The Internet Monk 

"the power of opimanynion, the phenomenon of speech, the impact of truth"

A Webjournal edited by Michael Spencer

How The Media Removed All Doubt

by Michael Spencer

I think it goes like this: Be silent and be thought a fool. Speak, and remove all doubt. Let us contemplate for a few moments that segment of the world media who have spoken, and removed all doubt of their foolishness, and considerably worse conclusions.

It might do us all well to remember that the media are currently under great pains in regard to how they must approach the war on terrorism. In the post-Vietnam era, it is Holy Scripture among most elite journalists to assume that the public is being lied to by the American government. And, of course, they were being lied to by the American government, and for darned good reasons (mostly.)

In the Reagan-Bush years, these same media tigers felt the humiliation of being fed information they strongly suspected smelt like U.S. military propaganda. Military escorted press junkets to Grenada and Panama. Briefings of bomb strikes during desert storm, complete with video clips It was all just a little toooo polished. There must be another story, they surmised. The real truth that was being hushed up and hidden from the public.

As it turned out, the military did exaggerate accuracy and make themselves look better than they really were, but does anyone expect the military of the United States to go weeping in front of a bunch of reporters, confessing their failures and sharing the stress all this puts on their inner child?

And so, the elite media developed an appetite for alternative versions of American military action, an appetite that our adversaries were more than happy to feed. Saddam Hussein led journalists through the ruins of bombed baby food factories and demolished hospitals, solemnly intoning that the American public was supporting baby killing and intentional targeting of civilians. 

Now those of you who know anything about journalism in WWII might already be asking yourself how much an appetite would American journalists have shown for the press conferences and bomb site walk-throughs of Hitler? The difference is two-fold. American journalists were inclined to believe that whatever the government told them was true, even if it was laundered for good reasons. Two, whatever Hitler said would certainly be a lie, since the man was deluded and evil. In other words, there was this "good versus evil" thing going on, that seemed to keep reporters from putting much ink into the Nazi view of the war.

At the onset of the current crisis, all Americans, including the left-leaning media, leaned the same direction due to the sheer force of events. CNN and Fox outdo themselves in red, white and blue. Even the liberal networks and liberal print media initially showed virtually universal support for the war effort.

It has become clear, however, that old habits die hard, and it seems the desire to present the "real" war and not the laundered U.S. military version is becoming overwhelming. In the last ten days we have been treated to straight faced reports saying we have bombed hospitals, nursing homes, residential neighborhoods and the Red Cross Warehouse. Twice. All. of course, served up by the Taliban and their media cronies and passed along by our diligent press. We have watched as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was asked by a seriously twenty-something press corps when and where the U.S. would launch it's next secret mission? On one report on U.S. special forces, the full name and hometown of each interviewed soldier was flashed across the screen. (Why not include pictures of the wife and kids?)  And we have listened to the liberal media pundits begin to question the effectiveness of the results of this war. After all, we've been at this almost a month now.

I hardly know where to start. These media puppies are so taken in with the technological wonder of a smart bomb, that they actually believe no one will get injured or killed. Bulletin, you promising young Jimmy Olsons: the purpose of a war is to kill people and break things until the other guy gives up or goes away. There is no such thing as a bomb that avoids people. Our guys will target the things that need to be targeted. And if that is in the neighborhood with Ahmad's Nursing home, Day Care and Tanning Salon, then that's the problem with living in a country that flies planes into buildings full of innocents. Move.

Has it occurred to any of these media bloodhounds that the Taliban might be lying about these civilian hits? These are people who cut off women's hands if they teach their daughters to read and execute people for speaking English. They finance their little regime with money from drug sales, which is strictly against their religion. They seem to feel its all right to do bad things to us, like sending anthrax through the mail, so am I overstating the case that we might be a tad bit suspicious of their claims that we are bombing hospitals?

There is the possibility that the reports are at least partially true because the Taliban have moved their targets into residential neighborhoods to hide. Using women, children and old people as shields is a trick Saddam Hussein didn't mind employing, and I doubt if the Taliban would hesitate, since they are totally without morals when it comes to staying in power. KIlling off their own people is no problem.

In other words, there is an inevitable tendency for those parts of the media that lean left and see themselves as the custodians of post-Vietnam journalistic integrity to begin buying the Taliban photo ops and sob stories as a way of saying any U.S. military action must be full of naughty tricks and dirty lies. Eventually, I predict, an anti-war drooling fit will take over and we will hear all the reasons we should negotiate with moderates in the Taliban government, stop the bombing, send in the U.N. yadda, yadda, yadda. Maybe Richard Gere and Hillary Clinton can go over and play the Jane Fonda part.

War is hell, and hell is not pretty. We are doing a dirty job and we are fighting a ruthless enemy. It is a moral struggle and the most merciful, loving, kind thing we can do is win. Quickly and decisively. We cannot invite the gang from the Today Show along. We can't put everything going on in the family hour or on the level of people who think Julia Roberts is profound. I don't want to know everything being done by our military in Afghanistan or everything that will have to be done to win this conflict. I don't want CNN interviewing Taliban generals about how the feel about U.S. bombing. I don't care about anti-war protestors and their speeches. And neither does the rest of America. I am sorry for refugees and widows and orphans, but I am sorry for a few thousand families in New York, too. And I don't want it to happen any more and this is the only way to achieve a reasonable hope of no repeats of 9-11.

War coverage must be serious, sober and limited. This isn't a game to be bandied about ESPN style. Our men and women will die and lots of others will as well. The media needs to grow up and learn from that generation of reporters who reported WWII with such class and courage. There are stories of bravery and sacrifice to be told, and the media should tell them. Pull the nation together, instead of tearing it apart. You can support the government and still look at yourself in the mirror. I promise. Maybe the government press conference isn't the "whole story," and more should and will be told by responsible media. But this will be a time to see if journalism recognizes the greatest moral challenge of our time, and can see clearly that we are in the right. If the media can speak with moral courage and restraint, we may continue to be proud of what freedom of the press means in this republic.

Michael@internetmonk.com                                                                             Post a Comment