Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiBrian Williams' "Response" to the Military Analyst Story
It has now been more than ten days since the New York Times exposed the Pentagon's domestic propaganda program involving retired generals and, still, not a single major news network has even mentioned the story to their viewers, let alone responded to the numerous questions surrounding their own behavior. This steadfast blackout occurs despite the fact that the Pentagon propaganda program almost certainly violates numerous federal laws; both Democratic presidential candidates sternly denounced the Pentagon's conduct; and Congressional inquiries are already underway, all of which forced the Pentagon to announce that it suspended its program.
Still, there has not been a peep from the major news networks at the center of the storm, the integrity of whose reporting on the Iraq war is directly implicated by this story. Even establishment media defender Howard Kurtz called their ongoing failure to cover this story "pathetic."
Like Fox and CBS, NBC News outright refused to answer any questions about the allegations when asked by the NYT's David Bartsow, and its prime time anchor, Brian Williams, has delivered seven broadcasts since the story was published and has not uttered a word to NBC's viewers about any of it. Yesterday, I wrote about an entry on Williams' blog -- which he calls "The Daily Nightly" -- in which Williams found the time to mock one frivolous cultural puff piece after the next in the Sunday edition of the NYT, even as he still had refused even to acknowledge the expose in last Sunday's NYT that calls into serious question the truthfulness and reliability of his "journalism."
After I wrote about Williams' blog item yesterday, his blog was deluged with commenters angrily demanding to know why he has failed to address the NYT expose. In response, Williams wrote a new blog item last night in which he purports -- finally -- to respond to the story, and I can't recommend highly enough that it be read by anyone wanting to understand how our establishment journalist class thinks and acts.
The essence of Williams' response: he did absolutely nothing wrong. Nor did any of the military analysts used by NBC News. Nor did his network. These are all honest, patriotic men whose integrity is beyond reproach. Here's but a sampling of Williams' defense:
A few of you correctly noted I've yet to respond to the recent Times front-page article on the military analysts employed by the television networks, including this one.
I read the article with great interest. I've worked with two men since I've had this job -- both retired, heavily-decorated U.S. Army four-star Generals -- Wayne Downing and Barry McCaffrey. As I'm sure is obvious to even a casual viewer, I quickly entered into a close friendship with both men. . . .
All I can say is this: these two guys never gave what I considered to be the party line. They were tough, honest critics of the U.S. military effort in Iraq. If you've had any exposure to retired officers of that rank (and we've not had any five-star Generals in the modern era) then you know: these men are passionate patriots. In my dealings with them, they were also honest brokers. . . .
At no time did our analysts, on my watch or to my knowledge, attempt to push a rosy Pentagon agenda before our viewers. I think they are better men than that, and I believe our news division is better than that.
Williams argues that the two retired Generals whom he identified in particular -- Downing and McCaffrey -- voiced "harsh criticism of the Rumsfeld Pentagon and the war effort." As proof, he cites a McCaffrey quote from 2006 -- more then 3 years after we invaded Iraq -- in which McCaffrey said there was a civil war there and that "it's a very bad situation, and it's getting worse." He also said Downing was angry that we didn't use more troops for the invasion.
That is the sum and substance of Williams' response to allegations that these analysts were presented as "independent" despite having multiple political and financial ties which negated their independence. There is no indication that he has any plans to tell his viewers about the story. And he seems to think that this smug, dismissive response resolves the questions surrounding the behavior of NBC News. It doesn't. If fact, Williams' response -- and his citation to these two specific retired Generals -- raises far more questions than it answers.
* * * * *
Both McCaffrey and Downing were about as far from "independent" as a news analyst could possibly be. On November 15, 2002, a press release was issued announcing the formation of something called "The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq," which was devoted "to advocat[ing] freedom and democracy in Iraq." Its list of 25 members was filled to the brim with the standard cast of war-hungry neocons -- including Bill Kristol, Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle, Leon Wieseltier, Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute, Eliot Cohen, and anti-Muslim "scholar" Bernard Lewis. Both Barry McCaffrey and Wayne Downing -- the two extremely independent "news sources" hailed yesterday by Brian Williams -- were two of its 25 founding members.
On the day of its formation, the group announced that they would meet later that day with then-National Security Adviser Condolleeza Rice to discuss Iraq. The group's President was quoted in the Press Release as follows: "We believe it is time to confront the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's regime by liberating the Iraqi people." Here was its stated purpose:
The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq will engage in educational and advocacy efforts to mobilize domestic and international support for policies aimed at ending the aggression of Saddam Hussein and freeing the Iraqi people from tyranny. The Committee is committed to work beyond the liberation of Iraq to the reconstruction of its economy and the establishment of political pluralism, democratic institutions, and the rule of law.
So this was a group devoted to building domestic support in the U.S. for the invasion of Iraq through so-called "educational and advocacy efforts." And NBC News then hired both Barry McCaffrey and Wayne Downing as supposedly "independent analysts" to opine to NBC's viewers about the war, and did so without ever once disclosing this affiliation to their viewers, without ever disclosing that they were dedicated to propagandizing on behalf of the Bush administration's desire to invade Iraq.
Beyond their ideological affiliations that negated their "independence," both McCaffrey and Downing had substantial ties to the defense industry which gave them strong financial incentives to advocate for the war. Worse, these ties were detailed all the way back in April of 2003 by The Nation, in an article entitled "TV's Conflicted Experts:
But some of these ex-generals also have ideological or financial stakes in the war. Many hold paid advisory board and executive positions at defense companies and serve as advisers for groups that promoted an invasion of Iraq. Their offscreen commitments raise questions about whether they are influenced by more than just "a lifetime of experience and objectivity"--in the words of Lieut. Gen. Barry McCaffrey, a military analyst for NBC News--as they explain the risks of this war to the American people.
