|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
 Posted - 03/13/2005 : 16:02:56
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/13/politics/13covert.html?pagewanted=1&th
So if what I read is correct, the government PR produces news-items for news broadcasting on television networks, without any indication that the news-item is made by the government public relations. According to the New York Times:
quote:
Under the Bush administration, the federal government has aggressively used a well-established tool of public relations: the prepackaged, ready-to-serve news report that major corporations have long distributed to TV stations to pitch everything from headache remedies to auto insurance. In all, at least 20 federal agencies, including the Defense Department and the Census Bureau, have made and distributed hundreds of television news segments in the past four years, records and interviews show. Many were subsequently broadcast on local stations across the country without any acknowledgement of the government's role in their production.
And it's not just the Bush government that does it. When we get a little further into the article we read:
quote:
The practice, which also occurred in the Clinton administration, is continuing despite President Bush's recent call for a clearer demarcation between journalism and government publicity efforts.
Now, I'm not sure if this happens in the Netherlands, but as far as I'm aware it doesn't. If there is a message which the government wants to get out, this is done through commercials broadcasted under a clear 'postal box 51' mark, so everyone knows that this is a commercial from a government agency. Frankly, the first thing I thought about when reading about this was Goebbels. It sickens me. It means that the government is able to spread propaganda as objective news and it means the news broadcasters themselves do not bother to research the topics they are broadcasting. Do any of you have some more information about this?
|
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2005 : 16:31:00 [Permalink]
|
To add some further snippets in the article:
quote:
So in a recent segment produced by the Agriculture Department, the agency's narrator ended the report by saying "In Princess Anne, Maryland, I'm Pat O'Leary reporting for the U.S. Department of Agriculture." Yet AgDay, a syndicated farm news program that is shown on some 160 stations, simply introduced the segment as being by "AgDay's Pat O'Leary." The final sentence was then trimmed to "In Princess Anne, Maryland, I'm Pat O'Leary reporting."
Why? Why would any self-respecting news source pass of a governmentclip as their own? At least be frank about your sources.
And then, apparantly the news is being 'bought' by the news broadcasters from firms that produce these 'news'-clips for major corporations, again without a mark that they are indeed commissioned by these corporations:
quote:
It is a sizable industry. One of its largest players, Medialink Worldwide Inc., has about 200 employees, with offices in New York and London. It produces and distributes about 1,000 video news releases a year, most commissioned by major corporations. The Public Relations Society of America even gives an award, the Bronze Anvil, for the year's best video news release.
Of course, the problem (and probably the solution) is cash.
quote:
"No TV news organization has the resources in labor, time or funds to cover every worthy story," one video news release company, TVA Productions, said in a sales pitch to potential clients, adding that "90 percent of TV newsrooms now rely on video news releases."
When reading the parts about Ms Ryan, another illustre name surfaced in my head, Leni Riefenstahl.
quote:
In the segment, Mr. Bush is shown signing the legislation as Ms. Ryan describes the new benefits and reports that "all people with Medicare will be able to get coverage that will lower their prescription drug spending."
The segment made no mention of the many critics who decry the law as an expensive gift to the pharmaceutical industry.
At least she hasn't got the self-deceit down as well as Leni and still seems to have some morals:
quote:
Ms. Ryan said she was surprised by the number of stations willing to run her government segments without any editing or acknowledgement of origin. As proud as she says she is of her work, she did not hesitate, even for a second, when asked if she would have broadcast one of her government reports if she were a local news director.
"Absolutely not."
|
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
 |
|
|
sweetmiracle
Skeptic Friend
USA
74 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2005 : 09:59:22 [Permalink]
|
I'm so totally not stunned....
Recently we had a minor fuss over a columnist who'd been paid by the administration to push their plans for education in his columns...I thought it should have been a major fuss, but seems most people expect this kind of thing and simply ignore it...
The US gov. has become such a media game, from election campaigns based on 'feel-good' or 'threatening' imagery to all the game-playing by the various departments...
