bill O' Reilly's convoluted comments about dining in
Harlem) than in supporting independent media (like Mediachannel or
Link TV's Mosaic program) Like the commercial channels, they focus on
backing celebrity politicians and partisan attacks on conservative
talk show polarizers.

The UN General Assembly is meeting in New York. A high-powered
conference on global climate change with the top scientists in the
world rated almost no coverage. But the presence of the Iranian
President became THE story because of the controversy his visit
generated and the chance to show the monster in their midst.

Broadcasting & Cable uses a military metaphor in describing how local
news "deployed" for his visit, "Despite the limited access, stations
are deploying heavily around the city. WNBC senior vice president of
news Dan Forman said the channel has put 30% more bodies on the
street, thanks to the Iranian's presence, than it typically would for
the United Nations assembly

Getting close to the controversial leader isn't feasible, so the
stations are relying on pool footage while deploying reporters to
where he's speaking for standups, commentary from protestors and
passers-by and brief glimpses at his passing car."

But of course this "pasing car" reportage " is not about reporting the
visit in a thoughtful way, or assessing developments but, rather,
inflaming public opinion. More darkly, it's a case of demonization-a
process that Ahmajadinejad participates in happily for his own
reasons---and is being used just like all the Saddam Hitler bashing
was several years ago to prepare public opinion for war.

The more outrageous his comments appear, whether they are or not, the
more public his smiling and taunting appears, the more the Bush
Administration wins over public opinion. Any efforts he makes to show
another image-as in wanting to visit Ground Zero-is, of course
forbidden.

The tabloids set the inflammatory tone in New York: ""WIPE THAT SMIRK
OFF YOUR EVIL FACE," chastises the Daily News who calls him a "madman"
and worse. Not to be outdone Rupert's NY Post slams him as a "petty,
cruel, dictator" and writes about "MAD-MOUD'S WASCKY WORLD." His talk
at Columbia University is headlined "Cuckoo at Columbia." Fox News's
Greg Gutfiield opens up both barrels, saying, "so the fould-smelling
fruitbat Ahmajadinejad spoke at that crack-house know as Columbia
University today. " No language is off-limits, no ridicule out of
bounds.

This suits the the Iranian leader who TIME has called "a dark genius
at mobilizing Iranian public opinion." Now he is the victim of a rude
College president and an even ruder press. Down in the polls at home,
the US media coverage has played right into his hands with the effect
of also keeping the US public ever more ignorant about the country we
may be the next to bomb.

Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post also scolds the self-styled
responsible press for giving more exposure to Neo-con know nothings
and less visibility for people who we can learn from.

"Reporters should be seeking out experts who actually understand the
Middle East - because the vast majority of them think that attacking
Iran would be a huge mistake," he writes on Niemanwatchdog, " A small
group of neoconservatives is ever-more-loudly beating the drums for
military action against Iran - and getting a lot of attention
 
Why the hell was he doing an interview of someone he didn't have a clue
about???

Want to know what he's about?? Just watch this rousing "Death to
America" rally in Iran just before Ahmadinejad gives a speech about
going nuclear:

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1385.htm


mary collins <collinseelo@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Mike Wallace...... accepted his umpteenth Emmy award at the TV
> Academy dinner in New York on Monday night for his 60 Minutes
> interview with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmajadinejad, an almost
> unpronounceable name to most Americans.
>
> "Before that interview," he boasted. "none of us knew who this man was
> or what he believed."
 