McCaffrey and his NBC colleague Col. Wayne Downing, who reports nightly from Kuwait, are both on the advisory board of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, a Washington-based lobbying group formed last October to bolster public support for a war. Its stated mission is to "engage in educational advocacy efforts to mobilize US and international support for policies aimed at ending the aggression of Saddam Hussein," and among its targets are the US and European media. The group is chaired by Bruce Jackson, former vice president of defense giant Lockheed Martin (manufacturer of the F-117 Nighthawk, the F-16 Fighting Falcon and other aircraft in use in Iraq), and includes such neocon luminaries as former Defense Policy Board chair Richard Perle. Downing has also served as an unpaid lobbyist and adviser to the Iraqi National Congress, an Administration-backed (and bankrolled) opposition group that stands to profit from regime change in Iraq.
NBC News has yet to disclose those or other involvements that give McCaffrey a vested interest in Operation Iraqi Freedom. McCaffrey, who commanded an infantry division in the Gulf War, is now on the board of Mitretek, Veritas Capital and two Veritas companies, Raytheon Aerospace and Integrated Defense Technologies--all of which have multimillion-dollar government defense contracts. Despite that, IDT is floundering -- its stock price has fallen by half since March 2002 -- a situation that one stock analyst says war could remedy. Since IDT is a specialist in tank upgrades, the company stands to benefit significantly from a massive ground war.
The same article details that Downing had many of the same problems, including the fact that he sat on the "board of directors at Metal Storm Ltd., a ballistics-technology company that has contracts with US and Australian defense departments." None of this was ever disclosed to NBC's viewers -- not once -- as McCaffrey and Downing were paraded out by Williams and other NBC reporters as "independent" military analysts touting the need to invade and occupy Iraq.
* * * * *
In fact, rather than disclose these obviously relevant allegiances, Williams -- throughout 2003 and well after -- presented McCaffrey to his then-CNBC audience as the definitively objective, independent analyst, with introductions like this one, from the November 24, 2003 broadcast, as extremely typical:
WILLIAMS: Retired four-star General Barry McCaffrey joins us from Seattle tonight. He earned three Purple Hearts in Vietnam, two Distinguished Service Crosses, was a division commander during the first Gulf War.
These days, he's a professor at West Point and an NBC News military analyst, and I know him well enough to know that he's going to want to say a word here, General, and please feel free, about the value of sergeant majors in the U.S. Army who are as talented and as beloved as that man.
GEN. BARRY MCCAFFREY (RET.), U.S. ARMY, NBC MILITARY ANALYST: Well, you know, you're right on the money, Brian.
As always, there was not a word to NBC's viewers that this "NBC Military analyst" was on the Board of Advisers of a neocon group devoted to persuading Americans of the need to invade and occupy Iraq, nor a word about his financial investments in the policies he was advocating. Just look at the completely deceitful way that Williams presented McCaffrey repeatedly, and the type of "independent analysis" to which NBC viewers were consequently subjected. From the September 8, 2003 broadcast:
WILLIAMS: We are joined now from Washington by retired four-star general Barry McCaffrey, one of the foremost military experts currently in civilian life. He was a division commander during the first Gulf War, now a professor at West Point, and an NBC News military analyst.
General, let's start with what Senator Harkin just said. You were far from a protester of Vietnam, you were on the other end of it as a combatant. He said it smells like Vietnam, so do the bills coming in for it. Do you concur at all?
GEN. BARRY MCCAFFREY (RET.), U.S. ARMY: No, not at all. I think there could be two inept metaphors in Vietnam applied to either Central America, Iraq, or any of the current crises we're facing. That was a very different, externally supported war by a homogeneous people who were essentially on the tail end of a struggle against colonialism, using communism as a vector.
My gosh, this is nothing like that. I think Iraq -- By the way, just to get to the heart of the matter, Brian, I actually think the president's speech was an item of tremendous political courage. He has now faced up to -- what I think he was getting from Secretary Rumsfeld was war on the cheap.
And now he's saying, We got to succeed, we got to have resources, forces, U.N. legitimacy. This is a step in the right direction . . . . But we better stay the course, or we're in trouble..
Here is the dialogue those two shared on Mission Accomplished Day -- May 1, 2003:
WILLIAMS: With us tonight to look back at the military operation and perhaps what today means as a media event and a significant event in the lives of the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen is retired four-star General Barry McCaffrey who, of course, commanded the 24th Mechanized during the first Gulf War. He is an NBC News analyst on military affairs.
General, let's start with today. The pictures were beautiful. It was quite something to see the first-ever American president on a -- on a carrier landing. This must be very meaningful to the United States military.
General BARRY McCAFFREY (US Army): Oh, yeah, I think it's a huge shot in the arm to the morale of--of the entire armed forces, never mind to remind Americans why we pay for these 10-carrier battle groups. I mean, this is a -- just an enormous source of military power and the ability to influence events sometimes without fighting.
In the weeks leading up to the invasion, McCaffrey was frequently on numerous NBC shows, including Williams', presented as an independent expert. On the February 18, 2003 edition of Williams' CNBC show, he was on with fellow war-supporter Michael O'Hanlon -- that was "balance" -- to talk about the risks of the war, and McCaffrey said:
Well, I think that the Iraqis have no good options, and so what we're going to do, we will encounter chemical weapons. It will be abject misery. Some will be killed by them. It won't change the military operation. The biological weapons we hope will be deterred by some pretty strong background threats. I think what we're going to have to do is go in and take down 60,000 Republican Guard troops in stiff urban combat in Baghdad and Tikrit, and that's going to look, at rifle company commander level, like World War II for about five days.
