It’s Bagh-SPAN: Bremer Bunch Will Broadcast

[janx]

http://www2.observer.com/observer/pages/frontpage6.asp

Live from Baghdad, fair, balanced and direct, it’s Bush TV.

The Coalition Provisional Authority running Iraq, created by the Bush administration, dissatisfied with the American television news decisions on covering the conflict, is about to create its own broadcast operation, with the capacity to bypass the networks, live from Iraq, 24 hours a day.

"We’ve had to rely on events covered by the networks and their interpretation, and their feed back to the United States," said Dorrance Smith, the former ABC News producer and an advisor to President Bush and his father, now senior media adviser to the Coalition Provisional Authority.

"That’s about to change," said Mr. Smith, "because we’re about to have total 24-hour connectivity."

Asked if he would call the new operation an American Al-Jazeera, a broadcast operation institution untethered by commercial considerations, Mr. Smith said it was more like a "C-SPAN Baghdad."

(much more at link)

[janx]

1. I don't know much about the NY Observer, but

if this is true, it's unbelievable. Exactly who would watch it?

[bigtime]

2. contact your cable operator today!

:eyes:

[GAspnes]

3. So they're over hating PBS because it's publicly funded?

I guess.

[janx]

6. That was one of my first reactions, too.

Who is paying for this? U.S. taxpayers?

[Sticky]

19. CNN Newsnight

Wolf Blitzer's guest was Joe Hagan. The television columnist for for "The New York Observer.

From the transcript:

BLITZER: I know, in your article, you quote Dorrance Smith extensively, formerly of ABC News, now working for the Bush administration, an adviser to Paul Bremer. Who would pay for this new operation?

HAGAN: That would be the taxpayers, Wolf.

This is being paid for out of the Pentagon budget, the very budget that -- the $87 billion that we understand that this is costing us

snip>
BLITZER: So, would this government-funded operation be more like C-SPAN, if you will, or just propaganda?

HAGAN: Well, I'll tell you, Dorrance Smith, the senior media adviser to the coalition, calls it C-SPAN Baghdad.

But some news executives that I talked to privately today told me that it did sound like the seeds of a propaganda service to them, which is something that we'll just have to see what happens

The entire transcript is posted here:
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/14/asb.00.html
Scroll down

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shirlden]

7. Well, by golly,

if we can't control the war......we will just control the news about it. How really ingenious. Why didn't they think of this earlier and not bomb Iraq at all......just pretend that we did and then show all the happy people dancing in the streets and throwing kisses. They have Faux to do that here, so guess, one good success deserves another. Who will watch it??? The freepers, dittoheads, idotters and fundies, of course.

:hi:

[Spazito]

8. I would suggest that now is the time for the other networks to take ....

the gloves off. They would have nothing to lose now. Competing stories: happy, happy propoganda versus stark reality.

The Bush mantra seems to be: if we can't sell our lies one way, we will just lie more and sell it differently.

[janx]

9. I think that's inevitable.

Coverage should get more interesting now.

[hang a left]

18. Betcha a buck, they won't need any reporters or other media

in Iraq anymore.

And Mr. Bremer was quoted as saying, "We've got the news covered now, the Iraqi people have said they don't want any more biased press coverage, and this is good news."

[bushisanidiot]

10. AWOL Already Has Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc.

good god. aren't they right wing biased enough for him? are they gonna show the teletubbies and claim that's iraq? what kind of idiots do they think are going to buy their obvious lies?

heh.. the rest of the world will still be reporting and it will be hilarious to see how much of a contrast there is between the white house truth and everyone else's truth. HAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!

what a loser and an embarrassment AWOL is..

[jpgray]

11. This is SO ridiculous

This should be a PR fiasco.

[unbrand]

12. Murcan media is the only media?

I don't get it. These freaks assume that they're just competing with American network media? They know they can't control the internet (yet) and non-American press will still show more of the truth than any American news outlet (making the US look bad). Soooo...... ??? I guess their world view is CNNBCFOX-whatever and that's it, huh?

