Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Ongoing Disgrace of NBC News and Brian Williams
The New York Times's David Barstow, whose excellent and aggressive journalism led to the uncovering last April of the Pentagon's domestic propaganda program involving network "military analysts," today returns to this topic with another lengthy front-page exposé. Barstow focuses today on the numerous, undisclosed conflicts of interest of Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who continues to be featured frequently by NBC News as an objective analyst as he opines about war policies in which he has a substantial (and concealed) financial stake.
Some of the key facts which Barstow reports concerning the improper behavior of McCaffrey and NBC News were documented all the way back in April, 2003, in this excellent article from The Nation, which Barstow probably should have credited today. That article -- entitled "TV's Conflicted Experts" -- detailed the numerous defense contractors to which McCaffrey had a substantial connection -- including Mitretek, Veritas and Integrated Defense Technologies, all featured by Barstow today -- and highlighted how the policies and viewpoints McCaffrey was advocating as a "military analyst" on NBC directly benefited those companies.
Because those conflicts were brought to light by the anti-war Nation, and because that article was published in April, 2003, as the country was drowning in a war-crazed frenzy, NBC was able to blithely dismiss these concerns, unbelievably telling The Nation that its military analysts' business interests were "not their concern." Unsurprisingly, the Nation article generated little attention and controversy. Few people were interested back then in challenging war-praising retired Generals and the networks which were glorifying the invasion. NBC continued without objection to feature McCaffrey, and the similarly-conflicted retired Gen. Wayne Downing, as objective "military analysts."
Still, what was -- and remains -- most incredible about Barstow's April, 2008 exposé was that, to this day, the networks which featured these highly conflicted "analysts" have never uttered a word about the controversy over the Pentagon's program, despite the fact that it was the subject of an enormous front-page NYT story; members of Congress accused the Pentagon -- rightfully so -- of operating a potentially illegal propaganda operation and demanded information directly from the networks; both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton spoke out against the Pentagon's program; and even the Pentagon felt compelled to terminate the program in the wake of the controversy. None of that merited a mention by any of the networks, despite (more accurately: because of) the fact that their own reporting was so directly implicated by the controversy.
As I documented at length at the time, using the thousands of documents Barstow had obtained, the propaganda that the networks broadcast as a result of this "military analyst" program -- about Iraq, Guantanamo and a host of other related issues -- was very coordinated and, by design, implanted falsehoods in virtually every aspect of their "reporting".
The active suppression of this story by the networks -- their decision to conceal from their own viewers the fact that, for years, they presented as "independent" analysts individuals who were working in tandem on "message amplification" with the Pentagon and who had significant business interests in their analysis -- was so severe, so remarkable, that even establishment defenders such as Howie Kurtz and The Politico emphatically protested the networks' silence. Clocks were even created to count the number of days the networks blackballed Barstow's story -- and it currently stands at 223 days, and counting.
Last April, in the wake of Barstow's front-page story, I documented at length numerous other facts featured in today's Barstow article -- including the countless times McCaffrey went on NBC News shows to advocate war policies that directly benefited his undisclosed business interests, as well as the completely deceitful way NBC presented McCaffrey as an independent and objective analyst without ever mentioning any of his multiple activities that clearly called into question his objectivity as an "analyst."
A couple of weeks after Barstow's story was published in April, I noted that Brian Williams had taken the time on his blog to write about and mock multiple, trivial NYT stories from that week, yet had never once mentioned -- either on his network news show or even on his blog -- the extremely incriminating story in the NYT about his repeated reliance over the years on retired Generals -- such as McCaffrey and Downing -- who were active participants in the Pentagon's propaganda program and who were burdened with all sorts of economic ties that created clear though undisclosed conflicts of interests.