I could go on for pages printing similar exchanges Williams had with McCaffrey throughout 2003. The same is true for Downing, who was repeatedly presented to NBC viewers as an independent analyst without his multiple political and financial affiliations ever once being disclosed (Months before the war began, in November, McCaffrey was a guest on an MSNBC show to tout the launch of the new pro-war group; when McCaffrey was presented as an independent analyst throughout 2003 and beyond, that connection was never mentioned).
It's true, as Williams points out as though it is exculpatory, that -- like Bill Kristol and plenty of other hard-core war supporters -- McCaffrey wanted more U.S. troops in Iraq. He even signed a 2005 letter from PNAC -- along with the likes of Kristol, the mighty Kagan Brothers, Max Boot, Frank Gaffney, Michael O'Hanlon and Peter Beinart -- demanding that more troops be deployed to Iraq (the Kagans, O'Hanlon and Beinart -- despite their relative youth -- were all unavailable for duty).
It really ought to go without saying by now that advocating more troops for the War hardly made one a "war critic" nor did it demonstrate independence from the Bush administration's propaganda campaign for the War. To the contrary, the fact that both McCaffrey and Downing had financial ties to the defense industry which would stand to profit from policies entailing more defense spending further calls into question their independence, rather than resolves those questions. As The Nation reported back in 2003:
McCaffrey has recently emerged as the most outspoken military critic of Rumsfeld's approach to the war, but his primary complaint is that "armor and artillery don't count" enough. In McCaffrey's recent MSNBC commentary, he exclaimed enthusiastically, "Thank God for the Abrams tank and . . . the Bradley fighting vehicle," and added for good measure that the "war isn't over until we've got a tank sitting on top of Saddam's bunker." In March alone, IDT [on whose Board of Directors McCaffrey sat] received more than $14 million worth of contracts relating to Abrams and Bradley machinery parts and support hardware.
At the very least, NBC viewers ought to have been told of the numerous, substantial ties which these "independent" military analysts had.
* * * * *
What makes all of this even more astounding -- and what makes Williams' glib dismissal of these issues yesterday all the more indefensible -- is that all of these conflicts and all of this deceit was well-known long before the NYT article added more details. As I've repeatedly noted, concerns over the use by news networks of retired Generals masquerading as "independent analysts" were raised for years in multiple venues -- including by the NYT and by the astoundingly prescient Colman McCarthy in The Washington Post, and the networks simply ignored those concerns, marching along with their pro-war parade of military analysts.
But far worse, the specific, undisclosed conflicts of both McCaffrey and Downing -- the two Generals cited by Williams to prove NBC did nothing wrong -- were disclosed more than four years ago by The Nation. And there is no way that NBC and Williams can claim not to have known about them, since The Nation described those ties as specifically as could be. Did NBC ask the Generals about these ties? Did they consider disclosing them to their viewers? Did the undislcosed ties violate NBC News policy? Does NBC have policies now to prevent this from happening again? Who knows? NBC refuses to comment on any of this.
In fact, it appears that NBC was informed of these specific conflicts by The Nation four years ago. From The Nation article:
The networks don't seem too concerned about what the analysts do on their own time. "We are employing them for their military expertise, not their political views," Elena Nachmanoff, vice president of talent development at NBC News, told The Nation. She says that NBC's military experts play an influential role behind the scenes, briefing executive producers and holding seminars for staffers that provide "texture for both on-air pieces and background." Defense contracts, she adds, are "not our interest."
That was just false. As I noted last week after I interviewed CNN's former anchor Aaron Brown, who offered a similar defense, these retired Generals -- certainly including McCaffrey -- repeatedly argued in support for the war and the ongoing occupation, not merely commented upon military tactics. But to NBC, the substantial financial interests of their "independent" military experts to advocate for the war were simply "not their interest." Of course, it's not all that surprising that NBC News doesn't consider these conflicts worth noting given that, as a subsidiary of General Electric, a corporation that also profits greatly from increased defense spending and wars, NBC News is plagued by the very same conflicts in its reporting on the Government's military policies.
* * * * *
Just consider what is going on here. The core credibility of war reporting by Brian Williams and NBC News has been severely undermined by a major NYT expose. That story involves likely illegal behavior by the Pentagon, in which NBC News appears to have been complicit, resulting in the deceitful presentation of highly biased and conflicted individuals as "independent" news analysts. Yet they refuse to tell their viewers about any of this, and refuse to address any of the questions that have been raised.
More amazingly still, when Brian Williams is forced by a virtual mob on his blog yesterday finally to address this issue -- something he really couldn't avoid doing given that, the day before, he found time to analyze seven other NYT articles -- Williams cited McCaffrey and Downing as proof that they did nothing wrong, and insists that his and their credibility simply ought to be beyond reproach because they are good, patriotic men. But those two individuals in particular had all kinds of ties to the Government, the defense industry, and ideological groups which gave them vested interests in vigorous pro-war advocacy -- ties which NBC News knew about and failed to disclose, all while presenting these individuals to their millions of viewers as "independent." Is there anyone who thinks that behavior is anything other than deeply corrupt?
UPDATE: Yesterday, I sent an email to Williams' representative requesting an interview with him and/or an NBC News spokesperson about the issues raised here or, at the very least, a comment from them. I've received no response.
Glenn Greenwald was previously a constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New York. He is the author of the New York Times Bestselling book "How Would a Patriot Act?," a critique of the Bush administration's use of executive power, released in May 2006. His second book, "A Tragic Legacy", examines the Bush legacy.
© Salon.com
53 Comments so far
Show AllOr -- of course -- tune into Air America or Nova Radio ---
there are a number of liberal hosts you can listen to while driving or at home while working on the computer...
and a long list of liberal hosts and websites to read or listen to.
