Pentagon wants to spend $20m trolling US & ME for good press on Iraq

[bigtree]

Positive Press on Iraq Is Aim of U.S. Contract

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 31, 2006; Page A20

U.S. military leaders in Baghdad have put out for bid a two-year, $20 million public relations contract that calls for extensive monitoring of U.S. and Middle Eastern media in an effort to promote more positive coverage of news from Iraq.

The proposal, which calls in part for extensive monitoring and analysis of Iraqi, Middle East and American media, is designed to help the coalition forces understand "the communications environment." Its goal is to "develop communication strategies and tactics, identify opportunities, and execute events . . . to effectively communicate Iraqi government and coalition's goals, and build support among our strategic audiences in achieving these goals," according to the statement of work that is publicly available through the Web site http://www.fbodaily.com

The proposal calls for monitoring "Iraqi, pan-Arabic, international and U.S. national and regional markets media in both Arabic and English." That includes broadcast and cable television outlets, the Pentagon channel, two wire services and three major U.S. newspapers: The Washington Post, New York Times and Los Angeles Times.

Monitors are to select stories that deal with specific issues, such as security, reconstruction activities, "high profile" coalition force activities and events in which Iraqi security forces are "in the lead." The monitors are to analyze stories to determine the "dissemination of key themes and messages" along with whether the "tone" is positive, neutral or negative.

The media outlets would be monitored for how they present coalition or anti-Iraqi force operations. That part of the proposal could reflect Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's often-stated concern that the media does not cover positive aspects of Iraq.

article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/30/AR2006083003011_pf.html

[Eric J in MN]

1. The Pentagon is supposed to defend the US, not tell

...us what to believe.

The Pentagon shouldn't get any money to monitor US newspapers.

[sutz12]

2. As usual, it's all about the PR

:shrug:

[babylonsister]

3. Consider this: this is what Stevens doesn't want us to know about

as far as the price of war and what the American public is spending all the money on.
This is total bullshit, and besides, aren't they/we already fabricating news there and here?
Jesus, $20 million? How about helping the gulf coast, or helping brain-injured vets, or just about anything else?

[subterranean]

4. If it bleeds, it leads.

[babylonsister]

6. What does that mean in the context of the OP? It's about PR. nt

[subterranean]

7. What it means is this will change nothing

As long as the explosions, violence, death and torture continue in Iraq while the U.S. is there, that is going to be considered more newsworthy than some feel-good propaganda or scripted press conference from the Pentagon. This is what they'll be getting for our $20 million:

Prospective contractors are also asked to propose four to eight public relations events per month, such as speeches or news conferences, including "preparation of likely questions and suggested answers, themes and messages as well as background, talking points."

Sounds like pretty much the same thing they're doing now, and I suspect it'll have about the same effect. But I guess with a budget of $520,000,000,000, they can afford to throw away $20 million to a PR company.

[savemefromdumbya]

5. The Pentagon is getting like Mary Kay beauty products?

[SoCalDem]

8. Propaganda costs a lot these days

:(

[bigtree]

9. it's part of the 'freedom agenda'

peein' freein'