Showing posts with label Propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Propaganda. Show all posts

February 24, 2008

A Parade of Propaganda, A Festival of Ignorance



Comedian Lee Camp just broke the cardinal rule for guests on Faux News: being honest. You know he won't be invited back on the air for a long time. Check out this little exchange:

Camp: Can I just ask a question?

H: Sure.

Camp: What is Fox News? It’s just a parade of propaganda, isn’t it? It’s just a festival of ignorance. A million people are dead in Iraq. Come on, this is ridiculous. What's the point of this? This is insane. People at home, go outside. Go, go hug your children. Love your family.
BTW, you notice the end of the segment with all the cheesecake on the set? Fox News Porn strikes again!

HT: Crooks & Liars

July 28, 2007

Bill O'Reilly: Propaganda Pimp

There's a great story at News Corpse about Faux News blowhard Bill O'Reilly: a recent Indiana University study has looked at the way O'Reilly uses his TV program for spreading propaganda. No doubt the master would be shedding tears of joy to see how well his pupil is doing.

Researchers at Indiana University have just published the results of a study that provides academic validation that O'Reilly is a textbook propagandist. Amongst the key findings is that:

"...the Fox News personality consistently paints certain people and groups as villains and others as victims to present the world, as he sees it, through political rhetoric."

The study itemized seven propaganda devices as defined by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis:

  • Name calling - giving something a bad label to make the audience reject it without examining the evidence.
  • Glittering generalities - the opposite of name calling.
  • Card stacking - the selective use of facts and half-truths.
  • Bandwagon - appeals to the desire, common to most of us, to follow the crowd.
  • Plain folks - an attempt to convince an audience that they, and their ideas, are “of the people.”
  • Transfer - carries over the authority, sanction and prestige of something we respect or dispute to something the speaker would want us to accept.
  • Testimonials - involving a respected (or disrespected) person endorsing or rejecting an idea or person.

    O’Reilly was found to have employed six of the seven nearly 13 times each minute. This is an important statistic because it is not merely the use of these devices that define their effect. It is the repetition and the absence of any substantive debate that produces the desired manipulation of free thought. This is why O'Reilly repeatedly interrupts and cuts off his guests - to keep them from diluting the rhetorical Kool-Aid. And contrary to his assertions that he doesn't "do personal attacks," IU has documented the reality that any cognitively functional bipedal hominoid has already figured out - O'Reilly is a bullying buffoon:

    "O’Reilly called a person or a group a derogatory name once every 6.8 seconds, on average, or nearly nine times every minute during the editorials that open his program each night." [See the Stalking Points Memos]

    Of course, O'Reilly didn't invent these tactics. They have been used before by governments, churches and corporations. The notorious American racist/anti-semite/nazi sympathizer, Father Charles Coughlin, served a bit of each of those masters. But O'Reilly has an unprecedented platform from which to spew his bile. And he is not merely a pundit expressing his opinions. He routinely calls on his disciples to act on his directives, whether they be boycotts, petitions, marches, or political activism and voting.
  • June 3, 2007

    The BIG Lie

    A couple days ago, I wrote that "Smaller countries make for better media." In particular, I showed (via some posts at bsalert.com here and here) that the American media sometimes dumbs down the message for the American public while giving the rest of the world straight talk about what's going on. Part of a post by Juan Cole today reinforces that message:

    What is important about what Gore is saying is his focus on how the pollution of America's information environment by 1) corporate media consolidation (all television news is brought to Americans by five private corporations, the CEOs of which all vote Republican) and 2) government propaganda (i.e. lies purveyed to Americans using the money and resources of Americans).

    Polling shows that the percentage of Americans who view Iran as the number one threat to the United States has risen to 27 percent now. I think it was only 20 percent in December 2006. First of all, how in the world can a developing country with about a fourth of the population of the US, about a $2000 per capita income (in real terms, not local purchasing power), with no intercontinental ballistic missiles, with no weapons of mass destruction (and no proof positive it is trying to get them), with a small army and a small military budget-- how is such a country a "threat" to the United States of America? Iranian leaders don't like the US, and they talk dirty about the US, and they do attempt to thwart US interests. The same is true of Venezuela under Chavez. But Tehran is a minor player on the world stage, and trying to build it up to replace the Soviet Union is just the worst sort of fear-mongering, and it is being done on behalf of the US military industrial complex, which wants to do to Iran what it did to Iraq. It is propaganda, and significant numbers of Americans (a 7 percent increase would be like 21 million people!) are buying it.

    Why have those poll numbers gone up? Because the Bush administration is trying to hang the Sunni Arab insurgency in Iraq on Iran (and even trying to hang the Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan on Iran). The message of administration and military spokesmen is that Iran is deliberately killing US troops and is a major source of insurgency in Iraq. No convincing evidence has ever been presented for either allegation, nor is it reasonable to assume that Iran plays a significant role in funding hyper-Sunni, Shiite-killing death squads to deliberately destabilize its client governments in Baghdad (al-Maliki) and Kabul (Karzai). Yet the New York Times and even the Guardian put this b.s. on the front page, and of course it is all over CNN, Fox Cable News, MSNBC, etc. Are US journalists trapped in the the dictates of the military-industrial complex by virtue of working for these mega corporations? We know that Roger Ailes at Fox Cable News orders his employees how to spin the day's news (he is a former high Republican Party official). Has any of the journalists counted up how many of the 127 US troops killed in Iraq in May was killed in Sunni Arab areas and how many in Shiite neighborhoods? Has any of them actually read the translated communiques on World News Connection of the Sunni Arab guerrillas and what they say about Iran and Shiites? Has any demanded air tight proof and non-anonymous sources before printing this garbage?