In response, Williams finally addressed Barstow's story on his blog (but not on his network news broadcast), yet did so only by ignoring all of the specific, substantive issues that were raised, instead offering a patronizing little lecture about how Williams himself had developed what he called "a close friendship" with both McCaffrey and Downing, and could therefore assure us that "these men are passionate patriots" who would never offer anything but the most honest and forthright assessments. That was the full extent of NBC and Williams' response to this story.
Not only has NBC and Williams suppressed this story, but -- more amazingly still -- they continue to feature McCaffrey as an "analyst" on American war policies still without disclosing or even alluding to his participation in the Pentagon program and/or his still-extant business stakes in the policies he's being asked to assess. Just this past Thursday night -- 3 days ago -- Williams featured McCaffrey on his NBC Nightly News program to opine about American policy in Afghanistan, and McCaffrey was identified only as a Retired General and NBC Military Analyst.
Earlier that same day, McCaffrey was on a different NBC News show to opine about our occupation of Iraq. Williams also featured McCaffrey on September 6 to opine about Iraq, and on September 9, McCaffrey was featured on MSNBC as having just returned from Afghanistan, and was then asked to analyze American policy in both Afghanistan and Iraq while being identified only as an "NBC military analyst."
All of this took place after the publication of Barstow's April story on the military analysts program which featured McCaffrey, years after The Nation highlighted McCaffrey's numerous business conflicts, and after ample documentation -- including in this space -- of how McCaffrey used his NBC platform repeatedly over the years to advocate pro-war policies that advanced his undisclosed financial interests. Brian Williams and NBC just ignored all of that. Indeed, to Bartsow last April, NBC arrogantly "declined to discuss its procedures for hiring and monitoring military analysts," instead issuing this purposely vague -- and obviously false -- statement:
We have clear policies in place to assure that the people who appear on our air have been appropriately vetted and that nothing in their profile would lead to even a perception of a conflict of interest
Even after that statement was issued, they continued to feature McCaffrey as an analyst to speak about exactly the wars in which -- as Barstow documents even more conclusively today -- he has an overwhelming financial stake.
Just as was true for the media's own complicity in the Bush administration's false pre-war claims (which no network television show, to date, has addressed), as well as for the direct involvement of numerous media stars in the Lewis Libby crimes (which they reported on while pretending that they had no involvement), here is yet another case where major media outlets simply suppress stories that severely indict the integrity of their own "journalism."
Worse than mere suppression, NBC and Brian Williams have just outright ignored this scandal, continuing to use McCaffrey as an analyst without requiring that he sever -- or even disclose -- his numerous conflicts, allowing him to continue to use NBC News to propagandize for the military policies from which his affiliated companies benefit. Now that Barstow has added substantially to the set of incriminating facts, it remains to be seen whether NBC will finally be forced to tell its viewers about what happened with its own involvement in the Pentagon's program and/or to take corrective action.
UPDATE: As several commenters observe, and as I've noted before, there is an irony to this story: namely, few companies benefit more from massive military spending and wars than NBC's own parent company, General Electric. Still, the GE/NBC relationship is publicly known and, therefore, everyone can decide for themselves how reliable, if at all, NBC's reporting is on issues that directly affect the company which owns it. By important contrast, the conflicts of McCaffrey (and other analysts) have been largely undisclosed, thus deceiving viewers when these networks present them as independent analysts of America's war policies.
UPDATE II: Matt Yglesias:
Barstow published a piece on this back in April. None of the TV networks addressed the issue he raised in anything resembling a serious manner. And, again, we now have NBC News caught flat-out in the midst of corruption, deceiving their viewers. And NBC News isn't sorry. They're not apologizing. They're not ashamed. Because they're beyond shame. They never had a reputation for honor, so they don't even see this sort of thing as damaging.
I really don't see how any of that can be denied. Nonetheless, the damage they caused, and continue to cause, has been immense.
- Posted in
36 Comments so far
Show AllSame ol same ol. That is why they are called the whore media!
