OPINION & EDITORIAL
Planted articles hurt Iraqi democracy
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Josh Moskowitz:
- Taser experiments will help save lives (April 7, 2005)
- Planted articles hurt Iraqi democracy (December 14, 2005)
- DeLay's tactics catch up with him, finally (April 15, 2005)
- Iran key concern for Israel (January 26, 2006)
- Journalism out in jeopardy (April 25, 2005)
Related Stories:
- U.S. cannot leave Iraq too soon (February 10, 2005)
- Neo-conservatism continues to fail U.S. (January 28, 2005)
- Hussein's death will not advance U.S. goals for Iraq (November 7, 2006)
- Troops deserve to come home (April 13, 2007)
- Protest far from treasonous (April 20, 2005)
by Josh Moskowitz
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
In its quest to transform Iraq into a functioning, authentic democracy, the Bush administration has resorted to using much more than overwhelming military force. In order to deflect rampant Iraqi criticism of its invasion and spread the fundamental characteristics of what a democracy consists of, the government has fully engaged itself in a war of ideas. Its methods and means may prove, however, to be entirely antithetical to some of our most beloved rights and freedoms.
Two weeks ago, a number of news stories detailed the Pentagon's use of funding for implementing largely pro-American articles in Iraqi newspapers. The articles, ostensibly unbiased and written by independent journalists, are actually the work of U.S. military "information operations" troops who send them to a defense contracting group in Iraq that translates them into Arabic and pays Iraqi papers to publish them. The articles praise the work of Iraqi and U.S. troops, heavily criticize the insurgency and discuss the wonders of rebuilding the nation under a democratic regime.
The articles are never attributed to the military or American government. When attributed, the articles will sometimes refer to an organization called the "International Information Center," an entity lacking recognition or legitimacy.
The defense contractor, the Lincoln Group, has a five-year contract worth up to $100 million with the American military. The group has implanted more than 1,000 stories in Iraqi and Afghan publications, paying the newspapers from $40-$2,000 in order to secure a spot in their pages. Members of the group have also paid Iraqi journalists directly, offering monthly stipends on $400 to those willing to write pro-American op-ed pieces or straight news stories.
Though news of this surreptitious program was only published last week, the administration has employed defense contractors and public relations agencies for the last four years.
Immediately after Sept. 11, 2001, the administration decided that the country's image had been unjustly tarnished and degraded by Islamic fascists, such as Osama bin Laden. A panel, called the Counter Terrorism Information Strategy Policy Coordinating Committee, was created, consisting of Pentagon officials and intelligence officers who were trained in psychological operations. Their task was to aid in changing mental perception of America in countries determined to harbor resentment or ill-will toward the United States. It was disbanded only after public uproar ensued regarding a new Pentagon operation called the Office of Strategic Influence, which may have worked with the panel, which had planned "to provide news items, possibly even false ones, to foreign news organizations." Though Pentagon officials denied the use of false propaganda, that operation was shut down as well.
While President Bush was admittedly "very troubled" upon learning about these articles, Pentagon leaders have touted their success and effectiveness. According to one, "We call our stuff information and the enemy's propaganda."
Sadly, though, the Army's biased and unidentified news articles are indeed propaganda. Paying Iraqi publishers and journalists to inject American constructed and proofread news articles is a tell-tale sign of how poorly this war is being handled militarily and politically. Most distressing is that it signals how effective the insurgency has become and will remain if the administration doesn't create a clear strategic plan for future American involvement.
Discussing his views on the freedom on the press, Thomas Jefferson once said, "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." There is little question that the ability to cultivate, create, express and publish one's ideas in this country have led to its greatness. In the marketplace of ideas, citizens are able to passionately debate, argue and learn from one another. Ideas that lack legitimacy, substance or validity are trumped by those that combine all three.
In its attempt to bring democracy to Iraq, the Bush administration's blatant use of propaganda to win the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people undermines a cause that American patriots fought for almost 230 years ago. The ability to speak and publish freely is one of our nation's most sacred rights — the same set of rights the Iraqi people deserve as they move toward democracy.
Josh Moskowitz (jmoskowitz@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in political science and journalism.
Anonymous (December 14, 2005 @ 4:41pm):
I glad your ilk was not around when the US was attempting to bring democracy to Germany and Japan after WW II.
Germany would be ruled by a Kaiser, or perhaps the werewolve insurgents wpould have brought back the Nazis.
"For up to two years after the Nazis surrendered on May 7, 1945, the threat of a Nazi insurgency loomed large over Germany. Towards the end of 1944, about 5,000 members of the elite Nazi SS and the Hitler Youth were recruited into a force called Werwolf and trained in terrorist tactics and guerilla warfare."
"Lest we forget, even with very little actual hindrance from insurgent and terrorist activities, it took four years to rebuild Germany to even a shadow of what it is today and ten years for it to be declared fully sovereign."
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/rubin082005.htm
Japan would now be ruled by the Emperor.
Anonymous (December 16, 2005 @ 12:53pm):
Thomas Jefferson said a lot of things and didn't let many of them get in the way of his objectives. Nation-building is a messy business, and we can all be thankful that it isn't left up to liberal undergrads.
Anonymous (December 19, 2005 @ 9:37am):
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
Anonymous (December 19, 2005 @ 9:39am):
The U.S. military tells Iraqis the truth, and some call it a "scandal."
The latest Iraq "scandal" the politicians and the media have discovered is the U.S. military's alleged covert purchase of favorable articles in the Iraqi press. This alleged "propaganda campaign . . . violates fundamental principles of Western journalism," reports the New York Times.
This is not surprising, insofar as Iraq does not yet enjoy "Western journalism." Journalists there are murdered, blackmailed and bribed. They and their families are routinely threatened and coerced by terrorist/insurgents. Newspapers often serve as propaganda arms of various political and religious factions. The widely viewed Arab network Al-Jazeera works diligently to promote terrorism and undermine Iraq by disseminating lies, distortions and misinformation.
In light of this reality, the U.S. military has a choice: It can accept this deleterious state of affairs, play by Marquess of Queensberry rules, and wait decades for the emergence of "Western journalism." The result would be a heady propaganda win for the terrorist/insurgents, a prolonged conflict, and more unnecessary violence and death. Or the U.S. military can work within Iraq's present-day constraints to try to ensure that Iraqis hear the truth about what is happening in their country.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007698
Anonymous (December 21, 2005 @ 12:11am):
Besides a lot of bashing of our government and military I fail to see any point in this article that relates to the title. Keep in mind that during WWII our government used press releases that showed our troops, "bravely repelling the Nazi hordes." The people of this country saw those releases and most were convinced we were doing a good job and support for the war was high. The military is doing the same thing in Iraq. Headlines that go something like "Insurgents pushed back yet again" or "Terrorists on the Run" serve to embolden the people and give them hope. In establishing a democracy in Iraq hope is one of the most important things tho have. I fail to see any argument about how "In its attempt to bring democracy to Iraq, the Bush administration's blatant use of propaganda to win the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people undermines a cause that American patriots fought for almost 230 years ago" in this article.
