Not feeling the outrage
Military uses PR Firm to Improve Image
The jist of the article is that the Pentagon is subverting and undermining democratic and journalistic principles, because the PR firm they've hired to improve Iraqi opinions of Americans was keeping the pentagon's role in the issue covert. There is some suggestion that the PR firm may have paid "spokespeople" in Iraq to air their stories.
Excuse me if I don't feel the indignation.
The fact is, that the burden of journalistic ethics is on the journalist. I get Press Releases everyday, from all sorts of questionable groups, including some which are flat out advertisments, and others from Government entities, convienently prepackaged as stories all you have to do is read.
Do I use them? Some of the time, of course. If I, the journalist, find the information credible, and of value to the public. Of course no one has offered to pay me to air a story yet (unfortunately! j/k)
So what NY times is telling us here, is that it is ethical for journalistic organizations to get free tapes of people's heads being sawn off by a dull sword, and to put that on the air, at the express desire of murderous terrorists, but its not alright for the Pentagon to try to win the war of hearts and minds, even as the MSM continues to batter home terrible things about the military to any Iraqi with the good fortune to have access to the information (Which btw, has increased manifestly since the fall of Saddam)
The NY times has enough trouble with their own ethical standards.
People in ivory towers shouldn't throw mud.
The jist of the article is that the Pentagon is subverting and undermining democratic and journalistic principles, because the PR firm they've hired to improve Iraqi opinions of Americans was keeping the pentagon's role in the issue covert. There is some suggestion that the PR firm may have paid "spokespeople" in Iraq to air their stories.
Excuse me if I don't feel the indignation.
The fact is, that the burden of journalistic ethics is on the journalist. I get Press Releases everyday, from all sorts of questionable groups, including some which are flat out advertisments, and others from Government entities, convienently prepackaged as stories all you have to do is read.
Do I use them? Some of the time, of course. If I, the journalist, find the information credible, and of value to the public. Of course no one has offered to pay me to air a story yet (unfortunately! j/k)
So what NY times is telling us here, is that it is ethical for journalistic organizations to get free tapes of people's heads being sawn off by a dull sword, and to put that on the air, at the express desire of murderous terrorists, but its not alright for the Pentagon to try to win the war of hearts and minds, even as the MSM continues to batter home terrible things about the military to any Iraqi with the good fortune to have access to the information (Which btw, has increased manifestly since the fall of Saddam)
The NY times has enough trouble with their own ethical standards.
People in ivory towers shouldn't throw mud.
2 Comments:
Isn’t hiring a PR firm the same as propaganda? It just costs more and probable is less effective.
Well, it definetely is the same thing as propaganda. I don't know if I agree that it would be more expensive than a government program to do the same thing. I think the free market rules, even in propaganda. Call it marketing.
"New Iraq Lite. Now with 100% less Saddam"
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home