NBC stands for Never Believe Criminals and Brian Williams is a puto who would be at home on skidrow wearing a see-through plastic skirt cut at mid thigh and black high heel boots with 9 inch heels. "Lookin' for a date?"
ahaha.....you're right as usual, Mordechai. Brian Williams is a huge right-wing, neocon ho.
“Modern propaganda is a consistent, enduring effort to create or shape events to influence the relations of the public to an enterprise, idea or group.
“This practice of creating circumstances and of creating pictures in the minds of millions of persons is very common. Virtually no important undertaking is now carried on without it, whether the enterprise be building a cathedral, endowing a university, marketing a moving picture, floating a large bond issue or electing a president. Sometimes the effect on the public is created by a professional propagandist, sometimes by an amateur deputed for the job. The important thing is that it is universal and continuous; and in its sum total it is regimenting the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers.”
Edward Bernays, 'Propaganda', 1928.
CMDC (Center for Moral Disease Control) ALERT
Re: PORTFOLIO HYGIENE
FORTUNE$ OF WAR?
LIKE $TINK ON WHAT HAPPENS. . .
http://flickr.com/photos/30213629@N07/2829658118/in/pool-828437@N25
It's no wonder that I NEVER watch TV any more - I permanently unpluged that Propaganda Box.
Press and "Psy Ops" to merge at NATO Afghan HQ:
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4AS0ZV20081129
Humbaba you are smarter than the average bear, now if we could just get the rest of America to kill their propaganda box!
I too don't watch television any longer. I used the time to learn to play a musical instrument (something I've always wanted to do) and stay up with CD and other progressive sites. I feel so much better.
Power corrupts.
Media power corrupts immediately.
The most infuriating bit about all of this is that the corporate media is doing this on airwaves which are by law, public property (despite their branding them as "our air"). That the Pentagon has a covert propaganda campaign is quite the non-surprise, as that is a standard part of any complete military establishment. That NBC, which is owned by GE (a major defense contractor), is doing this and pretending like nothing happened is not surprising either.
www.wunderman-comics.com
"The most infuriating bit about all of this is that the corporate media is doing this on airwaves which are by law, public property (despite their branding them as "our air")"
I never thought about the mandatory digitizing of broadcast signals until now. I have to admit I haven't put much (if any) thought into the decision except that it would lower the bandwidth needed for broadcast stations. Now I'm wondering why congress acted so decisively and so quickly on this legislation (given how they drag their feet on everything else)? Is there a legal loop-hole that a digitized signal takes it out of the realm of "public property"? i.e. it's no longer an analog 'radio' signal.
It could be that they wanted to free up bandwidth for all the new innovations (cell phones, wi-fi, bluetooth, yada-yada...). Or are they just trying to sidestep current regulations?
Comments welcome.
If one is skeptical, cynical, or paranoid - take your pick - the digitizing of media makes its successful manipulation, and possible distortion, far easier. In the analog era edited or manipulated audio tape, video tape, photographs, film, etc. was obvious if examined. Today, once something becomes digitized, its editing and manipulation can no longer be ascertained and therefore images and sound can no longer be trusted.
The move to digital is mostly a technological one, and the USA is not the first nation to switch over (that "honor" goes to Luxembourg in 2006). The real scandal of the whole thing was how all current analog television broadcast license holders were allowed to switch over to digital without an auction taking place for the new broadcasting spectrum (a real example of corporate crony capitalism if there ever was one). As for digital alteration, that is detectable as well if one knows how read and program the relevant code. Where it is dangerous is amongst the non-technocracy.
www.wunderman-comics.com
"As for digital alteration, that is detectable as well if one knows how read and program the relevant code. Where it is dangerous is amongst the non-technocracy."
Really? How do you know if a video has been digitally altered? Where do you go to find the 'program and relevant code' if all you have is the video?
I submit that it is dangerous for all of us not just the 'non-technocracy'.
