Behind Mainstream Media's War Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand (NYT)

[kpete]

Pentagon uses military analysts as ‘puppets’ to push talking points.
A new New York Times article reveals that the Pentagon has wooed military analysts with private briefings and access to classified information “in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance.” Most of these analysts have ties to contractors who are “vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air,” and many admit that they suppressed doubts about the administration’s misinformation out of fear of jeopardizing their access or contracts:

....................

Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

A PENTAGON CAMPAIGN Retired officers have been used to shape terrorism coverage from inside the TV and radio networks.

By DAVID BARSTOW
Published: April 20, 2008

The documents released by the Pentagon do not show any quid pro quo between commentary and contracts. But some analysts said they had used the special access as a marketing and networking opportunity or as a window into future business possibilities.

Over time, the Pentagon recruited more than 75 retired officers, although some participated only briefly or sporadically. The largest contingent was affiliated with Fox News, followed by NBC and CNN, the other networks with 24-hour cable outlets. But analysts from CBS and ABC were included, too. Some recruits, though not on any network payroll, were influential in other ways — either because they were sought out by radio hosts, or because they often published op-ed articles or were quoted in magazines, Web sites and newspapers. At least nine of them have written op-ed articles for The Times

...............

Records and interviews show how 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.

more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

These analysts were also instructed to not “quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/19/pentagon-uses-military-analysts-as-puppets-to-push-talking-points/

[LibertyorDeath]

1. Thanks kpete great info

Rec!

[Richard Steele]

2. K&R

[girl gone mad]

3. If anyone would know..

the Times would.

[Fireweed247]

4. I highly recommend Militainment Inc

to see just how big a role the media has played in this whole illegal immoral war.

This film illustrates the complicity of the Corporate media in pushing war on our Culture and specifically glorifying the Iraq War
http://www.mediaed.org/videos/CommercialismPoliticsAndMedia/MilitainmentInc
http://128.192.94.172/Misc/MilitainmentIncAugust07.wmv

[Cooley Hurd]

5. David Grange...

He's one of the sleaziest...

[AwakeAtLast]

6. This needs a lot of Ks & Rs

Here's one from me. :kick:

[gratuitous]

7. The High Church of Redemptive Violence is very evangelical

They put on an impressive display of authoritative men with many bright ribbons, shiny medals and other trappings to persuade the public of the righteousness of their cause and the justice of their actions.

And boy, does it work!

Folks you think should know better are gulled totally. Fed a steady stream of whiz-bang weapons, thrilling explosions, and smiling men and women in uniform, our society has invested itself so totally in the Myth of Redemptive Violence that merely suggesting there might be another way for people to settle their differences invites the hysteria of the true believers. You might think the polygamists in Texas are harsh on apostates, but watch what happens when someone who doesn't advocate violence accidentally slips onto your teevee screen. First, they're usually outnumbered, at least three to one. Second, the questions, innuendo, and outright character assassination are constant and only get more vicious as the time, however short, goes along. The most charitable disagreement will be that an advocate for peace is a dupe or naive. But the trip from there to questions about courage, manhood (whatever the fuck that means anymore), loyalty, patriotism and mental health is a very short one. If such an interloper survives a commercial break, there's going to be blood on the floor, because Might Maketh Right, so mote it be!

It's far too easy to blame this solely on the Bush administration. The craven depths of eagerness and sycophancy the major media outlets in this country were willing to plumb surely served a symbiotic purpose for the administration and the media. Both sides achieved their aims and goals, and the Times gets points, I guess, for grudgingly admitting that they too were riding this gravy train to Hell.

This is a valuable article, but it could have spilled over into terrific with one simple little step: One breath, one hint, the slightest declaration of intention by the media not to be suckered again. None of the folks quoted in the article betray the least bit of regret, or resolve to be more careful about checking their sources in the future. So the next time? Next time they'll do it all over again to further rack and ruin, and years later there will be another long article about how badly the media was played. By then we'll have filled up a few hundred thousand more graves, and the High Priests of Redemptive Violence will have profitably won another round.

[truedelphi]

8. Is this the same NYT that carried those Judith Miller articles

So heavily based on information "leaked" to her from the WH??

The information detailed the desperate need to attack Iraq.

Then her articles were quoted by Bush in various press conferences where he quoted Judith Miller, using the NYT articles as a reference for the massive need to attack Iraq.

or is it some other NYT?

So gee, how could the Times ever come up with this thesis that a handshake exists between the media, business, and the Powers that Be????