New York Post Compares Robert Greenwald to Nazi Propagandist
By on Nov 4th, 2005 at 10:08 am
New York Post Compares Robert Greenwald to Nazi Propagandist
Filmmaker Robert Greenwald is releasing a documentary that is critical of Wal-Mart. According to Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post, that makes him no better than Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister in Nazi Germany:
Instead of a response from the retailer, “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price” (which is receiving a vanity booking in theaters before hitting DVD on Nov. 14) edits in promotional footage of Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott in a way that holds him up to ridicule – a low-blow technique that would bring a smile to Joseph Goebbels.
If you want to see the film and make up your own mind, check out the official website.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
I am really bored with Nazi references on all
November 4th, 2005 at 10:15 amsides. It really is kind of embarassing if
that’s where your argument leads.
Yeah, and the NY Daily News is reporting that Bonnano crime family has its “hooks” into the NY Post.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/362426p-308527c.html
LOLOL
November 4th, 2005 at 10:18 amYea but this is the NY Post we’re talking about.
They don’t even pay attention to it in NY, why should we out in the rest of the country.
November 4th, 2005 at 10:23 amOK, NYP – apparently you didn’t get the f-ing memo… no more Nazi comparisons be EITHER side! capische????
November 4th, 2005 at 10:31 amThanks Pete, I appreciate the effort!
November 4th, 2005 at 10:33 amAgreed, all the Nazi references just diminish what really happened not too long ago. We shouldn’t throw that around, it is classless and in bad form. Even if it is easy to compare.
November 4th, 2005 at 10:34 amGeorge W. Bush: “Mr Greenwald, My Grandpa knew Joseph Goebbels, and you sir, are no Joseph Goebbels”
November 4th, 2005 at 10:46 amThis morning’s NY Post……50 cents.
Rupert Murdoch’s media empire…….100 bazillion dollars.
A Rupert Murdoch publication making critical remarks by using a Joseph Goebbels reference…..priceless.
November 4th, 2005 at 10:52 amOh yeah? Well Stephen Hayes of the propaganda Weekly Standard is on Diane Rehm right now. He’s one of these pieces of crap like Santorum and Kristol who shapes his delivery depending on whom he is talking. When these thugs get on NPR they pull out their “introspective, measured” tone which is quite a contrast to their heated, over-the-top propaganda tone they have on Fox. These guys are flakes. You could do a dissertation on delivery as it relates to mental stability with these Neocons.
Remember, we need to email to Sugarland Churches the text of the “Wacko” remarks by Delay lobbyist. I’ve done 30. Help me out.
November 4th, 2005 at 10:53 amAren’t we talking about a FILM? I thought Michaels Moore’s 9/11 film was a great Editrial Cartoon, but, IT WAS STILL JUST A FILM! Doesn’t propaganda come from governments, you know like the Armstrong Williams stuff. I thought Murdoch was of the Adam Smith school of let the markets decide. Sounds like the Waltons are concerned about their market forces and made a couple of phone calls to ole Ruppert. BOO-HOOOO.
November 4th, 2005 at 10:58 amThe essential ingredient for a piece of film to be called “propoganda”, is for the filmmaker to be in a position of POWER… call Greenwald a muckraker, but he can never be a propogandist…
The beauty (or ugliness) of it is, NYPost is in a position of power, so maligning individuals calling them propogandists is the most emblematic example of propoganda ever devised…!
November 4th, 2005 at 11:06 amDissent is not propaganda.
Armstrong Williams, now that was propaganda…
November 4th, 2005 at 11:11 amReally good point #11. If a King tells you that being poor is good, don’t trust his word and raise hell!!
November 4th, 2005 at 11:14 ami don’t think the criticism is fair. Think Progress refers to Lumenick’s review as “Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post’, but Lumenick is a self professed liberal who has favorly reviewed “Bowling For Columbine” and other left-leaning films he agrees with. Read his review of “Going Upriver” or “Good Night and Good Luck”. Is Lumenick complaining that Greenwald took a “Nazi-like” tactic or one of a cheap propangandist? How many well known propangadists are there when you want to compare them? Can he agree with the premise of the film while complaining about the filmmaking itself? Because that’s exactly what he does if you read the review. Don’t fall for the slippery slope arguments (…then Greenwald must be exactly like Goebbels) that conservatives use all the time. Liberals who think for themselves should be commended for not falling in lockstep like the current right wing crop.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:15 amGabby Johnson is right! (*) No more Nazi comparisons on either side. It’s too easy to sling them and rarely any real relevance.
