Consultants sell out objectivity for access to Pentagon briefings. (Use one sound bite of consultant admitting to pressure to toe the line and sony pcg-v505 battery,sony pcga-bp2e battery one sound bite of consultant cut off for disagreeing with the administration view of the war.)

Geez, what’s the term called when the mass media are under strict direct control and can be relied upon never to stray from the party line? Or regimes that exercise more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy? Like methods that include the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats?

Gosh, it’s right on the tip of my tongue, ya know how when the leaders of the mass media are often politically compatible with the power elite? Geez why can’t I think of that term? It’s when the result is usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses? Hmmmm. Oh I got it…FASCISM!!!! Woohoo, finally got it. Wow, that took a while.

Welcome to the late great United States, please leave your individual thoughts, ideas of morality, competence, compassion, & constitutional law at the door.

They presented people with blatant conflicts of interest without making the conflict of interest clear (for examplt at a bare minimum by saying “General, X who makes his money as a lobbyist trading on his access to the pentagon, will now tell you if he agrees with the Defence departments official line.” each and every time they put general X on the air).

Obviously no network would do such a thing openly. They were in on the scam and planned to get away with it (as they did). This problem won’t be solved on January 20th. It will remain necessary to fight to force the networks to fire those of their managers who betrayed the public trust (that would be all of them).

Otherwise known as: the truth.

No-one could have anticipated we’d been played.

No one would contend that briefings should be provided to the press. No one would argue that having been a retired general, admiral or colonels. No one would argue that such status would probably give you some good internal sources from past relationships. Makes an easy sound bite for television or on the blog. We need to learn how to fight back with sound bites. I would suggest the following:

1. Consultants sell out objectivity for access to Pentagon briefings. (Use one sound bite of consultant admitting to pressure to toe the line and one sound bite of consultant cut off for disagreeing with the administration view of the war.)

2. Consultants sworn to secrecy over their role as propaganda mongers for the administration. (One or two quotes.)

3. Consultants hide propaganda role and relation to defense firms. (Quote of one or two consultants admitting that it gives them access to information that helps their firms and clients.)

4. Consultants used as propagandists also spy on the free press. (Couple quotes of the consultants providing advance information concerning news articles adverse to administration position.)

It is important to phrase the argument in terms of dishonesty (selling opinions), propaganda, secrecy and quid pro quo. Tie it to the administration’s views. The pentatgon may be the contact point but it is the partisan politicians pulling the strings.

And #3, I believe you answered your own question, in the first sentence of your post.