I don't disagree with the articles' premise that the Pentagon was involved in this propaganda, but only at the behest of their corporate puppet masters. The pentagon is a s manipulate d as our anti-democratic, mainstream media. The real culprits here are the companies that fund and manipulate the media in order to rally our country around profit based initiatives cloaked in patriotic rhetoric. To focus on the small fish, like a few Pentagon officials runs the danger of letting the big fish get away.
The reason that the MSM allows this crap on their networks after all, is because their sponsors approve of it.
A small example.
I'm sure this is happening by a 1000 fold.
Eisenhower warned Americans about this a long time ago.
I could be more cynical and suggest that the American economy depends on war, on military spending, and thus GE is doing Americans a favor.
Notice how Mr Williams refers to The Good Generals Patriotism. This tactic used so that any question of his motives attacks the mans moral integrity and would only be done by someone who is NOT patriotic.
Certain peoples use that tactic on these boards.
It is the exact tactic used by people who on any critique of Israel label said critics Anti-semitic.
"anti-war Nation"
Bzzt. Thank you for playing. We have some nice consolation prizes backstage for you.
--
Eric Patton
Cincinnati, OH
ebpatton@yahoo.com
http://www.new.facebook.com/people/Eric_Patton/663783881
Someone posted:
"The real culprits here are the companies that fund and manipulate the media in order to rally our country around profit based initiatives cloaked in patriotic rhetoric."
While I agree with the above poster, I believe the major reason for the problems we are in is that, we have stood patiently watching the whole country crumbling appart, politically, morally, economically, and have done NOTHING.
I don´t know what has happened to us since the days of the marches for equal rights, or the demonstrations against the Vietnam war, but WE, all of us citizens of the good old USA that have allowed these leaches to take over everything.
I wish someone knew what prescription would be needed, to do a major reset and go back to the equivalent state that existed back at least 1999, or prefearably post Vietnam era.
SassyinSA
I couldn't agree more, great post.
What have we(I) done about Katrina,Iraq etc? Not as much as I should.
It is very sad that Peace is not profitable. If it were there would not be too much sentiment left to instigate wars except for the old stand bys, honor, valor, patriotism and let's not forget power and control. Peace is worth fighting for, but it would be nice to see a dispute fought by statesmen and diplomats without death and destruction. How about a college or university just for teaching and training peacekeepers, doctors of diplomacy.
There is a peace government!
It's run by former Natural Law Party Presidential candidate Dr. John Hagelin.
This is where Dennis Kucinich got his idea for a Dept. of Peace.
The cutting edge knowledge of quantum physics is combined with the deepest knowledge in the field of consciousness to help create harmony and peace.
It's fascinating stuff but probably about 500 years in the future for most folks.
I have read and heard Dr. Hagelin many times, but he is like a poltical,Einstein discussing quantum physics to the masses still working on basic math. Yeah, at least 500 years----if the human race is around then!
"...the GE/NBC relationship is publicly known..." Well, it may be public information, but surely very few NBC viewers know GE beyond light bulbs and bringing good things to life, or that Obama adviser Sam Nunn is listed as chairman of “public responsibilities” for GE, or that the Carlyle Group has a major stake in Universal Studios, as in NBC/Universal. Public information and what the public knows are two different things - hell, I'd bet most NBC viewers couldn't even tell ya what the letters GE stand for.
On another note, the implication here is that McCaffery wouldn't be pro-war if he didn't have a financial stake - which, based on his history, is ridiculous. And his media relationship is long - from Wikipedia: As "Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) under President Bill Clinton from 1996 to 2001... was instrumental in negotiating a deal to place anti-drug messages in prime time television shows without acknowledging that these messages were paid for by his Office."
So, really, he and NBC are just playing the same old game, eh?
You can't expect the Big Media octopus to cut off it's tentacles.
Just wait until the Pentagon starts stationing active duty combat brigades in the continental U.S. to protect the captive media from interference.
Oh, I forgot, they just did this.
But I could be wrong !