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:39:44 -0700, mary collins
<collinseelo@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Media Coverage Helps Ahmajadinejad, Harms Us Public: How the Media is
>Selling Us Another War September 28, 2007 By Danny Schechter
>
>Mike Wallace was not in the best shape. He was wheezing and his eyes
>looked like saucers as accepted his umpteenth Emmy award at the TV
>Academy dinner in New York on Monday night for his 60 Minutes
>interview with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmajadinejad, an almost
>unpronounceable name to most Americans.
>
>"Before that interview," he boasted. "none of us knew who this man was
>or what he believed." There was incredulity in his voice as if he was
>some modern explorer who went into the wilds and brought back the
>elusive monster Bigfoot. The audience of nearly l000 TV journalists
>applauded as if he had accomplished a daring feat by getting a big bad
>guy on camera.
>
>Sitting at my table in the Sheraton ballroom, three producers from
>overseas marveled at all the international stories that were winning
>recognition as if to say 'you Americans are lucky to get so much
>coverage of the world." They of course didn't know that most of the
>networks have long closed most of their foreign bureaus, cut back on
>documentaries, and were deeply complicit in uncritically doing more
>selling than telling in the run-up to the Iraq war.
>
>They didn't know that PBS, which swept the awards won honors for a few
>programs that have been on the air for 25 years, not for their news,
>and that don't have a big audience relative to the commercial
>channels. They don't know that, in fact, analytical and investigative
>reporting is at an all time low. Surveys show most Americans know
>little about the world despite TV's theoretical global reach.
>
>They also don't know that many bloggers and progressive activists
>spend more time bashing right-wing outlets like Fox (Example: all the
>hype around Bill O' Reilly's convoluted comments about dining in
>Harlem) than in supporting independent media (like Mediachannel or
>Link TV's Mosaic program) Like the commercial channels, they focus on
>backing celebrity politicians and partisan attacks on conservative
>talk show polarizers.
>
>The UN General Assembly is meeting in New York. A high-powered
>conference on global climate change with the top scientists in the
>world rated almost no coverage. But the presence of the Iranian
>President became THE story because of the controversy his visit
>generated and the chance to show the monster in their midst.
>
>Broadcasting & Cable uses a military metaphor in describing how local
>news "deployed" for his visit, "Despite the limited access, stations
>are deploying heavily around the city. WNBC senior vice president of
>news Dan Forman said the channel has put 30% more bodies on the
>street, thanks to the Iranian's presence, than it typically would for
>the United Nations assembly
>
>Getting close to the controversial leader isn't feasible, so the
>stations are relying on pool footage while deploying reporters to
>where he's speaking for standups, commentary from protestors and
>passers-by and brief glimpses at his passing car."
>
>But of course this "pasing car" reportage " is not about reporting the
>visit in a thoughtful way, or assessing developments but, rather,
>inflaming public opinion. More darkly, it's a case of demonization-a
>process that Ahmajadinejad participates in happily for his own
>reasons---and is being used just like all the Saddam Hitler bashing
>was several years ago to prepare public opinion for war.
>
>The more outrageous his comments appear, whether they are or not, the
>more public his smiling and taunting appears, the more the Bush
>Administration wins over public opinion. Any efforts he makes to show
>another image-as in wanting to visit Ground Zero-is, of course
>forbidden.
>
>The tabloids set the inflammatory tone in New York: ""WIPE THAT SMIRK
>OFF YOUR EVIL FACE," chastises the Daily News who calls him a "madman"
>and worse. Not to be outdone Rupert's NY Post slams him as a "petty,
>cruel, dictator" and writes about "MAD-MOUD'S WASCKY WORLD." His talk
>at Columbia University is headlined "Cuckoo at Columbia." Fox News's
>Greg Gutfiield opens up both barrels, saying, "so the fould-smelling
>fruitbat Ahmajadinejad spoke at that crack-house know as Columbia
>University today. " No language is off-limits, no ridicule out of
>bounds.
>
>This suits the the Iranian leader who TIME has called "a dark genius
>at mobilizing Iranian public opinion." Now he is the victim of a rude
>College president and an even ruder press. Down in the polls at home,
>the US media coverage has played right into his hands with the effect
>of also keeping the US public ever more ignorant about the country we
>may be the next to bomb.
>
>Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post also scolds the self-styled
>responsible press for giving more exposure to Neo-con know nothings
>and less visibility for people who we can learn from.
>
>"Reporters should be seeking out experts who actually understand the
>Middle East - because the vast majority of them think that attacking
>Iran would be a huge mistake," he writes on Niemanwatchdog, " A small
>group of neoconservatives is ever-more-loudly beating the drums for
>military action against Iran - and getting a lot of attention
 
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:01:18 -0700, nobody@nowheres.com
(the_blogologist) wrote:

>Why the hell was he doing an interview of someone he didn't have a clue
>about???
>
>Want to know what he's about?? Just watch this rousing "Death to
>America" rally in Iran just before Ahmadinejad gives a speech about
>going nuclear:
>
>http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1385.htm
>
>


Want to hear worse. Look no further than Saudi Arabia.
Ahmadinejad has absolutely nothing to do with Iranian
foreign policy, btw.

>mary collins <collinseelo@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Mike Wallace...... accepted his umpteenth Emmy award at the TV
>> Academy dinner in New York on Monday night for his 60 Minutes
>> interview with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmajadinejad, an almost
>> unpronounceable name to most Americans.
>>
>> "Before that interview," he boasted. "none of us knew who this man was
>> or what he believed."
 
On Sep 28, 6:39 pm, mary collins <collinse...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Media Coverage Helps Ahmajadinejad, Harms Us Public: How the Media is
> Selling Us Another War September 28, 2007 By Danny Schechter
>
> The audience of nearly l000 TV journalists
> applauded as if he had accomplished a daring feat by getting a big bad
> guy on camera.


The current gaggle of inferiors that pass as main stream 'journalists'
wouldn't know what real journalism was if it bit them on their
posteriors..

But it's probably not their fault anyway.. they were hired to fail at
reporting true stories.. just as their monopolized media corporations
wanted them to fail..
 
Back
Top