By Max J. Castro                                                                      Read Spanish Version
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

The Bush administration has made a mess of many things, from the Iraq war to Katrina. Yet there is one area in which Bush and his people have met with, at least, limited success -- namely the manipulation of public opinion, especially when it comes to the “war on terror.”

In this regard, the selling of the Iraq war by exacerbating the fears and channeling the rage of the American people after 9-11 was a tour de force. Much of the mainstream media collaborated, in one way or another, with this endeavor by failing to examine dubious administration claims, passing on propaganda as fact, embedding its reporters with American troops, adopting the official language, and shamelessly cheerleading. While even in the mainstream media there always have been individual journalists who questioned the administration’s story, overall the media’s complicity in the war began to wane only when the debacle of Iraq became too obvious to ignore.

Now, a fresh New York Times investigation has revealed an outrageous and previously unreported Bush administration campaign to influence public opinion on Iraq and the war on terror through the media (“Message Machine Behind Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand,” by David Barstow, April 20, 2008).

The Times story details how the administration and the Defense Department have and continue to use the talking heads that appear on television in the guise of unbiased military “analysts” to shape the portrayal of the war in the media.

Based on extensive interviews, the Times uncovered what amounts to a massive and well-orchestrated psychological warfare operation perpetrated by the administration and the Pentagon. In this case, however, the targets of the psychological warfare operation were not citizens of an enemy state; the target was the American people.

Here is the gist of the story presented in last Sunday’s edition of The New York Times:

“To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as ‘military analysts’ whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.

“Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance… ”

In order to ensure that the retired military officers used as analysts by the television networks and cable channels to do its bidding, the administration not only has employed the granting or denying of access to officials and information -- a tool frequently used to influence reporters -- but a powerful financial weapon as well. “Most of the analysts,” the New York Times reports, “have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.”

The conclusions of the Times examination, which used both records and interviews, reveal the workings of a propaganda campaign the paper describes as still going on. The following are verbatim extracts:

• …the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse -- an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.

• …military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants.

• …the companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies…scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror.

• …Analysts have been wooed in hundreds of private briefings with senior military leaders, including officials with significant influence over contracting and budget matters…

• In turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated.

• Records reveal a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines between government and journalism have been obliterated. Internal Pentagon documents repeatedly refer to the military analysts as “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who could be counted on to deliver administration “themes and messages” to millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.”

This latest Bush administration attempt to shape and distort public perceptions of the realities of the wars it has engineered is one of the most outrageous of all. Yet, while shocking, it is not really surprising given the track record of the Bush-Cheney regime. The question that arises, however, as a result of these new revelations, is where was the media -- during this campaign of disinformation rife with conflicts of interests and other transgressions which often serve as its fodder -- when all of this was happening under their very noses? How could they have missed this story of such a colossal propaganda campaign being waged on the American people through them? What is their explanation?

It comes down to the same reason most of the media used to explain failing to inform the public regarding the huge holes in the administration’s weak case for attacking Iraq: ignorance. According to the Times, “...some network officials…acknowledged only a limited understanding of their analysts’ interactions with the administration.”

It is a sorry excuse. But maybe there is another explanation. Perhaps too many in the mainstream media are still willing to look the other way when fed propaganda for fear of being stuck with the dreaded labels of liberal or unpatriotic. Perhaps, also, some anchors and reporters have been too busy uncovering such momentous news as how the candidates really feel about their faith or why Barack Obama doesn’t wear a flag pin on his lapel to notice the huge Trojan Horse camped in their midst. 

The good news in all of this is that all the perfidy and skill of the administration and all the collusion by some sectors of the media have failed to prevent most of the people of this country from seeing through the administration’s lies, albeit only belatedly and partially. According to a new Washington Post ABC News poll, six out of ten Americans now reject the official Bush line that winning in Iraq is necessary to successfully fight the war on terrorism. The bad news in all this is, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, that you get news about a presidential campaign or about a war from the media you have not the one you would like to have.