WHY would anyone possibly be watching Brian Williams or MSNBC/GE -- or still consider that PBS is the straight "news" -- !!!
Or -- the Sunday morning talk shows!!!
FIRST . . . read your own news --- don't have a reader do it for you.
SECOND . . . turn your TVs off --- put them in the closet.
There's nothing on TV but garbage.
We all need to be very careful when seeking the "news." We need to understand the money behind the source and that includes the NYT and PBS.
Truthout and Common Dreams are excellent journals that between them can keep an individual informed more than sufficiently. Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now" is excellent. Combine that with "Z" mag, "The Nation," "Mother Jones," "Rolling Stone," and sometimes "The Atlantic" and Harpers" in conjunction with website blogs "Talking Points Memo," "The Carpetbagger," and "Crooks and Liars" and one can be completely up to speed and heavily informed.
No one needs any of the network news (?) programs, cable news (?) programs, PBS, NPR, or any mainstream (read co-opted) newspaper, or magazine - they are all suspect.
Stop buying their product, stop supporting their sponsors as much as possible, stop listening to their shills and live an informed elevated life.
These entities and those individuals who work for them and support them need to be rendered irrelevant and completely ignored beyond keeping an eye on them.
I suppose it won't be long before our "Parliament of Whores," i.e. congress is considering an amnesty for the corporate mainstream media and its minions the way they are about to sign off on an amnesty for the telecoms corporations, at the behest of fascist BushCo., for their illegal wiretapping of American citizens, also at the behest of fascist BushCo. We are in deep shit.
Great comments from lwhunt and ncycat. Williams is especially reprehensible in the way he fawns over the generals, and the military in particular, and then pretends to be objective, or whatever fairy tale he goes to sleep by. Williams is as culpable as NBC and the rest of the networks for the Iraq disaster, just as much as Bush-Cheney, McCaffrey, Downing and all the members of their duplicitous committee who engineered our way into invading and occupying. They should ALL be in prison. But that assumes there's any justice anywhere in that sordid picture.
Last year the Organization of International Journalists voted the United States 37th in the world for having the most honest and complete news coverage... BEHIND Germany, France and the U.K. although the U.K. itself has fallen drastically during Blair's years.
That is pretty sad for a country who has long considered itself "The Beacon of Truth" in the world.
Fortunately, we still have the Internet and a number of respected people who are willing to tell it like it REALLY is, like Bill Moyers, Kieth Olbermann, Joe Conason and Arianna Huffington. (I once would have added Lou Dobbs to that list, but now even he has gone off the deep end with the Reverend Wright B.S.!)
Unfortunately even these people can occasionally fall prey to some of the false stories and silly distractions fed the Press by the propaganda machine.
It is nearly impossible to sort the wheat from the chaff, but I would suggest that if a news story seems to make this administration, the state of world affairs or the news media in general look good in any way... look at the story with a jaundiced eye... it's probably a lie!
Here's the REAL QUESTION . . .
WHY IS ANYONE WATCHING THIS CRAP --- ????
**************************************
TURN OFF YOUR TV --
PUT IT IN THE CLOSET ---
The Propaganda Machine........
What is sad is that the American Public has been baraged with false information since September 11, 2001 and the National Media has been the main source of that propaganda.
World Trade Center #7 was an apparent "Demoliton by explosives".....No one has questioned the NIST´s failure to explain how that building could have come down without explosives.
The Anthrax outbreak was created in U.S Military facilities and again, no one has questioned that.
Not one Media source is calling "The Illegal Invasions and Occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan" anything but "The War against Terror"......Who created this "Great Islamic Force"? The answer is the United States and Saudi Arabia. Who needed an enemy to increase the Military Budget? The U.S. Military Industrial Complex.
Julius Streicher was mentioned as the Nazi propagandist who was executed for his role in Nazi Germany. But, what happened to Reinhard Gehlen, head of Eastern Nazi Intelligence and his staff? Most of them became CIA Agents along with 1600 Nazi Scientists who were brought to the United States under "Operation Paperclip"......You see, they knew how to control a society and our OSS, later CIA, wanted their expertise.
Deborah Jeane Palfrey, a top end prostitute, had promised that she would name names rather than go to jail....She was found hanging from a ceiling by her mother. (Suicide? NOT)
Brandy Britton, a top end prostitute who worked for Palfrey, was found hanging from her bedroom ceiling by her daughter. (Suicide? NOT)
Jonathan Luna, Assistant U.S. Attorney working on Britton and Palfrey case found dead of multiple stab wounds (Thought to be a suicide? NOT)
"The Political Elite and the National Media" work as one. No scandal gets reported without approval. From Sex to the B52 Nuclear Incident of August 2007, the National Media avoided the major issues.......From Anthrax to A DOD Procurement Officer committing suicide, the NationaL Media avoided the major issues. From World Trade Center #7 to the lies used to "Invade" Iraq, the National Media avoided the major issues. From a 3 TRILLION DOLLAR Invasion and Occupation of Iraq to the 77% devaluation of the dollar, the National Media avoided the major issues.
Until the American People know who was behind the attacks of 9/11 and who really financed those attacks, the justification for killing innocent civilians will continue (It is better to kill "Them" over there than here.) To say Osama Bin Laden was responsible without knowing that he was working with the CIA, is not factual......One must know why he was allowed to go back to Afghanistan to help the Taliban and not arrested as the Sudanese had offerred to arrest him and send him to the United States.
The American People are easy to confuse when the information is inaccurate......Saddam Hussein worked for the CIA and was handled by James Critchfield and he waged a nine year war for the United States against Iran.
