TV Schedule

PBS breaks ‘media blackout’ of NYT story on Pentagon propaganda

  2. Robijnson
  3. related topics
On Sunday, The New York Times published an explosive report exposing the Pentagon’s secret campaign to use analysts in order to “generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance.” Since that time, TV news organizations have largely been silent on their role in the propaganda. Ari Melber notes that last night, PBS’s Newshour finally broke this blackout, but couldn’t convince the other networks to participate
Robijnson

28 responses // PBS breaks ‘media blackout’ of NYT story on Pentagon propaganda

  • A crack in the armor.
    CarolynGillis
  • http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2008/apri...
    04/22/2008 DEMOCRACYNOW ARTICLE: Pentagon’s Pundits: A Look at the Defense Department’s Propaganda Program

    (transcript at you can read the transcript at http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/22/pentagons_pundits...


    DemocracyNow's Amy Goodman did an extended analysis in the video from The War and Peace Report. If you want to get in depth information about this, follow this link to watch the video. (It's pretty lenghty but very informative):
    jimmyp
  • You know ... I used to really respect the ethical standards of journalism in a country like America, especially since spending time seeing how it works in a place like India - with misquoting going on all over the place, papers being handed money not to print certain stories by politicians, and so on. But the way American news outlets have kept Americans in the dark about an injustice going on in the world, spurred by our very own government ... I feel like that's so much worse than all that other small stuff.
    ashabpatel
  • Information is the most important tool a free people can have. If we don't have access to a free flow of information then what do we have?
    natenate
  • really that surprising?
    sagewho
  • I'm shocked that the NY times is was/is investigating this issue. I thought they went down with the rest of the media.

    I am not surprised that the Bush administration went this far to push for war. What is surprising is that it took this long for the rest of us to find out just how far the administration is willing to go to manipulate the country.
    cheyroze
  • What else is new? This has been going on forever since before the printed word. Sadly, the general public will not be the wiser even if it was on their 'evening news'.
    cibalin
  • SMASH THE SYSTEM
    thedismembermentplan
  • Considering that the governing board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; the parent organization for PBS, is dominated by GWB hand-picked cronies (including it's president), I'm stunned the story received any airtime at all.
    I believe that Current is having a profoundly positive effect on US broadcast journalism getting to the heart of a story and having the guts to serve the public as it should have all along.
    huntre
  • finally someone speak up
    iamchinese
  • I'm not even a little surprised. the media is the government's puppet at this point. As citizens, we shouldn't readily trust any source of information without some investigation. I learned that by watching FOX news (gag).
    suepierre
  • watch this comment being used here, here, here, here, here, and here
    the coverage of this story.. and the lack thereof.. should be a story in and of itself.

    it illustrates the point that the news can be defined by those select few who pick and choose what to report.. regardless of how informative or relevant it may be to the general population..

    while its not exactly the same thing as censorship, anyone who condescendingly criticizes other societies for lack of a free press should take a little closer look at home..

    peace
    chapter12
  • Shows like the Daily Show and Colbert Report are being instrumental in getting this kind of stuff "front of mind" for people, I think. The system is crumbling from the pressure. Finally!
    Elligirl
  • I love PBS, they always throw out the contraversal stories than no one else airs, I would love to see a current-PBS merger
    justwannafindmytrue
  • Oh my!!!
    Nice tryThis is a rehash of a story that wouldn't fly the first time, what 6-8 months ago. I can't wait to see what gets said 'bout this.
    rockon
  • Of course the Pentagon is wagging the dog. It also wouldn't surprise me if they had inside operatives in key senior positions within the major cable and news networks.
    shampton
  • Doesn't anyone else but me think it's creepy that all the network news shows cover the same 'news' issues the same way at the same time? While they're telling us that Brittany Spears has shaved her head (or whatever she's shaving at the moment) real news that is important and impacts real people it ignored by the media.
    patsarts
  • You can catch an hour of real journalism every week day at www.democracynow.org The show is usually availale by 8 or 9 am CST for viewing on-line. prior shows are available as well with headlines listed...they keep our eye on the goverment when so many others claim too.

    It's just one source, but if you like what you see hear at current, I believe you will find it to be time well spent.
    jimmyp
  • I wouldn't be surprised if a few people from NY times were canned and blacklisted over this.

    I watch BBC news. I stopped watching the US news (for the most part) when I came back from Iraq. it made me SICK to hear what they were and were not saying.

    I think the really sad thing is that the average American TV viewer is too ignorant to even understand what is going on. That is how the war was started. Bush played on the American people's faith in his word and inability to search out other sources. The journalists followed along like little puppies because to NOT do so would be the end of their career.

    Just my humble opinion! :)
    vixen0078
  • http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1830500.stm
    The BBC knew about this from day 1, but how much do you think they remained influenced by "The Office for Strategic Influence" which they themselves reported on in 2002.
    phillyharper
  • all i can say is: it's about time....
    djaudible27
  • I saw it from the beginning. It was clear to me that it was contrived. It was too perfect, predictable. Stupidity is predictable - but it doesn't stop nevertheless.

    The real problem is that we rely too heavily on sources outside of ourselves to tell us what's what, rather than listen to our own inner voice.

    Common sense? Horse sense? Probably, if many of you thought about it, you'd see that you too had an inclination that it was just a little too scripted to be REAL.
    VoyagerFilms
  • 1984 coming to life. Orwell warned us, yet we stand still.

    Put your congressional representatives phone #'s on speed dial and call them often!

    Let the voice of the people be heard over the talking money.
    Pwdrskir
  • They need to be reminded that THEY work for US.

    People easily get fired for lying to their employers.

    Some heads need to roll.
    Humdrum
  • They don't work for us. PBS works for us because they are public news. CNN is not public news. CNN works for ratings and profit.
    Kurka
  • The corporate news agencies are granted licenses to conduct business on OUR airwaves by the FCC, which in turn is supervised by Congress, which in turn is supposed to be accountable to the people.

    Tell YOUR employees that your sick and tired of the Corporations calling the shots!!
    Pwdrskir
  • I agree with the second guess, the media hires their on people to serve as commentaters. the government does not force companies like CBS, ABC, NBC, FOXNEWS, CSPAN, CNN, MSNBC, and every indi newspaper in the US to use any certain commentater.

    It just isn't not going to happen. If there was ONE national paper, and ONE national TV station, and ONE site on the internet, then yes the information could be manipulated. But not a bunch of independent organizations.
    karrde
  • saw it comin, what next??
    arizonamike

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.