We all know that the MSM is feeding us the Corporate version of the news. That is why many of us are here in the Liberal Blogosphere. That is why many watch Link T.V., MyDD and Amy Goodman. That is why Chomsky is a liberal icon. Why? The MSM has abbrogated its responsibility to real Journalistic coverage.
My personal quest for alternative news and reporting came in 2002 after the embedding of troops by the DoD and News organizations with the invasion of Iraq.
News-oriented journalism is sometimes described as the "first rough draft of history" (attributed to Phil Graham). Many organizations claim proud traditions of holding government officials and institutions accountable to the public, while media critics have raised questions about holding the press itself accountable.
My comments will encompass the critic's perspective of the War on Terror.
Effect number one.Corporations, Conservatives and Confidential sources are creating our news today. Level one consumers gobble it up as chicken feed.Level two consumers such as Liberal blogs disect, refute and debate it to a fault. Level three consumers ignore it all.
According to The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosensteil, there are nine elements of journalism. In order for a journalist to fulfill their duty of providing the people with the information they need to be free and self-governing, they must follow these guidelines.
1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.
2. Its first loyalty is to the citizens.
3. Its essence is discipline of verification.
4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.
5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.
6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.
7. It must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant.
8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.
9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.
Effect number two Instead of creating the news and framing the debate, we follow the propaganda and the resulting discussion.
From TMP Muckraker
The Iran-U.S. PR battle is in full swing.
With word that the U.S. plans to offer public proof of Iran's hostile role in Iraq sometime this week, Iran's ambassador to Iraq suddenly agreed to an interview with The New York Times....
And Qumi had something else up his sleeve for the U.S. -- following quickly on the Bush administration's confirmation Friday of their new strategy of "kill or capture" for Iranian agents in Iraq --: news that Iran planned to open a national bank in Iraq, "in effect creating a new Iranian financial institution right under the Americans’ noses," and that Iran had made offers of "military assistance" to Iraq.
All this was news to the U.S., it seemed, who would not respond to Qumi's statements until they'd made their way through "official routes."
(Thanks to mini mum for that little gem)
Official routes? Hmmm. Here's a story for those interested in creating real news and asking real questions. Since the Bush administration is preparing it's official case against Iran. Shouldn't we scoop the story and be making ours first?
President Bush has talked about mistakes his administration committed in Iraq. He doesn’t specify, so we should assume that one of them is invading Iraq under false pretexts. Or that after the invasion the Iraqi Army, the security forces and many government leaders and autocrats were dismissed overnight, and let go with their expertise, secrets and guns? Or was the biggest mistake, after the invasion, turning the government over to people who are known to be Iranian agents like Ahmad Chalabi, Al-Jafari, Al-Hakim and Al-Maliki?
Today, some 150,000 American soldiers, not including the 20,000 extra troops due soon, are virtual hostages in Iraq. With the stroke of a Fatwah, Tehran can, in a minute, put them all in jeopardy. The Iraqi Shiite militias as well as the sectarian government, the US-trained police and the rest of the Ministry of Interior forces are all loyal to Tehran.
This has caused many Sunni Saudis concern and outrage over the single handed give away in Sunni Iraq to Shia Iranian interests while demonizing and sabre rattling against Tehran. Cheney's speculated visit last month to Saudi Arabia underscored the rumors of wealthy Saudis financing the Sunni Insurgency in Baghdad. We will have to assume some hidden friends-foes understanding if we are to explain the unexplainable in American foreign policy. Take for example, calling Iran the axis of evil, then delivering Iraq, Palestine, Syria and Lebanon to her on a silver plate a la Hezbollah. Al-Maliki, like Ibrahim Al-Jafari before him, came from Iran. Link for Documentation
With Sunni ally Pakistan harboring the Taliban and Sunni ally Saudi Arabia sympathetic to Sunni insurgents in Iraq (no followup reporting to allegations of rich Saudis funding the insurgency in Iraq); why is this administration accusing Iran?
Effect number three Finding credible sources is a challenge. I have been googling all over the Internet looking for analysis on my story. Unable to do so, I asked the maid... who is Iranian. She's the one who explained it to me.
Effect number four: News from the top down vs. reporting from the bottom up.
From Wikipedia:
In the 1920s, as modern journalism was just taking form, writer Walter Lippmann and American philosopher John Dewey debated over the role of journalism in a democracy. Their differing philosophies still characterize a debate about the role of journalism in society and the nation-state.
Lippmann understood that journalism's role at the time was to act as a mediator or translator between the public and policymaking elites. The journalist became the middleman. When elites spoke, journalists listened and recorded the information, distilled it, and passed it on to the public for their consumption. His reasoning behind this was that the public was not in a position to deconstruct a growing and complex flurry of information present in modern society, and so an intermediary was needed to filter news for the masses. Lippman put it this way: The public is not smart enough to understand complicated, political issues. Furthermore, the public was too consumed with their daily lives to care about complex public policy. Therefore the public needed someone to interpret the decisions or concerns of the elite to make the information plain and simple. That was the role of journalists. Lippmann believed that the public would affect the decision making of the elite with their vote. In the meantime, the elite (i.e. politicians, policy makers, bureacrats, scientists, etc.) would keep the business of power running. In Lippman's world, the journalist's role was to inform the public of what the elites were doing. It was also to act as a watchdog over the elites as the public had the final say with their votes. Effectively that kept the public at the bottom of the power chain, catching the flow of information that is handed down from experts/elites.
Dewey, on the other hand, believed the public was not only capable of understanding the issues created or responded to by the elite, it was in the public forum that decisions should be made after discussion and debate. When issues were thoroughly vetted, then the best ideas would bubble to the surface. Dewey believed journalists not only had to inform the public, but should report on issues differently than simply passing on information. In Dewey's world, a journalist's role changed. Dewey believed that journalists should take in the information, then weigh the consequences of the policies being enacted by the elites on the public. Over time, his idea has been implemented in various degrees, and is more commonly known as "community journalism."
This concept of Community Journalism is at the center of new developments in journalism. In this new paradigm, journalists are able to engage citizens and the experts/elites in the proposition and generation of content. It's important to note that while there is an assumption of equality, Dewey still celebrates expertise. Dewey believes the shared knowledge of many is far superior to a single individual's knowledge. Experts and scholars are welcome in Dewey's framework, but there is not the hierarchical structure present in Lippman's understanding of journalism and society. According to Dewey, conversation, debate, and dialogue lie at the heart of a democracy.
While Lippman's journalistic philosophy might be more acceptable to government leaders, Dewey's approach is a better descriptor of how many journalists see their role in society, and, in turn, how much of society expects journalists to function. Americans, for example, may criticize some of the excesses committed by journalists, but they tend to expect journalists to serve as watchdogs on government, businesses and other actors, enabling people to make informed
Another Gem fromColorado Luis: (the smoke screen)
No Colorado newspapers reported on U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard's effort to abolish the federal minimum wage through an amendment to the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, even though some did publish articles about another Allard amendment to the same bill.
In conclusion, we will be witnessing the Bush Administration's rationale in coming days for the case against Iran. The MSM will be throwing up its daily fog. Hopefully some thoughtful analyisis and trickle down reporting will allow for us the scoop the story before it is converted to propaganda and it's insidious effects.