It is time for the American National Media to get out of the Propaganda Business and give us history and facts.
re Ouspensky reader 7:44pm 5/1
you wrote "We can't expect any kind of journalism worth-the-name from corporate news media. But we can and always should let them know they're not fooling us..." i wholeheartedly agree. tuning them out is only the first step, followed by a boycott of their advertiser's products.
but the best way i can think of to "let them know" is to stop voting for their annointed candidates. vote green, vote libertarian, whatever---but vote for principles and platforms that appeal to the best in you (the frequently-heard admonition to "vote for the D because the R is just too scary" is the opposite of this).
This is just another example of the media creating the news. The media, all types, put out to the people what they choose as the news, therefore warping the real story. If you want the real news, you have to go to several sources. Commondreams is an excellent start and on their page there are numerous references to other outlets. To be fair, look at all angles that are out there and then sort out what you think is true. And ALWAYS read Noam Chomsky.
NO IMMUNITY !!!!!!!!!
From prosicution for any individual, group,media Netowrk,company, or judicial and elected members and law enforcment agencies that in any way have violated the oath of protecting the constitution form "ENEMYS FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC".
We the people must "never forget " to " stand united " to protect the Constitution from enemys foreign and DOMESTIC.
Did anyone else catch the story that the public TV stations in New York are going tto produce a daily international news report? Which will REPLACE the BBC World News now carried on more than 200 public TV outlets?
I didn't think so.
"SUVA (Reuters) - Fiji's military government deported the Australian publisher of Rupert Murdoch's Fiji Times newspaper on Friday, after declaring him a threat to national security."
I am still paying an extra three cents a stamp for every letter I send because 'someone' mailed anthrax to the Justice Committee and the media. Is there an easier way to domination with a junta?
We can't trust the news, consumer culture has destroyed the communal bonds that used to provide us with bearings in this twisted world; I've quoted bits of this song before, but I think this calls out for the full lyric:
Read about the things that happen throughout the world
Don't be believe in everything you see or hear
The neighbours talk day in day out about the goings on
They tell us what they want - they don't give an inch
Look at the pictures taken by the cameras they cannot lie
The truth is in what you see - not what you read
Little men tapping things out - points of view
Remember their views are not the gospel truth
Don't believe it all
Find out for yourself
Check before you spread
News of the world
Never doubt
Never ask
Never moan
Never search
Never find
Never know
Each morning our key to the world comes through the door
More than often its just a comic, not much more
Don't take it too serious - not many do
Read between the lines and you'll find the truth
Read all about it, read all about it - news of the world
"News of the World"-The Jam
The only thing this author has wrong is calling the News Media, "Major News" which for all intents and purposes is an oxymoron. The corporate entities in question are NOT in the business of disseminating NEWS but rather corporate propaganda, bombast, and tripe for the sheeple who live their lives in a vacuum and various illusions that corporate owned political duopoly is somehow looking out for real people. Hopeful more than the 1% will wake up someday and finally get it, and start voting outside their Democratic and Republican boxes.
kittyc May 1st, 2008 1:44 pm
"Corporate media in alliance with defense industry war profiteers and the Pentagon. Corporate control of the government and the media, pushing for military interventions in the Middle East to get their hands on a dwingling natural resource. This is fascism, pure and simple. Who would expect anything less from General Electric. And Brian Williams is paid well to be their fascist apologist."
That's exactly it, kittyc. I fell for the lie that the media was/is lazy and incompetent. They are not. They know what they are doing and they do it very well.
The media is the enemy!
The news has been canceled! Especially on TV. It's just slime oozing out as Frank Zappa said.
Allow me to correct something I stated in a previous post ... Julius Streicher, the Nazi propagandist, *WAS* hanged by the Nuremberg Court. I stated he was only given a prison sentence. See the following -- http://www.bytwerk.com/gpa/streicher.htm
Some might say, well, you know, should we actually *hang* Brian Williams or his cohorts in the Pentagon and/or at NBC? Well, maybe, maybe not. But how about, at a minimum, sending their children to Iraq and Iran, and then putting them on the front lines.
Or maybe have Brian Williams actually *live* with the prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanemo for three or four months, then have him file a story on what's going on there.
Or maybe sentence these war criminals in the White House and the Pentagon and the State Department and the Congress and the mainstream media to what my uncle back in 1961 suggested they do with Adolph Eichmann. Don't execute him, my uncle said -- put him in a cell with a loaded revolver and when he realizes what he's done, what he caused to happen -- the death, the misery, the suffering -- he'll figure out what to do with the gun.
A bit harsh? Ask the surviving families of the over 1,000,000 Iraqi who have died as a result of this BIPARTISAN war if that's a too harsh punishment. One million dead Iraqis and counting; see the following http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html
Add that to the 2 to 3 million Vietnamese killed in the Vietnam War.
Then add that to all the hundreds of thousands of people killed by the fact that Afghanistan was the 20th country the US has bombed since the end of WWII. I'll repeat that -- Afghanistan was the 20th country the US has bomed since the end of WWII. Many of them for several years (e.g., Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Cambodia). All of them poor, 3rd world countries.
Come on, lesser-of-the-two-evil advocates, you're probably better at math than I am -- have we gotten to ***"6 million dead"*** yet?
Perhaps we've passed it.
Perhaps even Julius Streicher is marveling at how fast over the past 40 years the lesser-of-the-two-evils philosophy has succeded, in its way, in killing so many people.
Oh poor Brian, Katie, Corporate Media Lilliputians and Military minions, straining to keep their reality in the closet as I strain to avoid fecal metaphors, resorting to the ancient adage that "a rose by any other name is still a rose"
Thank you, Mr. Greenwald, for this thoughtful analysis.
We can't expect any kind of journalism worth-the-name from corporate news media. But we can and always should let them know they're not fooling us (which will become useful later, if the people ever manage to elect a congress that is willing to re-regulate ownership and other rules governing media public-licensing.)