Brian Williams and NBC can feature General McCaffrey all they want, no one will be listening now that the public knows he is a shill.
Some patriot.
A war machinist appears on one of the outlets of the war machine to keep promoting war. This is the logic of the machine: that a news organization can't treat as news something which is an essential part of its own function.
The admission that NBC isn't interested in the 'business dealings' of its 'analysts' is a perfect expression of what its 'news division' exists to accomplish.
Or to put it another way,
"If the present war arouses among the reactionary Christian socialists, among the whimpering petty bourgeoisie, only horror and fright, only aversion to all use of arms, to bloodshed, death, etc., then we must say: Capitalist society is and has always been horror without end." -- Lenin, October 1916
Thank you, Glenn, and Common Dreams!
As usual, a masterful expose and commentary!
This is why more people are turning to the Internet, to CD, Daily Kos, The Daily Show(!), et al, for news and information. The networks and cable news are secondary sources if consulted at all.
"The NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams," what a charade. I'll be reading the rest of CD commentaries while it's airing.
Eisenhower warned us.
Alex
I was always somewhat skeptical of the news, especially when weather was presented as being more important than actual news (the little that was reported).
I viewed fox news as the antithesis to real news reporting. I later came to hold the same belief to all the other news programs as well, including NPR. They are all just mouthpieces of the corporate elite and work hard to ensure the financial security of the corporate elite at the expense of the general public.
Hell, I even find that common dreams presents a distorted narrative (support the lesser of two evils), and ultimately gave their support to the democratic party, as opposed to democratic principles.
www.NotOneMore.US
The mainstream media is Pravda West. I don't bother with it, I'm too used to the Internet. I sit there reading lies and my finger itches for the Rebuttal button. What's the point of reading that stuff?
It would be cool if you could sue the media for lying.
I force myself to read the papers and to watch network news sometimes to understand the mind games that are being played. Then I stop because it raises my blood pressure. You cannot understand your fellow Americans without steeping in that slimy toxic soup now and then. Also, I need to know who Brad and Jen are.
Joe
Harvey
The Iraq "War" is/was labeled Rupert's War.
Yes folks Rupert Murdoch the super Zionist and strong supporter of Israel did an amazing job.His World wide media web was able to quote references from "itself" & Fox TV did the rest with his UK & Australia media branches also fully involved to inform the sheeple.
Rupert Murdoch then "rushed" over to London & with a private line & many visits to No. 10 he held Tony Blair's hand to make sure he stayed the course.
There is no doubt that the USA over the last 20 years has brought a Holocaust to Iraq -- 3 Million + dead , 4 Million displaced ,the country destroyed & Depleted Uranium & Cluster bombs all over the place & yet not a word in the MSM !!!
Of course Fox & CNN paid "the right people" to be experts in its fair & balanced menu. The neocons wanted "War" & we were all there to see it unfold --- without comment !!!!!!
History will record it as a shameful period in American & World history.
Good article. I think we should give some positive reinforcement to the NYT when they let some informative news in. This could have been published 7 years ago or more, but, hey, better late than never.
Please write a letter encouraging them to allow their good reporters to have space in a timely manner for real stories.
Joe
Bring America Back !!!! The Great Glen Greenwald bowls another strike with this enlightened piece. In contrast to the embedded Brian Williams, NBC fair haired boy star reporter, look what they've done to Keith OLberman, when he was
too tough on John McCain and the FOX TV war cheerleaders, MSNBC pulled him off the direct campaign debate team, and now he's being seen anchoring some sports
segments--which is from whence he came.
**So the suits at NBC are beneath disgrace, beneath dishonor, beneath ethics.
**As several posts below have mentioned. President Dwight David Eisenhower, warned us in his farewell speech of the terrible consequences of a run-away
military-industrial complex==every problem the USA has today exactly.
**War makes great News, Peace makes newsfolk work harder to get news that is
interesting. War times make money, peacetime makes for a lot of boredom.