Kurtz: Media won’t cover Pentagon propaganda ‘because they are embarrassed.’
Kurtz: Media won’t cover Pentagon propaganda ‘because they are embarrassed.’
In a washingtonpost.com online chat today, the Post’s media critic Howard Kurtz was asked why the television news media have largely failed to report on the Pentagon propaganda operation revealed recently by the New York Times. Kurtz said the media is too embarrassed to report the story:
Toronto: Hi Howard — kudos for last Sunday’s focus on the New York Times’s Pentagon propaganda story. Why do you think the networks still are silent on this? The comments on Brian Williams’s blog are at a boiling point — I’m surprised NBC hasn’t shut it down yet!
Howard Kurtz: I can only conclude that the networks are staying away from what would otherwise be a legitimate news story because they are embarrassed about what some of their military analysts did or don’t want to give the controversy more prominence.
Later in the same online chat, Kurtz said, “The networks are ducking this one, big time.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
They should be embarrassed!! Wankers!
May 5th, 2008 at 5:26 pmIs Howie acting like he is not part of the problem?
May 5th, 2008 at 5:26 pmIzvestia and Tass had as much credibility as the American MSM these days.
May 5th, 2008 at 5:29 pmNot all networks are avoiding this story. PBS and NPR have given airtime to this story. Of course, NONE of the analysts PBS used were involved in this Pentagon/Tory Clark propaganda scheme.
Congress is NOT avoiding this story. Ike Skelton is on it. Let’s see if the COMMERCIAL NETWORKS are too embarrased to cover the hearings.
May 5th, 2008 at 5:29 pmAnd why are the networks allowed to function if they refuse to publish news? Shouldn’t they lose their broadcast licenses in this sort of case? Otherwise what purpose do the networks serve?
May 5th, 2008 at 5:34 pmThe corporate media is not embarrassed that they’ve become a propaganda outlet for the neocons - after all, that happened back in the 80’s with the death of the “Fairness Doctrine”.
They’re embarrassed that they got caught.
Bastids.
May 5th, 2008 at 5:43 pmnot only should they be embarrassed, but ashamed as well
May 5th, 2008 at 5:45 pmPBS and NPR are public news media. They are not owned by large corporations nor are they dependent upon advertising revenue to remain on the air. Note that the Republicans have been attempting to destroy the public stations for many years. NPR and PBS are becoming more dependent upon grants from corporations. Bush attempted to load the management of PBS with hand picked right wingers. This is exactly why we need to increase public funding of the public media. It is the only way that we can avoid full right wing control of the media.
BTW: One reason that Air America ran into problem was the concerted agreement of many corporations to ensure that their advertising would not be on Air America. Just one more example of the necessity of providing a truly neutral source for news.
May 5th, 2008 at 5:47 pmLater in the same online chat, Kurtz said, “The networks are ducking this one, big time.”
The corporate media ducks everything this administration does from the average citizen.
Public airwaves my a$$!
May 5th, 2008 at 5:54 pmEmbarassed. Exactly. They are embarassed at their complicity in propaganda.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:00 pmThey know that the voters will figure out their part in the whole messy affair and stop watching because they became the governments mouth piece. The media has become the lap dog of the Bush administration and are trying to install John McCain as President for the same reason. No one seem to notice that when McCain had his big BBQ at his Nevada Ranch most if not all of the media who cover politics attended. They ate drank and were merry because they felt like the lap dogs they have become.
The media apparently is tried of reporting the news and like Fox wants to start inventing it as it goes. This is exactly why the German people didn’t stand up to the evil that Hitler did before and during WWII. Our media used to thumb it’s nose at PARDA and TASS the official news agencies of the old Soviet Union for being a mouthpiece for the communist party. What’s the difference if our media is bought and paid for by the Bush administration. What’s sad about it is they are bought so easily. The bribe of choice seems to be access which was proven by the way Judy Miller sold out for Karl Rove and the administration.
The people who work in the newsrooms of MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC, including management should be ashamed to call themselves journalist. There is no way the real newsmen like Kronkite and Brinkley and Edward R. Morrow would have sold out for mire access. They have become lazy and want the easy scoop which access provides. Also they cover up and report important issues as this report suggests and only want the party in power wants. That’s why they have become the “talking heads” instead of being journalist. Look at what CNN has done in recent days, hired two former Busy loyalists. Why? Is it because Bush is the worst President in US history and we need to have his top advisors telling us what they think?
May 5th, 2008 at 6:01 pmBah. They’re completely incapable of being embarrassed. “Look over there! Scarlett’s engaged!”
May 5th, 2008 at 6:02 pmJaneDoe Says:
And why are the networks allowed to function if they refuse to publish news? Shouldn’t they lose their broadcast licenses in this sort of case? Otherwise what purpose do the networks serve?
They serve as the propaganda arm of the republican party. Easy. Think abot it: General Electric owns NBC. GE makes 1000 times more money - through their defense contacts (submarines, jet engines, data services, etc..) than NBC. If GE wants to sell its engiens and subs to the government, you do not piss of the buyers in that government. You cater to them all ways and in all manners. If the government wants NBC to fib to us, they will. NBC knows it’s defense business would dry up in no time. Can’t have that. So they have decided to let the republic twist in the wind, while they earn their short term, quarterly bonuses.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:08 pmMore evidence of the free market failing to regulate itself.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:12 pmNo sense in reminding the viewers of their complicity in inciting a war of aggression. Could hurt the ratings, and possibly jeopardize future access (to Pentagon contracts).
