In my never ending attempt to bring a grain of balance to this thread I post the following article by Dick Morris who, for those who may not be familiar with this brilliant man, was the architect of Clinton's 8 years in the White House as his political advisor (Clintons equivalent of Carl Rove). Many would rate him as the most astute political advisor of this century----he could read the pulse of the American electorate as no other ever has. He is not an intellectual (thank the lord) but instead uses statistical data, polling and mostly common sense in determining the shifting polical sands of America. In this article he adeptly identifies the mood of America relative to the intellectual and journalistic dishonesty of the left wing media in the US today.
Message -----
Subject: Media Meltdown
Dick Morris expresses his views on the current state of media, dissembling
versus candor and balance.
Media Meltdown
By Dick Morris
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 16, 2003
ONE byproduct of war is often a major change in media and news reporting. In
the Civil War, photography was born. In World War II, Edward R. Murrow
brought radio into its own with his dramatic reports of the Nazi blitz on
London. In Vietnam, television became pivotal as images of bloodshed soured
American backing for the war. The Gulf War saw the growth of CNN as all-news
television became essential.
In the Iraq War, the public may well have learned not to trust the broadcast
networks or the establishment newspapers.
Never before have Americans had the chance to watch the establishment media
while also seeing events unfold for themselves, live, on television. Our
collective understanding of the dissonance between the two is breeding a
distrust of the major news organs that will likely long outlast this war.
Those in professional politics take the media's distortions for granted, and
even learn to play them through what has come to be called "spin." We know
what's happening in Washington, the White House and Congress; each morning,
when we read the version the media give to the public, we can't but help
notice the difference.
But the average American rarely, if ever, gets that opportunity. In this
war, they did - and their reaction to media news is likely never to be quite
the same.
Each morning, we sat reading our copy of The New York Times, The Washington
Post or the Los Angeles Times and ruminated on their prophecies of doom and
quagmire. Then we looked up to see, on television, correspondents actually
embedded with our troops reporting quick advances, one-sided firefights,
melting opposition and, finally, welcoming crowds.
Then the TV would cut back to the anchors and military analysts far from the
battlefield. There, with their pointers and maps, we heard all about how we
had too few troops in Iraq and the war plan had misfired and that Bush's
failure to enlist Turkish cooperation was likely to prove disastrous.
For months before the war started, we had read articles in the establishment
media about how house-to-house fighting in Baghdad would consume our troops
like a meat grinder. We heard dire TV predictions of poison gas, missile
attacks on Israel and burning oil wells. None of it happened.
Then, as the war unfolded, it was obvious that minor mishaps would dominate
the network and newspaper coverage. Friendly-fire casualties, accidental
journalist deaths, temporary supply shortages, unavoidable killing of
civilians - all were played with the same or greater gusto than was the news
of the actual war itself.
Who can forget juxtapositions like this one: A joyous mob hauls down Saddam
Hussein's 40-foot statue in a scene reminiscent of the fall of the Berlin
Wall - while ABC's Peter Jennings belittles the Iraqis as a "small crowd"?
The disjuncture between the reality and the reporting became obvious to
anyone who had eyes and ears.
A few news organs, including this newspaper, featured reports that the
established media felt were cheerleading in their optimism. But reality
proved the "cheerleaders" right and the pessimists wrong.
The result has been a major shift in American media/news habits. While CBS
viewership dropped 15 percent from pre-war totals, ABC fell 6 percent and
NBC gained an anemic 3 percent, the Fox News Channel audience rose 236
percent while CNN and MSNBC (with smaller audiences) recorded similarly
impressive gains.
On morning TV, the cable show Fox and Friends actually drew 2.9 million
viewers, more than CBS' 2.8 million on its Early Show - the first time a
cable news station has beaten a network news program in ratings (but not the
last).
Among younger viewers (18-34), CBS Evening News fell 16 percent while Fox
News Channel gained fivefold.
But the biggest loser was The New York Times, formerly the newspaper of
record, but now reduced - in full public view - to a newspaper of the
political opposition. Its readers got to see, in plain view, the paper's
pessimism and bias against the Bush administration.
This has been a rough war for tyrants and those who try to control the
thoughts of their people. In Baghdad - but also in Manhattan, at the
headquarters of the Times, NBC, CBS and ABC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Dick Morris is a former adviser to President Clinton.
Blatham
Please forgive me but I must make reference to your unparalleled ability to confuse minutia with magnificence----fake pottery to historical achievement in military excellence in liberating a country.
I remind those of you who will howl with indignation at my words, that as of this moment Baghdad is without power for lights and pumping water. Security to conduct operations to restore power and protect life is surely more important than pottery. I'm probably just as interested in antiquities and history as any of you but I would not want to be a commander in the task of telling parents or the family of a dead Marine that he died protecting pottery.
Nor the policeman protecting the antiquities in most museums of this world. c.i.
