It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
You probably didn’t hear about the House voting to ban Pentagon propaganda last Thursday — since the television networks have once again conveniently failed to cover the story.
But in a surprise move, a 2009 defense policy bill passed with an amendment, sponsored by Rep. Paul Hodes (D-N.H.), that outlaws the Defense Department from engaging in “a concerted effort to propagandize” the American people. The measure would also force an investigation by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) into efforts to plant positive news stories about the war in U.S. media.
An April 20 front-page New York Times article first reported how the Pentagon cultivated and coached more than 75 former military officers who became regulars on Fox News, CNN, the broadcast networks, and even NPR. One week later, the Pentagon announced that it would suspend the “briefing” program pending an internal review, which is continuing. On May 13, watchdog Media Matters documented that analysts in the Pentagon’s program appeared or were quoted in major outlets more than 4,500 times.
If the Senate also passes the propaganda ban, it will send a strong message to the Pentagon and other government agencies that the Congress will not allow the continued manipulation of public opinion.
But let’s not forget that this is just the most recent major government propaganda revelation in recent years. In March 2005, the New York Times revealed that several federal agencies were producing fake “video news releases” that local television stations aired as if they were bona fide news reports.
Two months before that, several “payola pundits” were discovered to be receiving lucrative government PR contracts to opine in favor of Bush administration policies — without disclosing their financial arrangement. Armstrong Williams was the poster-child, with his $240,000 contract from the Department of Education to promote the president’s “No Child Left Behind Act.”
In March 2005, the New York Times revealed that several federal agencies were producing fake “video news releases” that local television stations aired as if they were bona fide news reports.
On Monday, March 31, the Los Angeles Times published a front-page photograph that had been altered in violation of Times policy.
The primary subject of the photo was a British soldier directing Iraqi civilians to take cover from Iraqi fire on the outskirts of Basra. After publication, it was noticed that several civilians in the background appear twice. The photographer, Brian Walski, reached by telephone in southern Iraq, acknowledged that he had used his computer to combine elements of two photographs, taken moments apart, in order to improve the composition.
In March 2005, the New York Times revealed that there has been a large amount of fake and prepackaged news created by US government departments, such as the Pentagon, the State Department and others, and disseminated through the mainstream media. The New York Times noted a number of important issues including:
* The US Bush administration has “aggressively” used public relations to prepackage news. Issues with this have included that:
o A number of these government-made news segments are made to look like local news (either by the government department or by the receiving broadcaster);
o Sometimes these reports have fake reporters such as when a “‘reporter’ covering airport safety was actually a public relations professional working under a false name for the Transportation Security Administration”;
o Other times, there is no mention that a video segment is produced by the government;
o Where there is some attribution, news stations simply rebroadcast them but sometimes without attributing the source.
* These segments have reached millions;
* This benefits both the government and the broadcaster;
* This could amount to propaganda within the United States as well as internationally.
Effectively, American tax payers have paid to be subjected to propaganda disseminated through these massaged messaged.My Emphasis
Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
reply to post by MemoryShock
Well, the thing is, when it's actually DISCLOSED that a bare MINIMUM of 151 members of the House and Congress are DIRECTLY PROFITEERING off of the War machine, then how much accountability do you think there's going to be with THESE SAME PEOPLE deciding on this?
Think about that---They are making big money off this "sales job" of propaganda!
So why would they want to curtail it? That just cuts into their greedy profits.
Like I said, which direction this vote goes will be quite telling, in terms of how THICK the corruption of this group truly is. We know we're being played for idiots and drawn into wars to make these Elitists richer and more powerful, but just how entirely infiltrated and corrupted our governing body is will be revealed through the direction of this vote IMO.
[edit on 25-5-2008 by DimensionalDetective]
Originally posted by MemoryShock
If people don't start reacting to the fact that gthey are paying people to lie to them and manipulate them....then I don't think that anything will get them roused...