    No.

    It is this sort of thing that Gore is alarmed about. He is a man of enormous experience in public life, and he is saying that he sees a sea change for the worse in this regard. I concur.

    My fellow Americans, do us all a simple favor and THINK! Engorged on a diet of frivolous LCD (lowest common denominator) TV, celebrity gossip and Islamophobia (along with several tons of Cheetoz™), you've allowed your head to be filled literally with shit. You can't think critically, nor do you seem to want to. You're swallowing the BIG LIE once more. Just as you swallowed the big lie with regard to Iraq, now you're swallowing it with regard to Iran.

    Let us be perfectly clear: Iran is not a threat to the U.S. To be honest, I don't believe it's even a threat to Israel. Even if Iran is developing nuclear weapons, they are almost certainly being developed as a defensive weapon. Assuming that Tehran seriously wanted to nuke Israel, the Israeli government would almost certainly strike back with a much larger nuclear arsenal. As Jacques Chirac recently said (as quoted by the New York Times), “Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel? It would not have gone 200 meters into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed.”

    No, Tehran, if it is developing nuclear weapons, would be developing them to protect themselves and their oil fields from the rapacious West. Tattoo this on your brain: OIL. That's the only reason why we're in Iraq, that's the only reason why Cheney is trying to start a war in Iran:

    "Multiple sources have reported that a senior aide on Vice President Cheney's national security team has been meeting with policy hands of the American Enterprise Institute, one other think tank, and more than one national security consulting house and explicitly stating that Vice President Cheney does not support President Bush's tack towards Condoleezza Rice's diplomatic efforts and fears that the President is taking diplomacy with Iran too seriously.

    "This White House official has stated to several Washington insiders that Cheney is planning to deploy an 'end run strategy’ around the President if he and his team lose the policy argument. The thinking on Cheney's team is to collude with Israel, nudging Israel at some key moment in the ongoing standoff between Iran's nuclear activities and international frustration over this to mount a small-scale conventional strike against Natanz using cruise missiles (i.e., not ballistic missiles)." (Source)

    My fellow Americans, stop being manipulated by using that forgotten organ of yours called a brain. Reject the propaganda that's being pile-driven into your head (turn off the f***ing TV set if you have to), and wake up before it's too late!

    September 15, 2006

    Can You Say "Propaganda?"

    I got a real big kick out of the Fox News Commercial that blowhard Bill O'Reilly promoted during his interview with Arianna Huffington. The "Kurds of Iraqi Kurdistan Thank America" is such pompous propaganda that I couldn't help but laugh at it. It also makes me wonder about the intelligence of those Americans who willingly, blindly suck up such drivel (i.e., those people who watch Fox News). Speaking of which, I looked around the Fox News website, trying to find a copy of the video by itself, but it's not there. Could it be that Fox is too embarrassed (or cynical) to put their nonsense on their own website?

    Huffington had a great response for O'Reilly: When asked what she thought of the commercial, she said, "I want to know who is paying for it." O'Reilly, of course, said that the "Iraqi Kurdistan government" paid for the ad, with a little help (I'm sure) from their American neo-con friends.

    Click on the title link to go to the Quicktime copy of the interview; also, Crooks and Liars has a WMV copy plus additional comments.

    March 7, 2006

    The More Things Change... The American Fascist

    Vice President Henry A. Wallace (1941-45)Pop quiz, hotshot. Who said the following and when?

    "The really dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power."

    "They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection."


    Admit it, this could very well apply to today's situation. In fact, it was said by then-Vice President Henry Wallace, published in the New York Times on April 9, 1944. The more things change...

    January 6, 2006

    Bush: Arabic TV gives false impression of US

    There's a news article out of Reuters which says that President Bush feels Arabic TV gives a false impression of the U.S., and that Americans need to do a better job of communicating their ideals. Bush's remarks were given at the State Department, where the National Security Language Initiative was being launched. The Initiative will try to boost the learning of Russian, Chinese, Hindi, Farsi, Arabic and other languages, in part to "protect the United States and spread democracy," according to Bush.

    Now, I certainly don't have a problem with the language inititiative; I've written about this topic several times, as recently as Wednesday (see Mandarin Making Inroads in US Schools). Nor do I have a problem with the ideas that we Americans should communicate our ideals to the rest of the world (just as everyone else in the rest of the world should feel free to do the same), or that the language initiative should be started for national defense purposes and/or to spread democracy.

    What I do have a problem with is some of Bush's other comments:

    "You can't figure out America when you're looking on some of these TV stations -- you just can't -- particularly given the message that they spread."

    "Arabic TV does not do our country justice."

    "They ... sometimes put out propaganda that just isn't right, it isn't fair, and it doesn't give people the impression of what we're about."


    The pot calling the kettle black! The New York Times has written a number of articles since (at least) December that the Pentagon has been paying the Lincoln Group to disseminate propaganda in Iraq.

    "A Pentagon contractor that paid Iraqi newspapers to print positive articles written by American soldiers has also been compensating Sunni religious scholars in Iraq in return for assistance with its propaganda work, according to current and former employees."
    -- Muslim Scholars Were Paid to Aid U.S. Propaganda

    Please, Mr. President, let's not hear talk about "fairness" when you're just as guilty of the same crime you accuse the Arab media of. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you really want to be taken seriously on this issue, then either take the moral high road and quit spreading your own propaganda or quit griping about how the U.S. is presented in the media of other countries and work toward real improvement in American foreign relations.