CNN and Bush's Irrelevant Message

"The same people that attacked us on September 11th is the crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims, trying to stop the advance of a system based on liberty" said George W. Bush, fabulously stretching the truth.

Update July 25: The president has declassified some intelligence to bolster the above claim. But the old information he provided is irrelevant to the present situation in Iraq:

CNN's Michael Ware, who is based in Baghdad, said the fact that al Qaeda in Iraq is part of the broader terror network has never been in question. He called Bush's speech "an ancient history lesson."

In the past, I have criticized CNN for giving its stories headlines that serve to reinforce Bush Administration spin (I call this "Propaganda Headline Syndrome"). But this particular story caught my attention because the link-headline -- Bush Accused of Simplifying Threats in Iraq -- shows that someone at CNN has finally declined to give a CNN story the usual Propaganda Headline. But it's too early to celebrate.

If you click on the link, you will discover that the actual story-headline is -- as usual -- a Propaganda Headline: Bush defends Iraq war, details threat from al Qaeda. As I have noted before, this kind of headline serves to reinforce Bush Admin spin in the minds of readers: Bush spin-doctors count on the US media to give White House rebuttals headlines that regurgitate the tortured logic of the Bush Administration. For example, they still try to link the Iraq war to the 9/11 attacks.

It's good to to see a CNN webmaster has declined to serve the Bush Administration as a propagandist. If only CNN editors would wake up to the fact they allow themselves to be used.

US Media Distorts Yet Another Bush Scandal

Ever wonder how Americans could have possibly reelected George W. Bush? Take a look at a front page story in today's Washington Post: "White House Cites Lax Voter-Fraud Investigations in U.S. Attorneys' Firings." This story is a beautiful illustration of how the mainstream US media plays along with the White House spin machine.

First, note that the headline is classic example of what I call the Propaganda Headline Syndrome (introduced here). The so-called "lax voter-fraud investigations" mentioned in the headline were something that appears to have been dreamed up by Karl Rove at the White House and disseminated by right-wing talk radio hosts. This so-called issue wasn't prosecuted by the fired US attorneys because there was nothing to prosecute! It's a bogus issue (see The Myth of Voter Fraud). But in the hands of the Washington Post this non-issue became a Propaganda Headline. As I wrote back in the fall:

Media corporations like CNN will repeat any strongly worded White House statement as a headline news item. So if the White House spin is fiction, the headline will be fiction. Because it's the headline that the public will remember, in this way a lie becomes an accepted "truthiness." Call this the "Propaganda Headline Syndrome."

The headline gives publicity to the widely discredited notion of "lax voter-fraud investigations." Nevertheless, one might expect that the article itself would have laid that myth to rest. After all the Washington Post is one of the most respected names in American journalism. Sadly, it does not. Rather the story gives some credence to the "lax voter-fraud investigations" concept. Indeed, the article is a classic specimen of the "he said, she said" phenomenon in US journalism: when both sides of the bogus allegation are given equal weight, the least reputable viewpoint is enhanced. Take a look at the main part of the article (my emphasis):

White House officials, in providing new explanations of how and why several U.S. attorneys were fired in December, have said that President Bush mentioned to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales in October that he had heard complaints from Congress that some federal prosecutors were lax in pursuing voter fraud.

In attributing the firings at least partly to an inattentiveness to voter fraud, the White House is invoking a contention that has gained prominence in Republican circles starting with the 2000 presidential election, as both political parties have become aggressive in trying to leverage election law into Election Day victories.

The GOP allegation, repeated in several swing states where voting margins have been narrow, is that Democrats have illegally ratcheted up their tallies by permitting ballots to be cast by felons, by residents without proper identification, or by people who forged signatures on absentee ballots.

Democratic-leaning groups reject that allegation and counter by accusing Republicans of blocking fair elections by suppressing the votes of some eligible citizens.

Many readers of this article will say, "well, this latest scandal -- it's just politics." And that's what the White House wants readers to say. The Washington Post serves as a vehicle for the White House disinformation campaign.

Political news in the US is often reported like this: he said, she said. The journalist or her editor declines to help the reader to determine where the truth actually lies in such cases. So when the opposition party points to the most egregious crimes of the Bush administration, they are made to appear as just "one side" of a political spat. The US news media consistently gives the White House equal time and space to respond; it presents such propaganda as news; and it displays such disinformation under a media-crafted banner that promotes US administration spin -- the Propaganda Headline.

Thai-Style "Propaganda Headlines"

In the run-up to the November US elections, I posted on a media manipulation technique perfected by the Bush Administration. I called it the art of the "Propoganda Headline." This is how I described the phenomena:

Media corporations like CNN will repeat any strongly worded White House statement as a headline news item. So if the White House spin is fiction, the headline will be fiction. Because it's the headline that the public will remember, in this way a lie becomes an accepted "truthiness." Call this the "Propaganda Headline Syndrome."

In an international public relations coup, Thailand's government has managed to spin the bombings in such a way as to generate "Propaganda Headlines" at many foreign media outlets. Andrew Walker at New Mandala writes:

Thailand’s military regime has wasted no time at all in blaming Thaksin supporters for the Bangkok bombings. And their rather bizarre message is having an effect in the international media. The Sydney Morning Herald’s international news leads with “Thaksin supporters linked to bombs;” the New York Times carries Supporters of Thai Ex-Premier Blamed for Blasts; the BBC has Thai PM blames rivals for blast... And even my Yahoo morning welcome message carried “Ousted Thai PM backers eyed in bombings."

I was somewhat taken aback by the New York Times headline when I first saw it. If even an overwhelmed Thai regime can attain such proficiency in playing the Propoganda Headline game, why does the world press allow itself to be played so blatantly?

As I showed in the earlier posting, there are creative means by which good editors avert the moral hazard of the Propoganda Headline.

Propaganda Headlines

The White House continues to act as if reality and facts can be transcended through denials and lies. Media corporations like CNN will repeat any strongly worded White House statement as a headline news item. So if the White House spin is fiction, the headline will be fiction. Because it's the headline that the public will remember,in this way a lie becomes an accepted "truthiness." Call this the "Propaganda Headline Syndrome"

Today the White House hauled out the US Ambassador to put a positive spin on the meltdown in Iraq. Guess the network where this ploy generated a Propaganda Headline: CNN or BBC?

CNN: U.S. envoy: 'Success in Iraq is possible'
BBC: Iraq success 'possible', says US

The most precise headline in a literal sense is CNN's, but BBC's headline is preferable because it's not a Propaganda Headline. The BBC editor refused to let the headline become a mechanism for the propagation of a White House distortion. Emphasizing "possible," its headline undercuts the propaganda ploy, subverting it. It attributes the statement to the "US," instead of the "US envoy." After all, the Ambassador, in this instance, is nothing other than a mouthpiece for the US government (i.e. the White House). For the BBC, getting the "spirit" of the story right mattered more than the "letter" of the news. Whereas CNN allowed itself to be used as means of conveying propaganda, BBC intelligently resisted this danger.

The other day, the White House forced a State Department official to contradict himself. With the US election two weeks away, the White House is now desperate, and will bully any US official into saying just about anything so as to generate more "Propaganda Headlines." CNN is standing by, ready to assist.

This should be journalism 101: Editors, avoid "Propaganda Headlines" wherever possible! A slavish literalism is the friend of the propagandist and the enemy of understanding.