I can, however, forgive mentions of how the president’s grandfather acquired their family wealth.
(*) If you’ve never seen “Blazing Saddles”, you won’t understadn the Gabby Johnson reference.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:18 amIs Murdock an American citizen or is his citizenship still with Australia?
November 4th, 2005 at 11:23 amOh the irony! The Post is accusing someone of being a propagandist? And who would have imagined the Post would be in cahoots with Wal-Mart? Shocking! I agree with others that the use of the term “Nazi” diminishes what happened in Europe 60-70 years ago. But the propaganda tactics used by this administration, and by neo-con corporate execs who control large portions of the media, bear a remarkable similarity with those despicable evildoers of the Third Reich. I suggest that the term “Rovian†be used in the same way as “Naziâ€, since he has clearly studied their tactics and applied them to modern day society in a brilliant, albeit evil, way.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:26 amI call the NYP on a violation of Godwin’s Law. They have automatically forfeited the argument.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:29 amHow sweet. A Nazi-owned newspaper compares Mr Greenwald to anything Nazi. For years we’ve been bombarded by the same right-wing proproganda. Just as
we’re starting to finally win, these maniacs have the nerve to cry and say it’s not fair.
NEW YORK POST! LEARN TO LOSE LIKE AN ADULT AND LIVE WITH IT!
November 4th, 2005 at 11:31 am#16 I believe that Mr. Murdoch became an American citizen a few years ago. I have no doubt in my mind that this was primarily to get around foreign ownership laws regarding media in America. I’m sure he despises paying taxes to our government. He just likes to be a beneficiary of it.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:53 amMurdoch became an american citizen with the help of Ronnie Reagan in the 80’s….anyone suprised by that?
November 4th, 2005 at 11:55 amI was just thinking how stupid this is this morning. We are a target audience now.
November 4th, 2005 at 12:15 pm#20.
November 4th, 2005 at 12:50 pmMurdoch probably doesn’t pay any American taxes – he’s filthy rich.
Murdoch is a classic corporatist (fascist for those unfamiliar with the term). It’s actually part of the pathology of Nazis to claim everyone else is one, while they actually implement their policies. It keeps everyone ‘off their game’ from a propagandist and manipulative perspective. Or so they believe…
November 4th, 2005 at 1:03 pmIn any case, expect especially Fundamentalist/Primitive churches to screen Wally World’s counterattack propaganda film (extremely low-budget, from what I’ve heard) before too long.
Not to mention Sinclair Broadcasting Group, in the guise of “news commentary.”
Tape at eleven….
November 4th, 2005 at 1:14 pmThe rise and fall of Nazism is an important part of our recent history. To try to keep it out of the discourse is revisionist and smacks of holocaust denial, even if the ADL tries it. Hitler and Nazis get no special treatment from me.
November 4th, 2005 at 1:26 pmi’m with you #26, AAF4Jeebus – there are a lot of people who stiil remember those horrors and, in hindsight, the events that led up to them – if putting today’s happenings in that correct context sets off the internal alarms in people, then so be it, all the better for the purpose…there are way too many correlations to NOT compare that past with this present…people need to wake up, and very soon…
November 4th, 2005 at 1:45 pmTo those who have said things…
No, I won’t give up my comparing the bushco regime with the Nazi’s under Hitler. The comarisons are too close, too ripe and too true. Sorry in advance if this pisses you off.
November 4th, 2005 at 2:49 pmThere was an old UUSENET rule, the first one to call the other person in a debate a nazi, lost the debate. I think that applies still.
November 4th, 2005 at 3:06 pmFor what it is worth, I agree that the Nazi comparison is becoming a bit cliche’, but let’s call the “ugly baby” an “ugly baby”. I agree with Kindness that it is frighteningly appropriate, and the similarities are SO close as to seem, in may instances, identical.
November 4th, 2005 at 3:41 pmJennty, Katy, Kindness: I believe that, if you’re comparing aspects of this administration’s policies/characteristics/attitudes with actual policies/characteristics/attitudes of Hitler and Nazis, the reference is apt and no one should be offended. Of course, if one says “NAZI!” as a knee-jerk reaction, for no other reason than to be insulting, and without any comparison or historical reference, that’s where the “first one to say Nazi loses.” Does that seem correct?
November 4th, 2005 at 3:47 pmAn accusation of “propaganda†and “Nazism†coming from one of Rupert Murdoch’s media properties is the ultimate irony: News Corp is practically the official Republican communications outlet, owner of the Fox Channels, Fox News (the “anti-liberal†news channel), the New York Post, The Weekly Standard, The Sun, among others. And yet, here they are, accusing others of lack of impartiality.
