- "...if 'terrorism' is going to be used as an umbrella
term so large that it covers attacks on military troops occupying a country,
then the word becomes nothing more than an instrument of propaganda."
-
- Reuters is one of the more independent wire services.
So, a recent news story from Reuters -- flatly describing American military
activities in Iraq as part of "the broader U.S. war on terrorism"
-- is a barometer of how powerfully the pressure systems of rhetoric from
top U.S. officials have swayed mainstream news coverage.
-
- Such reporting, with the matter-of-fact message that
the Pentagon is fighting a "war on terrorism" in Iraq, amounts
to a big journalistic gift for the Bush administration, which is determined
to spin its way past the obvious downsides of the occupation.
-
- Here are the concluding words from Bush's point man in
Iraq, Paul Bremer, during a Nov. 17 interview on NPR's "Morning Edition"
program: "The president was absolutely firm both in private and in
public that he is not going to let any other issues distract us from achieving
our goals here in Iraq, that we will stay here until the job is done and
that the force levels will be determined by the conditions on the ground
and the war on terrorism."
-
- Within hours, many of Bremer's supervisors were singing
from the same political hymnal:
-
- On a visit to Europe, Colin Powell told a French newspaper
that "Afghanistan and Iraq are two theaters in the global war on terrorism."
-
- In Washington, President Bush said: "We fully recognize
that Iraq has become a new front on the war on terror."
-
- Speaking to campaign contributors in Buffalo, the vice
president pushed the envelope of deception. "Iraq is now the central
front in the war on terror," Dick Cheney declared.
-
- Whether you're selling food from McDonald's or cars from
General Motors or a war from the U.S. government, repetition is crucial
for making propaganda stick. Bush's promoters will never tire of depicting
the war on Iraq as a war on terrorism. And they certainly appreciate the
ongoing assists from news media.
-
- For the U.S. public, the mythological link between the
occupation of Iraq and the "war on terrorism" is in play. This
fall, repeated polling has found a consistent breakout of opinion. In mid-November,
according to a CBS News poll, 46 percent of respondents said that the war
in Iraq is a major part of the "war on terrorism," while 14 percent
called it a minor part and 35 percent saw them as two separate matters.
-
- A shift in such perceptions, one way or another, could
be crucial for Bush's election hopes. In large measure -- particularly
at psychological levels -- Bush sold the invasion of Iraq as a move against
"terrorism." If he succeeds at framing the occupation as such,
he'll get a big boost toward a second term.
-
- Despite the Bush administration's countless efforts to
imply or directly assert otherwise, no credible evidence has ever emerged
to link 9/11 or Al Qaeda with the regime of Saddam Hussein.
-
- Now, if "terrorism" is going to be used as
an umbrella term so large that it covers attacks on military troops occupying
a country, then the word becomes nothing more than an instrument of propaganda.
-
- Often the coverage in U.S. news media sanitizes the human
consequences -- and yes, the terror -- of routine actions by the occupiers.
On Nov. 19, the U.S. military announced that it had dropped a pair of 2,000-pound
bombs 30 miles northeast of Baghdad. Meanwhile, to the north, near the
city of Kirkuk, the U.S. Air Force used 1,000-pound bombs -- against "terrorist
targets," an American officer told reporters.
-
- Clearly, the vast majority of the people dying in these
attacks are Iraqis who are no more "terrorists" than many Americans
would be if foreign troops were occupying the United States. But U.S. news
outlets sometimes go into raptures of praise as they describe the high-tech
arsenal of the occupiers.
-
- On Nov. 17, at the top of the front page of the New York
Times, a color photo showed a gunner aiming his formidable weapon downward
from a Black Hawk helicopter, airborne over Baghdad. Underneath the picture
was an article lamenting the recent setbacks in Iraq for such U.S. military
aircraft. "In two weeks," the article said, "the Black Hawks
and Chinooks and Apaches that once zoomed overhead with such grace and
panache have suddenly become vulnerable."
-
- "Grace" and "panache." Attributed
to no one, the words appeared in a prominent mash note about machinery
of death from the New York Times, a newspaper that's supposed to epitomize
the highest journalistic standards. But don't hold your breath for a correction
to appear in the nation's paper of record.
-
- - Norman Solomon writes a syndicated column on media
and politics. He is co-author (with Reese Erlich) of "Target Iraq:
What the News Media Didn't Tell You," published this year by Context
Books.
-
- Copyright © 2003 Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting.
All rights reserved.
-
- http://www.fair.org/media-beat/031120.html
|
