Mass Distraction

Stirring piece at The Email Activist summarizing the story thus far re: absence of WMDs in Iraq, and the total public apathy about it. We bombed the hell out of a country and were wrong about the reasons why we did it. And no one seems to care. This is serious stuff, but you’d think from watching the news that Lacie Petersen was more important/interesting than 3,000 dead innocent Iraqis.

The piece goes on to connect our collective apathy to right-wing media control. A recent CNN piece on the absence of WMDs stepped through a long list of reasons why we haven’t found a smoking gun, but did not even mention the possiblity that there were no WMDS to begin with. Feed the public a steady diet of subtle manipulation and this is what you get:

A recent CNN-USA Today poll revealed that nearly 80% of Americans believe that the war was justified even in the absence of WMDs.

Sums up with an interesting example/argument showing why claims that the media is left-manipulated are false:

The Radical Right has been railing for over a decade against the biases of the “liberal media.”  But if they truly believed their own claims, then shouldn’t they be protesting with us against the loosening of media ownership regulations?  Shouldn’t they be shaking in their jackboots at the prospect of a monopolized liberal media?  Ah…but on this subject all is silent from the bad boys of talk radio and trash TV.  They seem to know the truth about who pays them and why.

3 Replies to “Mass Distraction”

  1. I think that the public’s (lack of) reaction to the WMD issue has less to deal with any sort of media manipulation, and more with respect to there having been other compelling reasons to topple Saddam. Sure, we went in under the pretenses of getting the WMDs, but after reading reports after reports about mass graves, children’s prisons, and tourture chambers, it’s hard for people to say, “Holy crap, Batman! We shouldn’t have gone into Iraq and deposed Saddam.” It may be easier to say that later, should the reconstruction not proceed in a reasonable manner, but at the present it’s a non-starter, issue wise for the majority of Americans.

    -Chris

  2. Well said Scot!

    Chris, Saddam was a dictator of course, but that gives no right to any other country to invade his country and take him out of power. This is a “job” for the people of Iraq (and maybe with help of UN/Human Right organizations) to do if they feel unhappy with their dictator.

    Heck, we had a dictatorship in Greece from 1967-1973. But US didn’t bother to come and “free us”.

    This war was simply a “family matter” for the Bush family. When I see things like this (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/images/0408-03.jpg), I just get so pissed off about how US is putting its nose everywhere they can, trying to control others by various ways.

    Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against the american people, in fact these doings by the governement are actually… normal. If any other country had the power or USA or was in its place, they would do the same things pretty much.

    I just wish UN had more power over important matters and was able to veto such radical actions by some countries, nothing more.

  3. > Lacie Petersen was more important/interesting
    > than 3,000 dead innocent Iraqis.

    That number is likely very very low. Added with
    the pureed Iraqi military personal, most of whom
    were forced to serve, puts the number in the tens
    of thousands of murdered humans, and lots more
    widows and orphans.

    Horrific considering it all took us all of one month.

    We probally didn’t kill many terrorists, but we
    should rest assured we created plenty.

    We didn’t see anything close to what really
    happend on the “news”. Hardy one dead Iraqi.
    No wonder we have a taste for war, we didn’t
    have to see, smell, hear, taste or touch it.

    American war films are so bloody real while
    American news is so slanted and sanatized.

    If the bombs were falling on us, would we
    strike a blow against the empire?

    > claims that the media is left-manipulated are false

    Yep. If the left actually controlled the media,
    the right would have been horrified and
    protesting the recent ruling to blast media
    ownership rules. Nope. They are happy for it,
    because they know what they are gaining.

    Most of the media are just spokespersons for the
    state department. Less so than ever before, but
    basically that was the state of things, but now
    more corporations make our news.

    Bush was so very deeply distraught over
    the plight of the Kuwaiti people, and then
    his son was so worried about the plight of
    the afghan women, a feminist military mission,
    and then the plight of the Iraqi’s. These people
    have a heart, and the bombings to show for it.

    I suppose South Africa didn’t have enough oil…

    Would people pay another poor person to
    kill some poorer people for Greed or Fear?

    People do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.