The Myth of the Liberal Media
Posted by Paul Wilden in Political Commentary |

One of the biggest stories of late that you probably haven’t heard about is the uncovering of the military’s blatant, and almost certainly illegal, propaganda program. I say that you probably haven’t heard about it because the national media has been almost completely silent on the matter. No surprise here because the media was fully cooperating with the Pentagon every step of the way.
I’m not going to write a lengthy post on the matter because I really don’t have anything to add that Glenn Greenwald hasn’t already covered, here, here, here, here and here.
I did want to ensure that my readers were aware of this very serious issue and I encourage you to read each one of Greenwald’s pieces on the subject. This is an excerpt from Greenwald’s latest post, (emphasis original)
On the question of whether the Pentagon maintained an illegal covert domestic propaganda program — and on the broader question of whether the American media’s political coverage is largely shaped and controlled by the U.S. Government — I don’t believe it’s possible to obtain more conclusive evidence than this:
These are excepts from a memorandum sent on January 14, 2005 — just before President Bush was to be inaugurated for his second term — from Capt. Roxie T. Merritt, the Director of DoD Press Operations, to several top Pentagon officials, including Larry Di Rita, the top aide to Donald Rumsfeld (pp. 7815-7816 (.pdf)). It reports on Merritt’s conclusions and proposals in the wake of a Pentagon-organized trip to Iraq for their military analysts:
BACKGROUND
One of the most interesting things coming from this trip to Iraq with the media analysts has been learning how their jobs have been undergoing a metamorphosis. There are several reasons behind the morph . . . with an all voluntary military, no one in the media has current military background. Additionally we have been doing a good job of keeping these guys informed so they have ready answers when the networks come calling.
CURRENT ISSUES
The key issue here is that more and more, media analysts are having a greater impact on the television media network coverage of military issues. They have now become the go to guys not only for breaking stories, but they influence the views on issues. They also have a huge amount of influence on what stories the network decides to cover proactively with regard to the military. . . .
RECOMMENDATION
1.) I recommend we develop a core group from within our media analyst list of those that we can count on to carry our water. They become part of a “hot list” of those that we immediately make calls to or put on an email distro list before we contact or respond to media on hot issues. We can also do more proactive engagement with this list and give them tips on what stories to focus on and give them heads up on issues as they are developing. By providing them with key and valuable information, they become the key go to guys for the networks and it begins to weed out the less reliably friendly analysts by the networks themselves . . . .
3.) Media ops and outreach can work on a plan to maximize use of the analysts and figure out a system by which we keep our most reliably friendly analysts plugged in on everything from crisis response to future plans. This trusted core group will be more than willing to work closely with us because we are their bread and butter and the more they know, the more valuable they are to the networks. . . .
5.) As evidenced by this analyst trip to Iraq, the synergy of outreach shops and media ops working together on these types of projects is enormous and effective. Will continue to exam (sic) ways to improve processes.
I did want to add one salient point. With the revelation that the media were willing partners in all of this, as well as their complete refusal to take responsibility for their actions, can we finally put to rest the ridiculous notion of “the liberal media”?
–Paul Wilden
Digg buttons brought to you by diggZ-ET (WordPress Plugin)
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.



May 12th, 2008 at 8:07 am
You do realize that spreading democracy though war is a liberal philosiphy, right? Same with big gov’t spending, more entitlements, and many other Bush policies.
The media is “liberal” for a reason. More gov’t spending means more value to the propanda medium they possess to disseminate the message of the highest bidder. When are you ever going to go shopping at Boeing or Lockheed and why do they need to spend so much to advertise on these same shows you are documenting?
May 12th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Since when is “spreading democracy though war” a liberal philosophy?.
You’re also confusing government spending with government power. Large social programs like Social Security for example, do not equate to government intrusion. The Terry Shavio case demonstrated that.
The media is in the pockets of big business, the same ones who profit from “spreading democracy through war.”
June 2nd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
When private industries who make profit off of war owns major broadcasting network stations and sends in their spokesmen as special commentator experts to tell us we have to be afraid of an enemy and even give this vaguely group a newly developed name and definition you have to wonder how democratic and liberal the media is
“Liberalism is trust of the people tempered with prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.”
– William Gladstone.
Are they trying to get us to approve the starting a holy war against Islam through a position of fear? or are they trusting us enough to show us the pros and cons of Islam and correctly translate foreign language so we can wisely make up our minds not to go towards an unwinnable world war? Or is it what makes more profits at the expense of investigative reporting at the risk of losing high Hollywood style action and comedy ratings?
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Are they trying to get us to approve the starting a holy war against Islam through a position of fear?
Some sincerely believe in the rapture and are encouraging war in the Middle-East so as to bring on Armageddon. Others are either racists or simply believe in American hegemon in the region. And still others just want the oil. And they all are using fear and ignorance to achieve their goals.
June 27th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
“You do realize that spreading democracy though war is a liberal philosiphy [sic], right?”
ROFLMAO God, that is hilarious! You Neo-Cons are so desperate to spin away your guilt from having humped this administration’s leg for so long that you’re regurgitating like you were a 6-year-old with Tourette’s. You just can’t help yourselves; you’re too far gone. You have no one to blame but your shameless selves and your false-Texan, Connecticut-born, cokeheaded, jackass of a misleader.
October 3rd, 2008 at 8:20 am
Interesting article. I really like your blog overall. Really makes me think! Thanks!