And it's not a Liberal or a Conservative thing. It's all across the board.... |
Remarkable claims require remarkable proof.
-Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2005 : 12:39:46 [Permalink]
|
| Its a sad state of affairs no doubt, and does not appear to be on the verge of changing. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/15/2005 : 06:44:25 [Permalink]
|
From the Washington Post:
quote:
Administration Rejects Ruling On PR Videos
GAO Called Tapes Illegal Propaganda
By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 15, 2005; Page A21
The Bush administration, rejecting an opinion from the Government Accountability Office, said last week that it is legal for federal agencies to feed TV stations prepackaged news stories that do not disclose the government's role in producing them.
That message, in memos sent Friday to federal agency heads and general counsels, contradicts a Feb. 17 memo from Comptroller General David M. Walker. Walker wrote that such stories -- designed to resemble independently reported broadcast news stories so that TV stations can run them without editing -- violate provisions in annual appropriations laws that ban covert propaganda.
OMB's Joshua B. Bolten: Justice, not GAO, interprets law.
But Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget, and Steven G. Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department, said in memos last week that the administration disagrees with the GAO's ruling. And, in any case, they wrote, the department's Office of Legal Counsel, not the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, provides binding legal interpretations for federal agencies to follow.
Seig Heil!!
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2005 : 03:56:27 [Permalink]
|
There is an excellent discussion on this topic on Democracy Now. The transcript is on their web site. Here are a couple excerpts:quote:
JOHN STAUBER: I was absolutely elated to see The New York Times front page coverage with the inside spread. I would urge everyone watching or listening to read that article. We link to it off of our website at prwatch.org. In the more than ten years that I have been investigating and reporting on the widespread use of public relations as news, there's never, ever been a story like this. This widespread use of fake news, we're talking thousands of stories a year. This is a billion dollar sub-industry of the P.R. industry has been going on for 20 years, and this is the first mainstream media expose of any length and depth about it.
And The New York Times piece really, really puts the wood to the Bush administration for their massive spending, a quarter of a billion dollars in just the last four years on P.R. spin and propaganda. You know, we need a full scale investigation of how that money has been spent, but actually, that's just the tip of the iceberg, when you consider that most of these are coming from corporations.
JOHN STAUBER: Well, it would appear to be, and there are other acts, going all the way back to the 1920s where Congress has weighed in and said that in a democracy, government propaganda is inappropriate and illegal.
The fact there is actually a law against government propagandizing its own public was certainly an eye opener. I hope the ACLU files a suit against the use of our tax dollars to make propaganda for the public's consumption. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2005 : 14:04:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
The fact there is actually a law against government propagandizing its own public was certainly an eye opener.
I may sound pessimistic, but I doubt any legal actions will be taken against the Bush administration.
quote:
I hope the ACLU files a suit against the use of our tax dollars to make propaganda for the public's consumption.
But how much tax money is being spent if the corporations are funding most of it? It's their agenda anyway. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2005 : 14:21:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
The fact there is actually a law against government propagandizing its own public was certainly an eye opener.
I may sound pessimistic, but I doubt any legal actions will be taken against the Bush administration.
quote:
I hope the ACLU files a suit against the use of our tax dollars to make propaganda for the public's consumption.
But how much tax money is being spent if the corporations are funding most of it? It's their agenda anyway.
I'm hoping the more outing of this issue the more we will see a least a little public outcry. Who knows though. The Bushies are very good at deflecting.
As to how much public money, plenty. There have been millions of dollars spent by the government. There were those hundreds of thousands to the reporters and out of the department of education budget for the no child campaign. There was a small chunk of the SSI budget to market Bush's SSI plan. That one got whistleblower complaints. And I just can't believe we are not picking up the tab for Bush's fake 'town meeting' tour across the country to sell his SSI plan. If you haven't seen his town meetings they make the Jeff Gannon, aka Jim Guckert, question in the white House press room look like child's play. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 03/16/2005 14:22:42 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