The dominant media's claims that it makes every effort to provide a 'fair balance of expert analyses' is no differently bogus than its claim to be providing fair and balanced reporting via 'in-house' resources.
RE the Iraq invasion for example: offers of dissenting expert opinions from within the loyal military fraternity itself, such as those of retired General Willaim Odom (Reagan's one-time national security advisor), have been turned-down by every dominant major corp (according to Odom), after his initial 2006 major media interviews incurred the wrath-against-the-media of the Bush Administration.
It's a sad study in the power of Group Think and weak individual conscience, to see, for example, how news anchors like Bryan Williams first lies to himself about his corrupted professional honesty - and then idiotically expects his viewers to lie to themselves too, just so HE, Bryan, isn't made personally uncomfortable by OUR perfectly justifiable disbelief of him.
I think one of the biggest lies of all time is that some anthro-lexicographer once blanketly named all of us us humans 'Homo Sapien' ("Wise Man.")
That term might apply to the relatively few humans {men annd women] who've historically or presently bothered to seek truth at the cost of their instant, mindless comfort. In any case, Homo Sapien surely isn't a tern that applys to most high paid humans in the USA these days, especially if you're an Establishment news reporter.
The more truthful nominatum here would be Homo Prevaricatus ("Lying Man.")
Outstanding report, thanks Glenn for researching and publishing the background on these 'military analyst' who are making fortunes on the war they helped promote. Brian Williams, Courec and Gibson are look alike MSM whores, they are in it for the money and the consequences be damned. After 5 years of bushes illegal war the people of Iraq are in an even worse situation. The Bremer attempt to privatize and sell off all Iraq has blown up in their faces. Al-Sadr is a major roadblock to the neocons plans, look for re-newed violence to erupt for the closing months of the bush disruption of our semi-sane world. How can one greedy administration cause so much pain & death?
And where are all tse fine mainstream Democrats on this little gem? ... Hillary ... Obama ... Biden ... Schumer ... Pelosi ... Reid.
As quiet as spinless little mice.
Are they speaking up about the Pentagon and NBC not just misleading the public but also BREAKING THE LAW?
Of course not.
Oh, but I forgot: Obama wants ... "change."
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Yeah, right.
You know, at Nuremberg there was a guy named Julius Streicher. He was a Nazi editor who published all kinds of "misinformation" about Germany's enemies. The US jurists at Nuremberg didn't execute him, but they gave him quite a few years in the slammer. Why? Because he was a propagandist for the Nazis.
According to the Nuremberg jurists he violated international law. Whereas, today, in the United States of 2008, there's not only not a peep as regards throwing Brian Williams et al in jail, there isn't even a peep about NBC and Williams' silence on the story.
And so these things continue to be done with impunity.
How long will it take for the American public to realize that nothing's going to change unless and until the changes are FUN-DA-MEN-TAL!
Where's the outrage in 2008? I thought we "won" WWII. Where's a conparison by the mainstream media between this systematic misleading of the American public regading Iraq (and now Iran!) versus the to-do involving the 2004 Dan Rather affair that eventually led to his forced resignation?
All this and not a peep from the mainstream media and the mainstream Democratic Party.
And here are the Democrats and the mainstream media set AGAIN to launch the US into another war in the Middle East -- based on lies.
Do you remember several months ago when the Democrats in Congress gave George Bush a green light to go ahead and invade Iran. It's up to you, the Democrats said. You make the call, George.
If an when Iran is invaded, who do we have to blame, if not both the Republicans AND the Democrats?
And yet there are still people deluded enough to think that Obama or Hillary, if elected, will make a difference. Wake up, folks, it ain't gonna happen.
For an alternative to the lies, try the following site www.wsws.org
Look at the quotes from that imbecilic parasite Brian Williams---all of it cagily setting up "the good military men" in front of him, hiding behind them just like John McCain. You "can't" criticize a sincere, honest, well-meaning Pentagon stretcher (liar), can you? Gee folks, we were SO doing our best for each and all of you! That's why media-clowns are so prickly-defensive at the least shade of question about THEM---because they are incapable of theorizing their own "standards," or "professionalism" (have no idea what it means or when they became one, short of their first corporate paycheck). KILL YOUR TELEVISION....
www.democracynow.org has both audio and video of Amy Goodman's shows online, and usually transcripts as well.
Years ago I used the parental blocking on my TV system to block the cable news channels. And I'd never watch a news program on a corporate network like NBC. I don't feel out of touch in any way. I can read from lots of sources on the internet. I'd say I'm even better informed, as what I no longer have to do is to correct the mis-information that networks like NBC would put into my head.
BTW, of all the networks, NBC might be the one to trust the least on such matters. Its owned by GE, one of the largest defense contractors in the world. Is it any surprise that they'd be putting Pentagon shills on the air pretending to be independent analysts? And is it any surprise that they'd refuse to acknowledge manipulating the news to help the corporate bottom line?
The New York Times report also noted the complicity of NPR. There is an action alert here:
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/npr.html
There's an interesting mythology afoot in the land. Its that all military officers are automatically honorable, honest men. Its considered completely out of bounds to in any way question them.
We saw this last year when Move-on ran their General Betrayus ad, and the fact that the US Senate voted to condemn move-on for even saying that.
That was striking, because even if a general were honest and honorable as a military officer (not a given btw), General Petreus has clearly moved into the political arena. And, while I won't accept that a military officer is above any question, its an absolute certainty to me that any politician certainly must be questioned and watched.
This is not something that is traditionally "American". The founders of this country opposed even the concept of a standing army as they viewed it as one of the most powerful dangers to the liberty they had fought for. I think they'd be shocked to see an America today where military officers are so deeply involved in the political process and the propaganda system. And I'd guess they'd strongly object to this notion that they can not be even questioned because they've worn a uniform.
