by Patrick Lang (bio below)
One of the more pathetic spectacles available in today’s media is the propensity of the tribe of journalists to interview each other about events, systems and areas of expertise of which they have only a limited grasp. I suppose that tendency is thought of among them as a sign of confidence in their role as protectors of the public good, but the truth is that the bloviations of journalists are usually sadly demonstrative of ignorance of anything but their trade.
Members of Congress, their staffs and the press are (with some exceptions) so poorly grounded in the underlying matter of their stories that they are very easily manipulated and deceived by anyone who cares to do so. The White House, the Department of Defense, the State Department, various lobbies, and just about anyone who has an assured manner and credentials can use the broadcast and print press to “project” whatever they want through the media.
When you add to that a use of the real power which the state has over the corporate media through the implicit and sometimes rather explicit threat of denial of access to people and stories and therefore a threat to the “bottom line” then it becomes child’s play to use them as ventriloquist’s dummies.
Unfortunately, the public media are not immune to similar “control” since they are dependent on public funding controlled by political appointees.
This combination of media people’s ignorance of “real life” and the ease with which they are manipulated gives a certain zany quality to the spectacle of a panel discussion in which they clearly think that they have some special insight into the march of history.
Saturday night, Time Russert moderated a panel made up of Russert, Andrea Mitchell, David Gregory and Pete Williams. In the course of this discussion the group gravely asserted that Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger was obviously a “nepotistic” fraud because Wilson’s wife worked in the staff section at CIA responsible for sending him on the trip, and that, in essence, it was his wife who had sent him on the trip.
This is clearly a White House/RNC talking point.
It was said in the panel, without contest that this trip was a “boondoggle,” implying, at least to me, that the Wilson family budget benefited from this trip through payments to Wilson for his services. In fact, Wilson was not paid for the trip.
The CIA covered his expenses, but they did not pay him a fee. This was “pro bono.” His wife “sent him” on the trip? I do not wish to denigrate Mrs. Wilson’s career attainments, but the fact is that she lacked the authority to do that. What seems to have happened is that when the issue of sending someone to Niger to investigate the uranium issue was under discussion she, at some point, pointed out that her husband, a retired career diplomat, had experience in both Iraq and Niger and might serve this purpose. Someone followed up on that hint. What a surprise!!
It was said in the panel that Wilson lied in his book and in his now famous New York Times oped piece. I have read his book, talked to him, read his op-ed, and It does not seem to me that he lied. I would accept the charge that his language was not always as precise as it might have been, but, in its essence it seems to me that his reporting was correct.
He said that the VP was responsible for his mission to Africa. Since Cheney’s question to a CIA briefer was ultimately responsible for his trip, it is reasonable that Wilson might have thought that Cheney had asked that someone should go find out if there was anything to the “yellow cake” story.
This is lying? Continued below:
Wilson also has written that he learned that there had been no serious attempt by Iraq to obtain in Niger the uranium ore needed to press forward their putative nuclear weapons program.
He was correct. An Iraqi trade mission had, in 1999 approached (through intermediaries)the Nigerien government of the day to inquire if they would be interested in expanded “trade.” Wilson was told that the Niger government had perceived this as referring to uranium and in light of UN sanctions had said no. The US ambassador in Niger told the SSCI the same story as did the report of a US Marine four star general sent to investigate the same thing. Nevertheless, the panel confidently, and egregiously, asserted as the basis of discussion that Wilson was a liar. This assertion was on the basis of the judgments of the Republican Party dominated Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).
Iraq had an active nuclear weapons program before the first Gulf War. It was within a couple of years of producing a first detonation when the dictator Saddam, caught up in the arrogance of power, so stupidly invaded Kuwait. Nevertheless, the Iraqis had not had a nuclear weapons program since the UN inspection regime had destroyed it in the early ’90s by tearing it up “by the roots” all over the country. Those who participated in that process either directly or by providing the inspectors with “directions” as to where to look, know that this is true. When US forces reached central Iraq in ’03 they found that several tons of old yellow cake in sealed plastic barrels had been in storage for a decade. The Iraqis had had no use for it because they had not had a nuclear program for that long.
In a process reminiscent of the “schlocky” old German painting of a group of dogs sitting around playing cards, the panel of “NBC’s Dream Team” as Russert called them held forth on the iniquity of Ambassador Wilson and the excesses perpetrated on media/government relations by Patrick Fitzgerald, but more on this last “issue” tomorrow.
Pat Lang
……………………………………………………..
Col. Patrick W. Lang (Ret.), a highly decorated retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces, served as “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism” for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and was later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service. Col. Lang was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point. For his service in the DIA, he was awarded the “Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive.” He is a frequent commentator on television and radio, including PBS’s Newshour, and most recently on MSNBC’s Hardball and NPR’s “All Things Considered.”.
Personal Blog: Sic Semper Tyrannis 2005 || Bio || CV
Recommended Books || More BooTrib <a href="Posts
Novel: The Butcher’s Cleaver (download free by chapter, PDF format)
“Drinking the Kool-Aid,” Middle East Policy Council Journal, Vol. XI, Summer 2004, No. 2
……………………………………………………..
