How useful is US propaganda in Iraq?
Experts say it might help, but almost three-quarters of Americans dislike the idea.
In a
USA Today/CNN/Gallup survey released just before Christmas Day, 72 percent of Americans thought that it was "
wrong for the US to pay Iraqi newspapers and journalists to publish and write stories about US efforts in Iraq."
USA Today reported earlier this month, however, that the US actually
plans to continue with the program and expand it to other countries, spending more than $300 million in the effort.
As Alan Pusey of
The Dallas Morning News reports, these incidents have
reignited the debate over the value and limits of propaganda in an age of global communications and "perpetual political spin."
"Propaganda gets a bad rap," said P.J. Crowley, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and former senior director of public affairs for the National Security Council in the Clinton administration. "The issue is not whether it's good or bad; it's a fact of life. ... It's whether or not it hurts or helps."
"There is really a misconception about the value of propaganda, particularly in wartime. But it's an indispensable tool of modern war," said Aaron Delwiche, an expert on the subject at Trinity University in San Antonio. "There's no way any responsible commander would go to war without propaganda in the tool kit."
The
Morning News reports that the problem with the payment of money to Iraqi journalists, according to many experts, is that the US military deliberately obscured its role in producing the material. The program also is a reflection of government action earlier this year, when some federal agencies "paid journalists to write stories or columns that were sympathetic to the Bush administration's efforts to support traditional marriage and 'No Child Left Behind.'" Government investigators found these efforts inappropriate.
Victoria Clarke, a former Pentagon spokeswoman and now media consultant, says it's a good thing that the US Defense Department has said it will halt payments to Iraqi journalists.
Clarke says the revelations have undermined the goal of the overall mission: to create a free Iraq and free Iraqis. That can't happen if burgeoning Iraqi newspapers are seen as tools of the United States or anyone else.
"I understand the frustration of the military. They thought they weren't getting the kind of good press they deserved," Clarke said. "But that is short-term thinking. You might have a good story for one day, but you aren't going to instill in the society you're hoping to create the kind of independent values that you want."
The New York Times reported Monday on how former Bush advisor Karen Hughes is
handling the tough job of promoting the image of the US abroad without using 'propaganda.' Ms. Hughes admits it is not an easy sell.
"This is a big job with a lot of different moving pieces," Hughes, President George W. Bush's confidante and former communications director, said in an interview four months after taking office. "Ed Murrow once famously said that there's no cash register that rings when a mind is changed. But I think over the long haul we can begin to shape a better perception in the Middle East." Hughes received a fair amount of criticism for her
first trip to the Middle East this past fall, where she was accused of just repeating talking points and had to listen to a lot of criticism about the US's role in Iraq and the world. But the
Times reports that Hughes gained respect for her willingness to listen to her critics.
I think she's doing far better than her predecessors," said Shibley Telhami, the Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at the University of Maryland. "Because of her closeness to the president, she has real influence on policy. The problem is that she and her staff still lack real expertise in the Middle East." Hughes has made some changes. She recently cancelled
the glossy magazine 'Hi,' a pro-US lifestyle magazine aimed at Mideast audiences, and has appeared on the Qatar-based Arab news channel
Al Jazeera to argue the US viewpoint, despite advice from others in the Bush administration that she should avoid such appearances.
Meanwhile, some commentators challenge the notion that Arab and Middle East media always provide biased coverage of the region and the war in Iraq. Rami Khoury, the editor of
The Daily Star of Lebanon and a former Nieman Fellow in journalism at Harvard Unversity, writes that he has spent hours watching Arab satellite TV and talking to Arab media staff and senior administrators to "better understand their view of the world." He says the result is that he believes any useful, accurate analysis of the Arab media must separate "
professional conduct from their political impact."
In the past three years, covering the Anglo-American led war in Iraq and its messy aftermath, I've made it a point to regularly watch Arab, European and American television services in order to compare their coverage. On the basis of what I have witnessed during the past 1,000 days, I would like to bet Donald Rumsfeld a double cheeseburger with cheese, and Karen Hughes two tickets to a Yankees-Rangers baseball game on a balmy July evening, that the overall coverage of Iraq on the mainstream Arab satellite services has been more comprehensive, balanced and accurate than the coverage of any mainstream American cable or broadcast television service. Also, not everyone believes that the Pentagon is playing by the rules, even in the US. The
Chicago Tribune reported earlier this month that in
a lengthy study in 2003, former US colonel and Pentagon adviser Sam Gardner said he found 50 stories in US publications based on information disseminated by the Pentagon even though it knew the
information was false.
"It's a culture that believes that it's OK to manipulate the story," Gardiner said. "It goes all the way from the senior leaders down to the battalion commanders." The Pentagon has
denied this charge, calling the allegation "absurd, wrong, misguided, pick your adjective."
Also...
•
Kuwait sentences 'Al Qaeda' group (
BBC)
•
Mass grave found in Karbala (
Monsters and Critics)
•
Bush's Cold-War toolbox (
Boston Globe)
•
Legal, but not exactly likable (
Fort Worth Star-Telegram)
• Feedback appreciated. E-mail
Tom Regan
.
|
RSS feed