Someone should remind Lumenick that to be able to spew propaganda, one has to be in power in the first place. Someone should also remind him that propaganda is the concerted effort by a government to deceive its population, by publishing falsehoods and half-truths –which is the kind of (mis)information the US got, courtesy of its government, on the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. And still gets to justify the continuing occupation of that country.
On what media outlet can the US government rely to overwhelm the American public with all this (mis)information, broadcasted in the most uncritical, jingoistic way possible? Answer: News Corp.
Dissent is not propaganda. Disagreement would not make Goebbels proud. Quite the contrary. People at News Corp are projecting when they accuse others of being Nazis, fascists, and of spewing propaganda.
November 4th, 2005 at 4:10 pmI think there are two other clarifications that need to me made. First, that media attention is power. That that power can only exist in government is false. Certainly no one would argue that the anti-Kerry film “Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal” wasn’t propaganda, and the fact that it was propaganda prevented its full airing before the 2004 election.
The other point that needs clarifying is that Lumenick’s Goebbels comparison is based upon the film’s depiction of CEO Lee Scott, i.e. one aspect of the film, not the whole film or the case against Walmart. I haven’t seen the film, and think that judging the comparison without seeing the film doesn’t do anything for the debate on this matter.
November 4th, 2005 at 4:37 pm#34
“(…) First, that media attention is power. That that power can only exist in government is false.(…)”
In the US, there is no such thing as an independent media. The media are big conglomerates that pander to, and lobby the government in order to gain favour and get laws approved that will benefit their bottom line.
To make sure that their interests will be kept in mind, these big conglomerates hire former high-ranking government officials to be their highly paid executives and board members.
The anti-Kerry film you mention actually defeats the point you are trying to make: It was going to be aired by Sinclair Communications –hardly an independent media outlet. This is the outlet that refused to air
an episode of Nightline about fallen soldiers, fearing it might “undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq”: http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Media_control:_Sinclair_Broadcast_Group&curid=7635diff=0oldid=0&printable=yes
In 2004, Sinclair Communications donated 98% of its in political contributions to GOP candidates:
http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/affalert187.shtml
The film was produced by by Carlton Sherwood, a former Reagan administration appointee. The Republican PR firm Shirley & Banister Public Affairs handled handling PR efforts for the documentary and its producer: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stolen_Honor:_Wounds_That_Never_Heal
This is a media outlet whose interests are clearly aligned with those of the Republican party. You can hardly get any more government-sponsored than this.
I stand by what I said: Goebbels’ efforts were directed to deceive an entire population into conformity. He did not foster or (the horror!) advocate disagreement or dissent. And so the comparison is invalid. I do not need to see the film to smell a rat.
November 4th, 2005 at 5:27 pmOk how about a litmus test for Propaganda, being ,Were tax payers dollars being spent on formulating or distributing a particular message? Private funds should be able to produce something that may have a particular opinion and let the market decide its fate. Time to flush this one.
November 4th, 2005 at 5:39 pmNo, I’m not carrying the comparison in that direction. My point was that the Lumenick quote was about a technique used in a film documentary, and some arguments (including the original one) broaden the accusation in a conspiratorial way, and miss the simple argument against dishonest depiction.
All I am saying is this review is not a ham fisted attempt by Murdoch or the New York Post to attack the left. I am not saying they don’t do it on a regular basis. I am not defending them in any way. I am saying that regardless of Walmart’s practices, which Lumenick wholeheartedly disagrees with, he has the right to say that the film sucks anyway. Lumenick isn’t disagreeing with the message of the movie, only the way that message is conveyed to the audience—that there is enough dirt on Walmart’s practices without having to resort to a cheap shot.
November 4th, 2005 at 6:40 pm#37
Now you’re talking…
Of course Lumenick has the right to say whatever he wants about the movie –I don’t think anyone in this blog is advocating censorship.
Lumenick should probably have found a better way to make his point: As much as I sympathised with Moore and “Fahrenheit 911″, I had a very hard time when he showed a bunch of screaming monkeys on the screen while talking about Morocco (I think it was Morocco).
Same thought: Moore did not need to put down Moroccans to make his point. I was deeply disappointed –but it is a far cry from making Goebbels proud. I suspect it is the same with this Wal-Mart movie.