.
The amazing thing to me is that these so called Journalists continue to spread the propaganda of this criminal bunch of liars. How dare they. I have to say too especially Tim Russert. I did not see this program but after Libby lied about Russert telling him about Plame one would think he would realise just what this cabal is up to. I am losing hope, that with the continued help of the media, we are in deep shit. The Bush regime will continue to get away with their lies and crimes against humanity.
So what was the point of their little liefest anyway? They were purposely lying about Wilson again, repeating all the old, very old debunked talking points. And that crap about nepotism seems particularly stupid-as if Wilson wasn’t qualified and sent by his wife for the heck of it?…Why don’t they check up on nepotism in the bush administration if their so fucken worried about nepotism…
What exactly was the real point of their little dream team show?..to prove to the WH the media wouldn’t be doing any real reporting on any of Libby trial?
I watched the show twice and the second time I was inclined to think they were speaking reg. nepotism, as from the point of view of the smearing line of attack, not that they were calling it that….but I do agree this leaving out or using the popularily used consensus of opinions and not the updating of those opinions, which is hard to even say, is just shameful on the part of a lot of these reporters. Anyway it is driving me crazy just as it did during clinton and well practically forever, the twisting and misuse of facts and the outright lies….hard to find adequate words!
hi diane-more power to you for watching the show-I can’t do that anymore-literally get to pissed off so usually read what they said here or will go to transcripts of shows so I don’t have to see and hear their lying faces and voices. Either that or I try to watch but give up after a few minutes or all the blood pressure pills in the world wouldn’t save me.
If we need another reason to think the media are a bunch of corrupt toadies it sounds like that show was it…and too bad about David Gregory-I used to kinda like him but screw him too.
David Gregory is the one who came out the best on the show…but not entirely satisfactory for me…he seems to go right up to the brink of being on the right track and then stopppppps there. I always wonder if anyone of these reporters has the full and accurate story. Just love this liberal media, don’t you?
Hi Chocolate, I’ve missed you!
Remember back when bush was in France around 2002 and Gregory got in so much trouble for trying to talk french to Chirac at press conference-bush publicly humiliated Gregory and then I wondered if bush got him black balled for awhile because you didn’t see Gregory in the press or on tv for some time.
Just another one of those times where bush embarrassed us by being so petty on the world stage.
I just saw over at Huffington Post that Pete Williams, who was on this show and continually mouthed the Bush talking points, used to work for Dick Cheney! Now his comments make sense. The link is here.
Mitchell and Russert I can understand, but I’ve come to expect more from Gregory and Williams.
One possibility is that the CIA Leak Case having been lost, the MSM is now trying to ingratiate itself back into the good graces of the WH and especially Karl Rove, on wjhom they depend for material even if it is only fraudulent talking points.. Our media heroes actually began to do their job in the run up to the Fitz press conferernce and I’m sure Karl noticed.
Armando at the orange place just posted a diary which points out Pete Williams’ connection to Cheney: “Williams was a longtime former staffer for Dick Cheney…is “a native of Casper, Wyoming” – where Cheney is from. In 1986, Williams “joined the Washington, DC staff of then Congressman Dick Cheney as press secretary and a legislative assistant. In 1989, when Cheney was named Assistant Secretary of Defense, Williams was appointed Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs.”
One of the more pathetic spectacles available in today’s media is the propensity of the tribe of journalists to interview each other about events, systems and areas of expertise of which they have only a limited grasp. I suppose that tendency is thought of among them as a sign of confidence in their role as protectors of the public good, but the truth is that the bloviations of journalists are usually sadly demonstrative of ignorance of anything but their trade.
This is quite an observation. I hadn’t thought of it in those terms, but so true, so true. Having just caught a few unbearable minutes of “Reliable Sources” really underscores the point for me. Having worked as a flack, I have some sense of how spoon-fed a lot “journalists” are, too — especially in electronic media. I’ve read articles in newspapers that were barely altered press releases I’d written. I heard numerous interviews that were comprised almost entirely of Q&A sheets I’d made up. It was very disheartening. But I wasn’t flacking politicians. I don’t think I could have lived with myself if I had been.
Agreed.
I don’t watch the TV news anymore because I’m sick of this incestual commentariat.
I rarely interview other journalists. But there are exceptions. One of them is Robert Parry, whom I’ve interviewed several times. Why? Because he’s the guy who broke the Iran-Contra story, and then watched while the Beltway press corps buried it for another 6 months before it was picked up again, in the Middle East, where it couldn’t be stiffled. Since then he’s done more amazing work, as an investigative reporter, a media critic and historian. He has written some of the most devastating criticism and analysis of how the media has been complicit in the high government crimes of the past 30 years.
When I interview him, it’s a way of getting a deeply knowledgeable, critically-informed perspective into my story in a very few words. Depending on the field, there are other reporters who can perform a similar function. People like Robert Fisk–whom Amy Goodman has interviewed several times–Jim Lobe, Jason Vest, Mark Hertzgaard, etc.