RE:"I love it when they parade Williams on Leno, Conan and (this one hurts) Letterman. Yeah… Williams such a nice, great and funny guy! Just a "regular Joe". (Just like Brokaw was)"
And what hurts even more is Jon Stewart. He was (maybe still is) a big admirer of Williams, too. Had him on his show more than once with a great fanfare of hail fellow well-met.
RE:"Try PBS– you should not have to pay for it. We have "The Newshour with Jim Lehrer" and the "BBC World News" on our PBS station."
Yeah, ditto here, too. And I'm lucky enough to have a son who pays for DISH Network for me, so I get to watch Amy Goodman on FSTV (FreeSpeechTV). You can also get her on radio. I'm still watching Keith Olbermann's Countdown. Man, I hope he doesn't 'defect' to the Blah Blah Club.
RE:"The inbreeding gets worse each year. All that's missing is the banjo."
Maybe not, Doom n Gloom. Have heart! We DO have banjoMAN showing up periodically ... :-)
BOYCOTT GE PRODUCTS
This is what I posted at William's blog among all the other negative posts:
I NEVER buy anything made by GE, the corporation that owns Williams and NBC.
Get the corporations out of America's news media. Corporations will consider their corporate interests above America's need for a free press.
Williams works for his corporation and was chosen because he says what they want.
The war in Iraq was for oil to keep transporation costs low for the multi national corporations that ship from China and other nations to the US and Europe.
Its all about money...and oil.
The Generals worked for the military industrial complex and GE is part of that. They said what they needed to say to make money.
Watch the BBC.
5280
I like letterman too and I appreciate his open disgust with the Iraq war especially since he seems to be a conservative pro-america kind of guy.
I just filled out the form to send a message to his show about Brian Williams' disgraceful record on Iraq and included a link to this article. Maybe Dave will call Williams a "pinhead" the next time he has him on the show. What a great victory that would be for the cause of peace!
"The essence of Williams' response: he did absolutely nothing wrong. Nor did any of the military analysts used by NBC News. Nor did his network. These are all honest, patriotic men whose integrity is beyond reproach."
As Samuel Johnson famously said: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." You can now include the pimps and whores of the MSM, all of them, like Williams, to that list of scoundrels.
"I read the article with great interest. I've worked with two men since I've had this job — both retired, heavily-decorated U.S. Army four-star Generals — Wayne Downing and Barry McCaffrey. As I'm sure is obvious to even a casual viewer, I quickly entered into a close friendship with both men...."
This is exactly the problem, as Greenwald points out. The "journalist" is chummy with the "analyst" who, NYT reveals in the article Williams read with "great interest," was on the Pentagon's propaganda payroll. They probably played squash together or something, sent each other's kids & grandkids birthday presents.
Somebody please send Williams back to Journalism 101. It's not that journalists shouldn't have friends, but having friends in powerful positions makes them part of that power structure, reducing their credibility and objectivity to nil or less.
Destroying what is left of the credibility of the corporate media (credibility among the ill-informed, as it has had zero credibility among the well-informed for some time) is one of the most honorable and admirable tasks that a journalist can take on. More power to you Mr. Greenwald.
Great article, Mr. Greenwald; but when you say "the core credibility of war reporting by Brian Williams and NBC News has been severely undermined by NYT", etc.,you imply they might have had credibility in the past. They never did.
It's a great idea to badger Williams's office for an answer, but it's a mistake to hope for honesty in his reply, if it comes at all. Williams is a stooge for GE, which is near the center of the military-industrial complex. GE, NBC et al get away with this guff year after year because not nearly enough Americans disagree enough to demand a change.
Why was it so easy for the Bushies to persuade more than 75% of the US public and the Congress to support this criminal war? The Republican half of the population are quick to love the collective criminality of invading other countries. The Hillary half of the Democrats love it too. That's 75%. Some of us in the remaining 25% refuse to watch NBC/ABC/CBS "news". So Williams is in sync with more than 75% of his viewers.
The military-industrial complex has us by the short-and-curlies, and they know it.
MSNBC's show (it's a "show" folks, not news! I don't ever watch these programs, but I did last night) "The Verdict" was asking questions of three guests regarding whether or not it was the media who was at fault for the ongoing smear campaign to discredit Obama because of Rev. Wright's comments. One of the commentators, said yes it was the media that keeps it going, and why hasn't the host focused on more important issues, like the fact that 47 U.S. soldiers were killed in April-- the deadliest month for soldiers since last year), or the Pentagon's domestic propaganda program involving retired generals. Immediately, he was shut down by the host, with the host telling "Roy", "I'll talk to you later about this". That was that, no more discussion of any real news -- on with the Rev. Wright item -- for the fifth day in a row on every single channel. Disgusting!!!
Stay on it, Glenn.
This is probably the worst era in American journalism history. Moreover, it is unfortunate that most Americans get their news from broadcast sources, where oftentimes a "lead" story gets 10 sentences and an "in-depth" story (covering two nights) gets 20.
TV journalism "stars" of the last 30 years measure their importance by the size of their ratings and their paychecks. There was a time that a network news journalist had present 5 years of print credentials before being considered for a staff position. Now it's more about $100 ties, well-clored coiffures, and knowing looks.
Two failures have occurred here, intellectual and moral. On the intellectual side, as you have pointed out, they do not accept the NYT story, its importance and its evidence. Williams's argument is that he "committed" no error. Right..., but this is a journalistic sin of "omission", not "commission." Sounds similar to the excuses made at Nurenburg.