November 4th, 2005 at 7:29 pmI went to get a Job at Wal-Mart in Plano Texas,Just as a Janitor or a stock person, I was born in the U.S.A. in 1952. I have been working most of adult life.Anyway, I filled out the application, which had on it a personality test of about a hundred questions.I just could not believe the questions that they asked. It was like they were trying to trick me into answering the wrong way. Anyway I did not get a call back and was not hired, for seven dollars an hour. But its ok for me to be a customer and deal with the mostly Russian people that they hire. Im sure they just came to this country because they dont speck a word of english. Just attemp to ask an associate where somthing is and most of the time you get a I dont know. This I found to be sad.Thinking about it now, they can keep their job. I am an american and I dont give up. You got that Wal-mart.
November 4th, 2005 at 9:45 pmThe New York Post was either unaware, or it simply chose to ignore all of the criticism leveled against Wal-Mart for using a photo of a Nazi book burning in an ad that appeared in a Flagstaff,Arizona publication. This once again illustrates the wisdom behind the saying,”Those who can not remember the past,are condemned to repeat it.”
November 4th, 2005 at 11:13 pm… Re: #27 – I’m with you , katy ! When I lived in Chicago , people I considered my ” Aunt ” and Uncle ” ( Names will be withheld , of course ) had been in one of those living nightmares called ‘ camps ‘ , and were saved by our Allied soldiers . I’ve seen the tattooed numbers on their wrists ( and my ” Aunt ” is a tiny woman , and looking at the pictures of when she was young , she’s like a blonde sprite , tiny and delicate – what kind of ANIMALS do that to a terrified girl ?!? ) . Now , knowing that , and combining it with the HISTORICAL FACT ( go look it up in the HISTORY books for yourselves ) that the Bush family SUPPORTED THE NAZI REGIME by employing SLAVE CAMP LABOR ( the SAME kind of camps that my ” Aunt ” and ” Uncle ” WERE PRISONERS in ) , how ANYONE can defend the BushCo. legacy with a straight face is INSANE !!! …
November 5th, 2005 at 3:03 pmWith all this talk of Nazi-ism and the sins of the political fathers, who out there has boycotted the Ford motor company??? Has no one heard of “The International Jew”? Why are you all so quick to point fingers at the Bush family? Why is there not a word about the other famous and successful families and companies who have been involved with supporting the Nazi Party? It seems that this thread is no longer about Wal-mart and pros/cons, but about personal political agendas. I’m not suggesting that anyone forget about the past. I’m not promoting the extermination of a race. (By the way…why do people overlook the fact that IT WASN’T ONLY THE JEWS THAT WERE KILLED!) I’m simply stating that this is supposedly a thread pertaining to Wal-mart, so if you feel you must drag Roe vs Wade or the Iraqi conflict in here somewhere, please think twice. Unless, of course, you subscribe to the theory that Wal-mart is really controlling the whole political spectrum and that Sam Walton was a reptile from El-Kamino. Then, by all means, have at it.
November 6th, 2005 at 12:19 amEvery single columnist in the Post, with the exception of John Crudele, would bring a smile to the face of Goebbels. Malkin, Novak, Lowry, Peters, etc.
November 6th, 2005 at 7:42 amLumenick gave 4-stars to Bowling for Columbine; an odd thing to do for a “right-wing” hatchetman
November 6th, 2005 at 10:17 amIs the whole wal-mart discussion now a left-righrt issue???,i ma on the right and against wal-mart !!!,
November 6th, 2005 at 2:33 pmTo compare a film about Wal Mart to propaganda is rediculous. Hitler would have loved Target… and there’s no way a self respecting nazi would ever wade through the white trash at your average Wal Mart. C’MON, what are you guys? Nazis? (Marco continues to bait Ryan into the open, Ryan sniffs the air but then hesitates……)
November 6th, 2005 at 5:42 pmI thought the movie was quite predictable. Seeing the bigger picture in 1 sitting was the real treat. I will wait for the defense of this film. But I’m afraid that the numbers and stats will out weigh the kind words of good intention. It was sad to see the ghost towns of America, the crime outside the store, the empty Wal Marts, and the failure to help their workers. I hope the Union can reach this corporation that looks like a sweatshop. Go see this film and decide for yourself.
November 7th, 2005 at 11:03 ampeace in every step.
I am really bored with Nazi references on all
sides. It really is kind of embarassing if
that’s where your argument leads.
Comment by afterthought
There’s only one side that uses the Nazi argument to the point of idiocy….but that’s what they are, idiots.
