It’s been nearly a month since the New York Times first reported on a Pentagon program in which retired military officers, who’ve since become lobbyists or consultants for military contractors, were recruited to become propaganda agents of the Bush administration. Throughout the war in Iraq, these retired officers — or “message multipliers,” as they were described by internal Defense Department documents — took on roles as military analysts for all of the major news networks, without noting their puppet-like relationships with the Pentagon.
Despite the media’s reluctance to even acknowledge the controversy’s existence, a Pentagon document dump has led to some revelations that make the controversy look even worse.
Faiz reported this gem earlier today:
In a Feb. 16, 2006 email exchange, Pentagon media staffers discussed coordinating with the Heritage Foundation to identify someone to speak about detainee treatment at Gitmo. An anonymous employee suggested retired Army Sergeant Major Steve Short because “he seems to be on message and very articulate.”
Pentagon public affairs official Allison Barber responded by warning that the DoD could not officially “endorse” one particular speaker over another. “Important to remember that heritage can invite anyone to present and that we don’t really have an opinion on anyone,” Barber wrote.
The anonymous author then suggested he or she might lie and pretend not to have ever heard of Short: “gasp. are you telling me to tell a lie???? surely not! ;)”
Hilarious. The “wink” emoticon certainly makes it seem as if intentional deception was not an uncommon occurrence.
Sure enough, Short spoke to the Heritage Foundation, and repeated the line the Pentagon was anxious to share, insisting that U.S. officials at Guantanamo Bay “cared for detainees in much the same way that they would like to be cared for if the situation were reversed.”
As Faiz concluded, “For the Pentagon propaganda machine — a mission accomplished.”
Paul Kiel noted a gem of his own yesterday afternoon, noting an email to public relations officials in the Pentagon about Human Events editor Jed Babbin guest hosting Michael Medved’s far-right radio show. Babbin wanted to interview Gen. George Casey, then the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq.
[J]ust in case Pentagon officials were worried that the interview might not be worth doing, the emailer made the case: “this would be a softball interview and the show is 8th or 9th in the nation.”
Allison Barber, a Public Affairs official at the Pentagon, responded quickly:
Thanks for sending this.
Just fyi, probably wouldn’t put “softball” interview in writing. If that got out it would compromise jed and general casey.
The emailer, somewhat chastened, replied “check, check.” Not bad advice at all.
As for the media blackout, Media Matters is highlighting the noticeable silence.
On the heels of an April 20 New York Times investigative report exposing the hidden relationship between media military analysts and the Pentagon and defense industries, Media Matters for America today exclusively released an accounting of the analysts identified in the Times expose and their more than 4,500 appearances and quotations on ABC, ABC News Now, CBS, CBS Radio Network, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, Fox News, and NPR. The release documents just how far and wide the Pentagon program reached.
In the three weeks since the story by Times investigative reporter David Barstow first appeared on the front page of that paper’s Sunday edition, members of the media have remained largely silent on the subject while members of Congress have taken prompt action by calling for congressional hearings and investigations by the Department of Defense, the Government Accountability Office, and the Federal Communications Commission.
“In the face of such damning evidence, the silence of those in the media who hosted or quoted these military analysts more than 4,500 times reeks of irresponsible journalism,” said Karl Frisch, a spokesman for Media Matters. “Because the media have failed to follow up on this story with the tough questions one would expect, members of Congress have been forced to act. It’s time for the media to step up and do their job.”
“Had this been a front-page story in the Sunday New York Times about a political sex scandal, you can bet that we’d have seen wall-to-wall coverage on the TV and radio,” Frisch continued. “These news outlets have set aside their journalistic integrity to provide cover for themselves and once again undermined their own credibility in the process. Their lack of a meaningful response is an embarrassment.”