These journalists all have one thing in common… they really are journalists. They’re not glorified stenographers. They don’t take dictation. And thus, talking to them one can gain the benefit of decades of experience in close contact with realities and people’s first hand experience that puts the lie to what those in power would have us believe.
Last night I went to a small anarchist bookstore to watch Haiti: The Untold Story, shown by the reporter/filmmaker Kevin Pina. There were only about 6 of us there to watch the film and so we all got to talk directly to Kevin about his experience trying to report what is happening in Haiti now.
He’s definitely worth interviewing. The pundicrats doing a fine job making us feel like we’re trapped in the part of the carnival fun house with all of the mirrors – not so much.
Streaming on the web at kpfk.org, kpfa.org. With Larry Bensky. Also, Scott Armstrong, of the National Security Archives.
What everyone fails to mention is that Iraq had all the yellowcake it could possibly need sitting in storage under IAEA seals. They didn’t need yellowcake, they needed a weapons program — including the facilities and technology — to convert that yellowcake to weapons grade material.
It’s a total absurdity that they would waste time and money trying to illegally and surreptiously obtain the one thing needed for a nuclear program of which they already had an abundance. This is the great MacGuffin of the Wilson affair.
I agree and that’s just more proof that these so called reporters in the media don’t know how to do their job..if you and I here on the net have found this information why can’t they? None of them seem to have an inkling anymore what the word investigative means.
Their idea of investigating seems to be reading other papers and then qoute from them or the WH talkig points …
I know also when I first read about Iraq having all that yellowcake in country I was a bit dumfounded by this whole stupid story and thought that would be the end of this whole farce but it just goes on/on doesn’t it.
I so agree with this point Pat. I’ve seen it very clearly in my field of professional work as well. I work in the area of juvenile crime prevention. After an incident like Columbine I would cringe as I watched JOURNALISTS talk to each other about what leads a young person to do something like that and what effective policies in this area might be. They did nothing but show their ignorance, but tended to frame the conversation. It just drives me crazy!
So I know that for a story like this, we need to listen to people like you who know about the work and its implications. I just despair that more don’t hear what you have to say.
Last week — in a follow-up story about that SF attorney whose wife was murdered by a 16-year-old, some MSNBC show had three “experts” on.
The teen dressed in “Goth” fashion.
A psychologist (?) named Drew Pinsky (sp?) said that every single teen he’s worked with who painted his fingernails black was using opiates.
Okay.
Good god-and these are ‘experts’ on kids…my 35 year old nephew is punk and still paints his fingernails and toenails black(or red)and has 5 kids AND is probably one of the most spiritual people I know. My other nephew who is 25(and living with me right now as a matter of fact)..is Goth(or was)and while he doesn’t paint his fingernails black much anymore he is obsessed with skulls etc and very bad B horror movies-he also sells car–both my nephews are in bands and both are pacifists…My youngest nephew sees the whole Goth/skulls/as high theater and that’s it. Yeah just like Ozzie Osborne was all about devil worship right.
And neither do drugs.
Teens + black fingernails = drugs-gee do the cops know this stupendous tip-make their job so much easier right. Beyond stupid stereotyping.
That’s just irresponsible! And talk about inductive reasoning; every teen he’s worked with. He’s a psychologist. He works with troubled kids. Not the best population to draw an inference from if you’re making a broader point. Now every parent with a goth kid, who heard him, is going to wonder. I’ve painted my nails black. So has my husband. I can say with certainty that we’ve never done opiates.
I shouldn’t even comment on this kind of thing – I just get so angry.
We just had a similar situation here locally where a young man killed both of his parents. Very sad and tragic. Of course everyone wants to know why.
So the news media run stories with supposed experts about how his parents didn’t spend enough time with him and they argued because he wanted to go to a different church. Such a load of superficial crap!!
And of course, now all these parents think they’re kids are going to kill them if they don’t spend enough time with them. I’m all for spending as much time as possible with your kids, don’t get me wrong. But this kind of sloppy reporting (and that’s being kind) just fuels fear and over-reaction rather than trying to have meaningful conversation about how we’re raising our kids.
They were all dressed up in dark suits on CNBC, Russert’s weekly show. They sounded like they hadn’t even read Fitzgerald’s press release! Was it a trial run for Russert’s coming out on MTP this morning?
It was a “Nightmare Team” to me, and I mean it. The television talkers are a serious problem when you consider that 40% of Americans are functionally illiterate (1992 National Adult Literacy Survey, probably higher now if it’s even studied). A democracy simply cannot function on this level of information. That was the repugs goal, and they got it. A dictatorship.
I’ve got to hand it to them, though. They’ve use language most people understand in short, punchy statement with emotionally laden words. Since fear is more apt to work with the uninformed, they appeal to that. They’re invested in keeping us ignorant.
This is Communication 101, and the Dems need to get it.
Sorry for the rant. It was the grossest show I’ve ever seen.