November 7th, 2005 at 12:24 pmright- the left are not idiots, just well intentioned goofballs like the rest of us (except they have no sense of humor…)
November 8th, 2005 at 12:23 amJared- You know, I’ve seen what the unions did to GM and I don’t suppose we might want to rethink that idea?
I know what you mean. Bunch of friggin goofballs buying into this crap. This is what is wrong with America when people think they can drop out of HS, get a job mopping floors, and they should be able to live well and retire with that.
If Wal-Mart paid more, they could hire better and smarter employees, and then these that they would displace would once again be without a job. This is simply supply and demand folks. If these folks were worth more, they could get more elsewhere and then Wal-Mart would have to pay more to keep them.
They are mostly honest hard working folks, but they really aren’t worth more. People with no education, work experience, or those who cannot or will not handle a job that requires extensive thinking and planning still need a place to work.
November 9th, 2005 at 10:23 amI have had it with everybody using nazism as a common smear. The Nazis were monsters who may have led to the deaths (directly and indirectly) of 50,000,000 people from 1933-1945, and whose ideology continues to add to the butcher’s bill. Whether you applaud or abhor the tactics of Robert Greenwald (and on this one, I wholeheartedly support him — if WalMart were to disappear totally tomorrow, I wouldn’t shed a tear) at least give him some respect and tailor your arguments to his ideas and not his person. I do not like Michael Moore, but I would never accuse him of being another Ilya Eherenburg, which is as bad a smear.
November 9th, 2005 at 10:54 amYou know, where I live, stores flock around an opening Walmart, and all seem to do well. So I don’t know about this thing of supposedly driving companies out of business. 95% of new small businesses fail in the first 5 years anyway, regardless of whether they compete with Walmart or not. So how is it then Walmart’s fault when they do fail? I guess you have to have some evil genie to blame for your incompetance.
Um, and last I checked, Walmart wasn’t making anyone work there, and I think you’d go an awful long way to find anyone who was surprised on their first paycheck to find they weren’t making a thousand per week. When you agree to work for X amount and they pay you X amount, it sounds like everyone has fulfilled their agreement.
November 9th, 2005 at 11:12 amThis is hilarious. I compete with Walmart and I love them. I own a pool store and they sell the same chemicals and supplies that I do and for less. So I sell fewer of those, but then when people screw it up because of lack of expertise, then they come to me and pay even more than they would have the first time.
Walmart doesn’t destroy business, it creates it. I agree with the poster who said that companies flock to Walmart locations to open up. They employ your kids, your wife who doesn’t want a full time job, and they employ my neighbor who simply had not been able to get work elsewhere. She’s grateful.
These people can go hang themselves. They are just a few more Hollywood idiots with more ivory tower viewpoints to sell to the masses, and it makes perfect cud for MoveOn cattle to chew on. How did Walmart get to be a conservative or a liberal thing. Get a life!
November 9th, 2005 at 11:26 amCouldn’t care less about them. However, businesses come and go. My brother in law got “put out by Walmart” as he put it. Yet the reason was he was the only guy for 30 miles for over 20 years and ripping off the public. He’d have even made it fine lowering his prices to what Walmart was except he’d pissed so many people off, he could have given product away and they still wouldn’t have done business with him. Mr. Hollywood needs to go out and get a real job and quit whining about others.
November 9th, 2005 at 2:55 pmexchange rate dollar
transformational institutional caused maternally uniprocessor primers criers Dreyfuss,us canada exchange rate http://www.realestatehotbuys.com/us-canada-exchange-rate.html
November 23rd, 2005 at 9:15 pmPlaying the Nazi card…
Commenter Mike Sunday:Routinely referring to your political opponents as “Nazis” is not a tactic designed to foster bipartisan debate or problem solving. Yet its a tactic that your side uses routinely.Why don’t we do this in chronological order? Bil…
February 13th, 2006 at 8:53 pm[...] Think Progress New York Post Compares Robert Greenwald to Nazi Hard-hitting research and analysis that advances progressive ideas and policies New York Post Compares Robert Greenwald to Nazi Propagandist. Filmmaker Robert Greenwald is releasing [...]
March 4th, 2007 at 2:05 am[...] Think Progress New York Post Compares Robert Greenwald to Nazi Hard-hitting research and analysis that advances progressive ideas and policies New York Post Compares Robert Greenwald to Nazi Propagandist. Filmmaker Robert Greenwald is releasing [...]
April 12th, 2007 at 5:09 pmhalle berry and billy bob thornton
Man i just love your blog, keep the cool posts comin..
March 21st, 2008 at 4:56 amYajaira
they begin to see it as possible.
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:19 amGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 10:22 am