Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
otto...you honestly dont see anything wrong with an administration that provides special briefings to former military personal (some with financial interests in defense related industries) for the purpose of having them serve as military analysts for the media and creating an appearance of objectivity in order to present favorable (not necessarily factual) news coverage of the war in Iraq?
Or would you prefer just to continue with your mom jokes?
|
dux, again, and again, you and I prove that there can be no coherent two sided discussion among folks with diverse views here. Why do they post here in politics? It seems with an intent to mock, ridicule, and to sabotage the discussion that could, but does not happen.
I think it is worse than you described it, dux. From the Pentagon released email in the thread's OP:
Quote:
....CURRENT ISSUES:
I
The key issue here is that more and more, media analysts are having a greater impact
I
on the television media network coverage of military issues. They have now become the geI
to guys not only on breaking storys. but they influence the view5 on issues. Th~y also h.ave a huge amount of influence on what stories the network decides to cover proactively I I with regards to military....
.....We can also do more proactive engagement with thiB list and give them tips
on what stories to focus on and give them heads up on upcoming issues as they are I
I developing. By providing them with current and valuable information, they become the key
go to guys for the networks and
<h3>it begins to weed out the less reliably friendly analysts I
I by the networks themselves....</h3>
|
The intent of the "PSY-OP" seems to be to choose the stories that the media will report on, in the way that the pentagon wants them reported, and to script the military industrial complex investors/board members who they've represented as military "analysts", chosen by the networks while "weeding out" those analysts who disagree with the pentagon scripting, marginalizing them by refusing to brief them, until they have no influence with the networks and leave the stage permanently.
Result: A unified message delivered by cooperative shills for the pentagon who are also financially tied to defense contractors and neocon partisan lobbying groups.
I can't decide if the "PSY-OP" is worse than the networks ignoring the conflicts of the analysts who they contract, or if the lockdown by the networks of this story of the network's betrayal of the public trust and FCC licensing violations committed by the networks is worse. They've given us military sponsored and controlled INFOMERCIALS while telling us they were still reporting the news....like Cronkite, Huntely-Brinkley, and Frank Reynolds used to do....
I would be surprised that the pentagon and the networks could act this boldly, but the behavior and words of a number of my fellow TFP members, over the past 44 months, helps convince me that not many notice or care too much about the extra effort of corporate and government leadership to transfer wealth, power, and our constitutional protections from us to themselves. Too much information....too much to read and keep track of. Not worth it, apparently.