Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Withholding news is not propaganda

This letter has not been edited

Jerry Michals, Aurora

Published September 6, 2008 at 6 p.m.

Text size  

In his letter printed 8/12/08, D. W. Griffith worries about the liberal media spewing propaganda, then gives us a list of what (he) says are unreported stories showing left-wing bias and making G. W. Bush look bad. By the way, withholding news is not propaganda. The 500 metric tons of yellow cake was found after the first Gulf War in 1992 and was under the watch of the International Atomic Energy Agency until it was sold and delivered to Canada using the U. S. military trucks and aircraft this year. The yellow cake that Valerie Plame said did not exist was indeed the nonexistent yellow cake from Niger that helped get us into a war. The 40 buried Migs story, not squadrons, was reported when the Army released the information a month after they were found. All of these were in the daily press and television. Iran’s centrifuge buildup and missile test were both reported in newspapers and television promptly because Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent out a press release. Not finding WMD was just the news, not bias. Maybe the reason G. W. Bush didn’t get any props for the yellow cake removal was that the deal with Canada was made by the Iraqi government, which was duly reported by the “biased” media. So thank you D. W. Griffith for your diligent unbiased news gathering, but most of us read stories when they happened.

Comments

  • September 7, 2008

    6:58 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

    "withholding news is not propaganda"?

    When they report one side and withhold the other, it certainly is. The press assumes the false face of being unbiased when they are not. That false face coupled with selective reporting compounds the lie.

    What they report and when it is reported has an effect. Remember the 2006 elections? Every day leading into the voting the death count for US troops was being reported. Now, you hear it maybe every two months. That was propaganda the way it was reported.

  • September 7, 2008

    1:46 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    AngelontheSidelines writes:

    MIH,
    The old grey lady,(NYTimes) withheld the biggest story of the election season, until after the election, then the conservative pundits declared the NYT traitorous for telling us of the FISA violations of warrantless wiretapping.

    If the press WAS truly liberal, this story would have been out before the vote, and Bush would have lost.

  • September 7, 2008

    4:11 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    rjnova writes:

    President Bushes main problem has been Leftist Democrats willing to put our troops and country at risk to keep up a constant rant that the war was lost, then that it has not been concluded fast enough. Hind sight is always 20/20 but wars always have unplanned repercussions that require re-adjustments.

    I think the Dems activities border on disloyalty for the sake of political gain in the presidential election. Liberals consistently are willing to get into bed with Euro Socialists and ignore that Europe is distancing itself from socialism as fast as they can.

    I put myself with the plan to hit terrorists before they hit us. That is the only thing they understand. All Middle East countries recognize they can be put away like Saddam in about one week. That has not been lost on any of these half-assed dictators.

  • September 7, 2008

    4:57 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    dragonfly writes:

    Withholding news is not propaganda?

    Can you say "Pravda"?

  • September 7, 2008

    6:03 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    grandpaw writes:

    While the withholding of news does not meet the standard definition of propaganda, such withholding can certainly be used for the same purpose as propaganda, that is, to influence the choices that people make.

    The dictionary definition:

    "1 The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.
    2 Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda."

    It's interesting that the standard definition of propaganda does not include a requirement that the information propagated be false or misleading. I think most of us consider that to be a part of propaganda. Dictionary definitions don't always comport with most people's understanding of a word.

  • September 8, 2008

    5:22 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    SheikYurBooty writes:

    I just saw where the National Enquirer (you know - of Gary Hart and John Edwards affair fame) is reporting on the Bristol Palin unwed pregnancy scandal that Sarah wanted to get her "quietly married" before word got out, and that "While Republican Presidential candidate John McCain's been ducking reported infidelity claims, there's no denying his cheatin' ways with first wife, Carol - the woman who waited for him when he was a P.O.W."

    Where's the MSM?? The NY Times, NBC, CBS, etc are completely burying these stories, proving the headline-writer's point.

  • September 8, 2008

    8:06 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Acemon writes:

    Which is worse: withholding news or refusing to print propaganda?

  • September 8, 2008

    10:17 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Fisherman writes:

    Sheik,
    Stop reading just the National Enquirer and you'll see those stories you mentioned in the MSM.

  • September 9, 2008

    8:45 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    p_myers661 writes:

    While I consider the MSM to be a bunch of liberal stooges, I don't think they deliberately hide stories.

    There isn't room in your average newscast or paper for all the news of any day or time period. The 24/7 media can cover everything, but only superficially. Most choose to report on stories with a big audience.

    Don't blame the media for not telling all the stories. It's each person's responsibility to investigate stories and dig out facts on their own. The only way to get the true story is to get the whole story. Start with the MSM, Rush, MoveOn.org or any source you want. Just investigate their claims, accusations and reports yourself. Make up your own minds. That's why you have a brain and a keyboard.