Jebus, this is going to backfire on them big time.

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. According to this thread

the media is getting harrassed in Iraq, so others may have less access than these 'official' propaganda reporters.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=215697
As sierra_moon points out in the thread, it's mainly Arab journalists who are being targeted, because 'they might be Al-Jazeera' - although Al-Jazeera is a legal, genuine news organisation, as valid as Fox. Arab journalists should be able to get a better story from the Iraqis, seeing as they speak the same language.

So the net result will be less reliable reporting everywhere. Will we go back to prefacing news reports with 'this report was made by the Baghdad authorities, and so may not be neutral'?

[unbrand]

14. Utterly frightening.

When people don't believe the lies, make the lies even bigger.

So the US forces intimidate and disallow non-American media to report the real news. Sure, out military commanders are telling the troops not to harass the media (nudge, nudge - go right ahead). Meanwhile, the US military will have its very own propaganda network that the 'murican people will trust because, hey! It's TV from our gummint. Must be true!

I wonder if Huxley or Orwell had any idea their ideas about propaganda would become friggin' blueprints for the US of A. I thought these authors were writing WARNINGS to people about how societies COULD turn out.

Thanks for the link to the other thread.

[baby_bear]

17. not a remote possibility, muriel_volestrangler

I think it's pretty much understood that the Bush administration is against Muslims, Islam, Al-Jazeera, and anything Arab except for those who wield significant power.

It's hard to imagine being a citizen of just about any country and not despising the U.S. when you think about the arrogance with which the Bush administration treats the world.


I just hope we can rectify the damage once we get regime change in 2004...with legitimate votes this time.

s_m

[aquart]

15. Honey, they also believe there's a finite number of terrorists

And if you just go in and get 'em, well, then they're gone.

Is it possible they believe that nothing happens after the end of the movie? After John Wayne wins, that's all there is?

[Nevernose]

16. "Staffed by neocons and evangelists"

One of my favorite paragraphs from the article:
One producer described a C.P.A. press office as staffed by political true believers, "neocons and evangelists," the military full of passionate officials trying to achieve victory, "apoplectic" at the press for under-reporting the "good news’ in Iraq.

And people wonder why we call the assholes in the White House "fascists?"

[DoYouEverWonder]

20. So what happened to the TV network that SAIC

was supposed to build and run in Iraq back when we first took over. Didn't we already pay them millions of dollars to do this?


http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EH16Ak02.html

Massive military contractor's media mess

Aug 16, 2003

WASHINGTON - It is no secret that US defense and construction companies - particularly those with close ties to the administration of President George W Bush - are making a lot of money in the post-war rush for contracts in Iraq.

<snip>

Less well known is San Diego-based Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC), one of the Pentagon's largest, most lucrative and politically connected contractors. Of the six billion dollars it earned in revenue last year, about two thirds came from the US Treasury, mostly from the defense budget.

<snip>

The Iraqi (sometimes referred to as "Indigenous") Media Network (IMN) project, valued initially at a minimum of US$25 million, was formally launched in mid-April as a successor to a psychological warfare program that beamed radio broadcasts before and during the war into Iraq from a C130 cargo plane called "Commando Solo".
But the IMN was considerably more ambitious in scope, since its aim, as an outgrowth of the IRDC operation, was to put together a new information ministry, complete with television, radio and a newspaper, and the content that would make all three attractive to average Iraqis.

<snip>

"SAIC didn't have any suitable qualification to run a media network," according to Rohan Jayasekera, who has kept an eye on media developments in Iraq for London-based Index on Censorship. "The whole thing was so incredibly badly planned by them that no one could make sense of what they were doing," he said.

[hang a left]

21. I believe this project was for propoganda INSIDE Iraq.

Their new project if for disinformation HERE at home.

[DoYouEverWonder]

22. Thanks for the clarification

So since we can't get a network up and running for the people of Iraq, we are going to expand on this bad idea and also broadcast to the US?

This whole deal reminds me of a boat I use to own. A hole that you pour money into.