Not chance, blatham, but considerations of tactical prudence and combat efficiency determined which sites were secured, by which force components, and in what order. I deeply regret the loss of the priceless patrimony of mankind, and am outraged that it occurred. I fault The Administration somewhat, but grant that expedience may have over-ruled judgement in the matter. That does not excuse the act, nor does it in any way call to blame the combat troops around whom both the events and the controversy arising from the events swirled like a sudden sandstorm. Combat troops aren't cops. Cops obviously should have been among the assets provided. They were not. The combat troops have done rather well, given their limitations. Bear in mind the function of a combat unit is to inflict such damage on its opponent as to render the oppoent incapable of further opposition. Their job is to eliminate armed opposition, not to control or otherwise regulate the civic good.
Acquiunk wrote:Frolic wrote
"Let the dollarisation of Iraq begin!"
One of the less discussed aspects of this conflict was the attempt by Iraq to substitute the EURO for the dollar in oil transactions. If the EURO rather than the doller became the reserve currency for international oil transaction the US would suffer a great dimunition in influence and economic clout. As well as reducing the value of the dollar as an international currency which would have serious adverse affects on our own economy. The foundations of this war were not WMD but economic.
Good point!
An expert(forgot who it was) made the same suggestion.
A nice summary from BBC (yesterday):
Quote:"One feature of the war in Iraq was the speed and immediacy with which many events were reported by the media. Some of these turned out to be not quite what they seemed, others are still surrounded by confusion. Was this the fog of war, effects-based warfare, propaganda, or error? BBC News Online takes stock:
Iraq war: Unanswered questions "
This has been a rough war for tyrants and those who try to control the
thoughts of their people. In Baghdad - but also in Manhattan, at the
headquarters of the Times, NBC, CBS and ABC
Quote:
Perception, if you are peddling this stuff you are one deluded guy.
"He who has ears to hear, let him hear", or
There is none so blind as he who will not see.
"Those who try to control the thoughts of their people" are located in Washington DC and in Downing Street, and in this attempt they have singularly failed, thank goodness.
The time is long gone when people could be persuaded to swallow a lie as big as this one.
McT
I have a great deal of respect for Tony Blair, but I just can't understand why we had to support the Americans in Iraq.
The action has split the Labour party, and divided the country like no other issue I can think of. Leaving aside the human tragedy of war, it has cost us £billions which could have been spent on more socially useful projects. We have shattered any aspriations we might have had to be the natural leading player in Europe. By encouraging the US to go the UN route then pulling out when it wasn't going to work in our favour, we have only highlighted the illegitimate nature of the action, and have ensured the US will never trust the UN again. Indeed it could be argued that without Britain's support, the whole American adventure would have become untenable, not militarily of course but politically. Thus we have re affirmed the American neo conservative view that a pre emptive war is a useful tool of American foreign policy. We have split the EU. NATO is similarly divided. The authority of the UN is in ruins. Our international standing may have gone up in the US, but on balance I don't believe the Iraq war has enhanced this country's reputation. We have not captured or killed Saddam Hussein. We have not even discovered (yet) any weapons of mass destruction, (although I have no doubt we will, even if we have to import them).
And what have we got out of it? Well certainly not a share in the spoils of war. Those lucrative contracts have all gone to American firms so far. The only thing I can think of is that we have got some sort of understanding from George Bush to play an even-handed game over Israel/Palestine. But we shall see just how much Bush appreciates British support for his Iraq adventure when the Jewish vote is up for grabs next year. Don't hold your breath Tony.
Perc, Guarding oil receipts is more noble ..... how so?
Steve, you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas
Well, seems, he sits quite comfortable on that set:
perception, are you lauding THAT Dick Morris?????
HofT and nimh, I have learned a lot from your interesting discussion of nations, ethnicity, and culture. I am sorry to see us return to contention.
I was shocked beyond belief by what happened at the National Museum and have continued to grieve such losses. But it happened. The administration is beginning to realize that the matter will not go unnoticed or trivialized, and I hope that the our country will direct its power, as we play catch-up, to save, find, and restore.
Well, since three cultural advisers to the Bush administration have resigned in protest over the failure of U.S. forces to prevent the looting (so far), it seems that culture is somehow leaving the US government even more.
On cpan live as we speak the director of the pnac answering questions
Yeah, Gel, I am. The parent company, Decisionmark, is a broadcast industry information service, more or less. TitanTV is a "Home Version" of a system devised a few years back essentially for TV Broadcasters. If you have a TV-Capable card in your computer, hooked up to cable and/or antenna, it lets you schedule recordings to your PC in much the same way recordings are scheduled on a stand-alone PVR. It offers a Programming Guide tailored to your location. The Digital TV info they offer is pretty good. I don't use them, though; I have a PVR. While I don't know for sure, I would suspect any software they require you to download would include a bit of spyware ... just an assumption, no hard info. Curious ... why do you ask?