|
Edited
by David Miller
Publisher: Pluto Press, 2004
ISBN: 0745322026 (Paperback)
Pages: 310
The
US-led invasion of Iraq was undoubtedly the most televised
conflict in history. The theater of war was broadcast 24 hours a
day on a host of TV networks around the globe: Cut to our
embedded reporter on the front line, over to the million-dollar
media center in Doha, now a live feed from Basra, and then back
to the studio for some more discussion of the scores so far. But
in the rush to be the first with the breaking story, did such
small things like “accuracy” and “objectivity” get
overlooked? Or, was media compliance with the British and US
governments a conscious decision by producers and editors?
“If
the broadcast media had a plan to present a view that was
anything other than base propaganda, then surely they should
have embedded journalists in the Iraqi hospitals,” points out
Mark Thomas in the forward to Tell Me Lies. This essentially
sets the tone of the whole book which breaks down the issues of
government propaganda and media distortion into a series of
accessible reports by a host of experienced and respected
journalists. The arguments for war are taken apart and the
magnitude of the psychological battle for “hearts and minds”
is exploded.
Part
one is a collection of articles - by John Pilger, written from
February to April 2003 - that place the pre-invasion build-up in
a historical context. Part two, titled “Propaganda Wars,”
sets out the techniques used and the impact such psychological
operations (re-named “information support” by the British
New Labour Government) have on both the British and
international public. The third section focuses on
“Misreporting the War” and offers detailed breakdowns of the
coverage from both British and US media organizations as well as
background on the history of war reporting and the relationship
between the intelligence services and journalists. Finally, the
book concludes with “Alternatives,” which offers accounts of
the war from Al Jazeera’s perspective, and internet-based
alternative media, and highlights activism from media workers
and the anti-war movement.
Propaganda
is now almost expected to compliment any military attack.
Governments, especially the US and UK, have become increasingly
adept at disseminating their message both at home and against
the enemy. “The techniques being used to sell a war in Iraq
are familiar PR strategies. The delivery of the message is
tightly controlled. Relevant information flows to the media and
the public through a limited number of well-trained messengers,
including seemingly independent third parties.” The cost and
extent of this “information flow” are considerable, but in
addition to the more obvious leaflet bombardments of Afghanistan
and Iraq, areas of grey propaganda are also at work. The British
government’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office contracts third
parties to provide what appears to be news - professionally
produced and free - to the overseas media. The London Press
Service is run by Intelfax Ltd. whose mandate is to produce
“features and news items aimed at increasing overseas
perceptions of the UK as an innovative forward looking and
dynamic country.”
When
it comes to criticizing western mainstream media, it has to be
acknowledged that there is considerable variety across the
spectrum of print, radio and TV. Even within the BBC, different
news outlets pursue slightly different agendas. Yet, the
findings of the book’s analytical studies show failings across
the board. Issues of the effects of depleted uranium-coated
shells and the horrific, often child, casualties of cluster
bombs were scant in the UK press and absent in the US.
“Despite a clear anti-war majority in Britain and significant
anti-war minority in the US, most media outlets supported the
war and failed systematically to challenge the arguments for an
invasion or to expose the brutality and consequences of the
war.”
The
climax of media compliance were the images of a statute of
Saddam being toppled in Baghdad’s Firdos Square repeatedly
broadcast and printed and then held aloft as though it was
somehow a vindication of the whole invasion; job done. Cheering
Iraqis surround the effigy, rope around the neck, as it buckles
and falls to the ground. But wider shots of the scene reveal,
not just the US vehicle which pulled it down, but that the
hundred or so celebrating Iraqis were let through by US forces
who were surrounding the square. The event also, very
conveniently, was staged outside the Palestine Hotel where the
world’s media were based.
Tell
Me Lies is well-sourced and gives anyone interested in
alternative perspectives on the war plenty of specific
information. But is the message reaching further than people who
already agree? At a recent conference about media perspectives,
I asked David Miller, editor of Tell Me Lies, if the book was
making an impact. “The build-up [of opposition] to the Iraq
war is a process,” he told me, “and that has meant that
radical ideas and critical ideas about the media and propaganda
have been distributed wider than previously. So you’re
actually finding [that] the kind of ideas which used to be
confined to a minority are reaching out to a much wider
audience.”
As
for the final consumers of the news product, it is only
consistent public pressure that will force a change in media
culture. The increase in alternative sources of information is
fuelling the movement of people demanding more accountability
from those who shape the news agenda. However, “in the end
it’s not just a question of reforming the media, it’s a
question of reforming society.”
Jon
Wright is a freelance writer and broadcaster based in
Sheffield, UK.
|