May 5th, 2008 at 6:14 pmThey are bought and paid for, they wont cover it because they are complicit..
May 5th, 2008 at 6:14 pmNPR used to be a good source. But since their funding comes from the government, they know that their funding comes from the government and is at the whim of the government. I don’t see them as a neutral informer.
IMHO, the only truly neutral, and honest, source of news is DemocracyNow and the others shown on FSTV or LINKtv (available on DISH - not sure where else).
NPR has some good stuff, so don’t get me wrong, I am not completely dissing them, but the fact that they are funded at the pleasure of the president (basically) and we have all seen how that has played out.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:17 pmNo, not ducking it, their corporate masters were told by the Bush/Cheney Crime Family to not push it, cement overshoes or anthrax anyone?
May 5th, 2008 at 6:20 pmCrap. They should be too embarrassed to show their stupid, sycophantic faces - anywhere.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:20 pmBTW, Free Speech TV is running a funding drive now. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE support them. They are struggling and that is one source which we need to keep on air.
Even if it’s only a few bucks, please support this fine news source.
http://www.freespeech.org/ videodb/ index.php?action=detail&video_id=11094&browse=0
May 5th, 2008 at 6:20 pmMs_Joanne,
Check out the BBC. No corporate corruption. They are a free voice in the world.
dixie
May 5th, 2008 at 6:22 pmThere was a time where you could believe most of what came out of a newscasters mouth - mainly national news. Since the 1980’s, the networks wanted the news division to earn a profit, rather than being a community service sort of business model. As the networks demanded more and more profit from the news division - something which was very new to them - they were forced to leave the decidedly boring ‘nightly news’ format and started becoming more of an entertainment division. Cronkite, we need you now, more than ever.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:24 pmI watch and read BBC. Also http://www.spiegel.de/international/ is a very good source.
More people should read news from around the world, not just for a world perspective, but because they are more honest than the corporate media here.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:33 pmSo it’s time to boycott the whoring mainstream media once and for all. Hit them where it hurts. Don’t watch these liars any longer.
May 5th, 2008 at 7:00 pmLet’s see.. This is surprising because…
The media has been so on the ball otherwise?
Network news and political coverage in particular is getting better all the time?
More and more people are reading newspapers and watching TV news?
Er… Not so much.
May 5th, 2008 at 7:05 pmsatirev, I am not directing this at just you, but, please EVERYONE, stop calling them the MSM. I know that’s a, well, mainstream term, but they are not mainstream, they are corporate media.
Calling them anything else gives them a credibility they do not deserve.
Corporate Media (CM)…call a spade a spade, and call them the $hits that they are.
/rant off
May 5th, 2008 at 7:06 pmMSM is to embarrased my a$$, they will not report anything as big and as awful as this scandal because they will incur the rath of Dick(darth vader).The MSM are more entertaniment than news so why report it, besides The rev. Wright show is bigger in their eyes, they are just to busy trying to discredit Obama because they know he is going to kick a$$ in November.
May 5th, 2008 at 7:26 pmI think that Eric Alterman’s SCLM (So Called Liberal Media) works pretty well.
The current upset over the role of the SCLM on whether they are actually reporting news and their role in spouting the administration’s line reminds me of what was going on in reporting the casualties in Viet Nam. After some “engagement” the US Command would say that some number of North Vietnamese or guerillas were killed. North Viet Nam would then say that it was actually some number much lower. About a week later, the Russians would say that the number was some number more than North Viet Nam had said, but much less than the US official number, not necessarily 1/2 way between. Then about another week later, the US would quietly revise their official number to be something very close to the Russian number.
May 5th, 2008 at 7:37 pmOur local NPR station broadcasts the BBC overnite, as well as some CBC programs (Canada). They also sometimes swap reporters covering stories on the ground. In my opinion , the Best on the ground reporting these days ,is on the RADIO.
Our local PBS station , during their pledge week, is reairing the Frontline Program “Bush’s War”. If the information contained in this excellent program were actually presented to the American Public WHEN It OCCURRED….Bush would never have stampeded America into invading Iraq…and America would have avoided the fiasco that is occuring.
Free Speech TV, with Amy Goodman, has also done some Excellent work. Their program linking US Business ties to Nazi Germany, IBM in Particular, was a real eye opener.
I guess my point is ,that We no longer Need to rely on the Corporate Media.
May 5th, 2008 at 8:06 pmwrong. they are complicit.
May 5th, 2008 at 9:17 pmOne wonders why their ratings are going down, down, down. They are irrelevant. People don’t have time for this crap. And the networks are possibly paid to do the bidding of this administration. Or at least bribed to do so or lose their access. Follow the money and find many guilty parties. Are there any reporters out there, making 6-8 figures, who know how to ask the questions that need to be asked of the people who know the truth? Howard Kurtz isn’t one of them, obviously.
May 5th, 2008 at 10:01 pm.
ABCNNBCBS&FOXPRAVDA are embarrassed?
What ever for… hiring shills?
.
May 6th, 2008 at 12:51 am.
Since when is PROPAGANDA embarrassing?
.
May 6th, 2008 at 12:52 am