The moral failure was from the get-go-- all that nonsense about "embedded" journalists. But this was not so much personal moral failure as much as it was class, professional moral failure. For the TV folks, it certainly wasn't about getting a great story-- as much as it was about getting great pictures (though I don't think even that ever happened). CS Lewis, in an Oxford commencement address sometimes titled "The Inner Ring", explains how corruption and moral failure begins, develops, and grows into the blindness that Williams and NBC display in the face of this story. Indeed, Williams's blog is virtual parallel account to Lewis's illustration.
I don't know what will happen in the NBC/Williams saga. It would be nice if they admitted their errors and sought ways to correct them. Ten days have passed, these generals are yet on their payroll, and it doesn't look as though anyone is ready to 'fess up.
As much time as they blow on TV, you would think that all the networks could find a dedicated slot for self-examination from an independent ombudsman. How many times in the last five years have we seen "message control" at work from this administration? I say that before any "analyst" appears, he or she should say they will or will not be speaking from "talking points" developed elsewhere. If so, then the network interviewer should have the right to develop questions from such talking points. If the analyst--by comparison to other interviewees' appearances-- has demonstrated a role in fulfilling propagandistic purposes, then he gets the boot, and I would hope blacklisted from all further appearances for trying to compromise journalistic independence.
Julianne said, "NBC evening news is no more in my home. That doesn't leave much since I can't afford cable but I'll do my best to keep up."
Try PBS-- you should not have to pay for it. We have "The Newshour with Jim Lehrer" and the "BBC World News" on our PBS station. If you don't you have these in your area, you should lobby your local PBS station to include them.
The BBC World News is more straightforward that any other news report I've seen on TV. It covers more "actual news" in just one of its 30 minute shows than the MSM networks do in several weeks.
If anyone has a better suggestion, I would love to hear it. (Of course one could totally boycott TV as a news outlet). I also learn a LOT from watching C-Span coverage of actual speeches and events. This is "source" news reporting; rather than the second or third hand account that is handed out with a sound bite on news reports. For instance, I saw the actual speech that Rev Jeremiah Wright gave at the Nat'l Press Club, followed by questions from the audience. From this I was able to observe the actual event and to form my own opinions.
The inbreeding gets worse each year. All that's missing is the banjo.
I love it when they parade Williams on Leno, Conan and (this one hurts) Letterman. Yeah... Williams such a nice, great and funny guy! Just a "regular Joe". (Just like Brokaw was)
The only thing we can do is turn him and his GE owned network off and not buy from (any) of their sponsors. Whenever you see "GE", turn it off and/or close your wallet. (hell, turn them ALL off)
The media, wall street, telcom and the military industrial complex companies...all stand for war and they love it.
Keep up the great work Glenn.
Generals as media whores. What a country.
Hoa binh
He also charged $50,000 for a (small) group of wannabe journalists to attend a two-day journalism seminar at the Four Seasons Hotel in Las Vegas.
Again, Glenn Greenwald is owed thanks and praise for ferretting out the big back story - the mainstream media's blackout of a major piece of print investigative journalism that exposes the MSM's duplicity. Well done. Keep up the good works.
Bill from Saginaw
It was good to read this excellent article and all the comments, because watching NBC become so fluffy and twisted was sad and not nearly as entertaining as it would be if it was a science fiction story, like it ought to be. This ought to be some kids highschool paper, "How America became the USSA and nobody noticed"
Gosh, Brian Williams. How about that, huh? I was just talking about him being a sellout a few days ago, dragging my spouse reluctantly into agreement. It's funny. I think, with him, we were in denial for a little while. He talked such a good game, didn't he?
Tell it like is is! Brian Williams is a "News Reader" and the "News" is a product for sale. NBC could not show scenes of Americans dying in Iraq or show Iraqi children bein killed. That might cause the viewer to switch channels before the commercial.
What a fantastic article. This is what journalism should be, not the "journalism" that we are fed by the corporate media.
This further underscores the need to support independent media and voices within society. Let's keep the pressure on!
Corporate media in alliance with defense industry war profiteers and the Pentagon. Corporate control of the government and the media, pushing for military interventions in the Middle East to get their hands on a dwingling natural resource. This is fascism, pure and simple. Who would expect anything less from General Electric. And Brian Williams is paid well to be their fascist apologist. Are there any better reasons to turn the NBC Nightly News off.
This is another example of what we have been seeing all along from those who aim to control and run our nation: they have become brazen and cavalier about their corruption and illegal acts. In effect, they know they will continue to have the support of the military and the police, that the wealthy protect their toadies and that we as a nation can bloody well all go to hell for all they care. And so we sit, and fume, and rant, and nothing happens because they have the money and the power. Brian Williams just behaved like his masters: he gave us the finger.
The reason that all of the major new networks are silent is most likely that they are "lawyering up". They are afraid, and rightfully so, because, they have willingly participated in an illegal activity. It was no accident. They were not duped. They willingly participated in the scam to preserve "access" to the State Department and Pentagon. Silence from big business always means the same thing: the lawyers have been put in charge of the problem. Now we get to Congressional oversight investigations, Justice Department obstruction, Pentagon secrecy, etc and it all will go nowhere, as usual.
a free weapons distribution plan for the homeless will kickstart the revolution.
Perhaps Mr Williams and the rest of the MSM can explain other "censored" stories on the global US occupations, particularly this one:
http://www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=1263
I read the original CD article, and now this. Then leaped over to Brian's *blog* and all the responses. What's left to say other than ... can we say "talking head"?
NBC evening news is no more in my home. That doesn't leave much since I can't afford cable but I'll do my best to keep up.
Or how about the Reverend Wright? And will he hurt Obama's chances? I could just puke!
The only responsible news person I have seen on TV is Keith Olbermann on Countdown.
Interesting, but did you hear about Hanna Montana?