March 06, 2004

The New York Times and other major media outlets are at it again: parroting Bush-Cheney campaign themes against a Democrat while turning a blind eye to equal or worse offenses by Republicans.

In the current climate, with the Bush cabal's grip on power lessened somewhat by the combo of 500+ US soldiers killed and $500+ billion dollars federal deficit and the light these twin tragedies have shed on the _resident's lack of CHARACTER, CREDIBILITY and COMPETENCE, the "US mainstream news media" has shown some life and some independent thoughts, but only sporadically....You must look at the "US mainstream news media" as a battered spouse in crisis, at any moment, yes, she could pick up a shotgun and blow a hole through her abuser (by telling the truth, rightly prioritzed, on the air waves and in print) or she could denounce those concerned family members and social services professionals that have attempted to intervene and go back to the abuser, out of fear and habit...There are some disturbing signs of weakening resolve...She may yet believe him when he tells her that it will all be different now and that he has really changed...

Here is some excellent commentary from Robert Parry. His www.consortiumnews.com continues to be one of the beacons of truth that define the Internet-based Information Rebellion. We are going to need them...

Robert Parry, www.consortiumnews.com: The media’s eagerness to adopt this “conventional wisdom” on Kerry follows the pattern of Campaign 2000 when the Times joined the media pack in portraying Al Gore as a liar while buying into the image that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were straight-shooters, despite an abundance of evidence that they weren’t. Even four years later – after the deceptions about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and disclosures about the abuse of scientific research to make it fit Bush’s agenda – the national news media clings to this precious notion that Bush is no liar.

Break the Bush Cabal Stranglehold on the "US Mainstream News Media," Show Up for Democracy in 2004: Defeat Bush (again!)

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/030704.html

Protecting Bush-Cheney Redux

By Robert Parry Parry
March 7, 2004

The New York Times and other major media outlets are at it again: parroting Bush-Cheney campaign themes against a Democrat while turning a blind eye to equal or worse offenses by Republicans. This new case of protecting Bush-Cheney is built around the theme that Sen. John Kerry is a flip-flopper, while ignoring examples of George W. Bush’s own flip-flops.

The media’s eagerness to adopt this “conventional wisdom” on Kerry follows the pattern of Campaign 2000 when the Times joined the media pack in portraying Al Gore as a liar while buying into the image that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were straight-shooters, despite an abundance of evidence that they weren’t. Even four years later – after the deceptions about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and disclosures about the abuse of scientific research to make it fit Bush’s agenda – the national news media clings to this precious notion that Bush is no liar.

Now, the pattern repeats itself. On March 6, in a lengthy front-page
Times
article entitled “Kerry’s Shifts: Nuanced Ideas Or Flip-Flops,”
reporter
David M. Halbfinger dissects Kerry’s statements on issues such as gay
marriage and “defines” Kerry just the way the Republican National
Committee
drew it up: a waffler who takes both sides of issues. No where in the
piece
is there any reference to Bush’s history of flip-flopping on issues of
grave consequence to the world, such as his promises to curb carbon
dioxide
and other greenhouse gases; his pledges to maintain a balanced federal
budget and keep his hands off the Social Security trust fund; and his
assurances that he would run a “humble” foreign policy that wouldn’t
stretch U.S. forces with “nation-building” tasks.

No Context

Bush’s inconsistencies are ignored even in a context, such as Bush’s
direct
personal attacks on Kerry’s credibility, when Bush’s own record and
hypocrisy would seem especially relevant.

By contrast, if Kerry were to charge Bush with flip-flopping, the
accusation immediately would boomerang on Kerry. Any article about such
a
Kerry charge would surely devote space to the idea that Kerry was
living in
a glass house and throwing stones or perhaps the article might offer a
psychological analysis of how Kerry is “projecting.” We’d all be
reminded
that hypocrisy makes for a great story.

As in Campaign 2000, the Times and other publications seem determined
to
apply double standards that effectively give Bush and Cheney a walk.
The
logic behind this pattern is that it buys journalists protection from
right-wing press attack groups, which have long proven that they can
damage
or destroy the careers of journalists who get tagged with the “liberal”
label.

It is far safer and more lucrative for journalists to protect their
right
flanks by putting on blinders on their right side, so they don’t see
certain facts that might require courage to report. That way, they can
tout
their tough anti-Democratic writing as proof they’re “not liberal,”
knowing
there is no serious threat to their careers from the left.

The careers of virtually all the journalists who made a mockery of
Campaign
2000 continue to thrive, while there are many examples of journalists
whose
reporting angered the conservatives – the likes of former San Jose
Mercury
News reporter Gary Webb – who paid a steep price. [For details, see
Robert
Parry's Lost History.]

Next Chapter

And, as surely as night follows day, the next page in the
“Kerry-as-flip-flopper” script will be that Kerry “failed” to prevent
the
Bush-Cheney team from defining him as a flip-flopper. That will give
the
talking-head pundits another opportunity to reprise Kerry’s alleged
offenses while leaving out Bush’s and, of course, never mentioning the
news
media’s role in creating this unbalanced impression. Soon, it will seem
like bias for anyone even to suggest that Bush’s flip-flops, too.

So, as aspiring star reporters head off into another career-making
presidential campaign, it is worth reflecting on three previous stories
published by Consortiumnews.com: One is “Protecting Bush-Cheney,” an
account of the double standards in Campaign 2000; the second is this
year’s
"Kerry & the 'Special Interest' Hit Piece," an account of the
Washington
Post’s deceptive reporting on “special interest” donations; and the
third
is “Bush’s Great Debate – With Himself,” which details some of the
momentous flip-flips of Bush’s first term.

You’re unlikely to see these realities acknowledged in the mainstream
media, which seems eager to protect Bush-Cheney once again.

Robert Parry is a former Associated Press and Newsweek reporter who in
the
1980s broke many of the stories that are now known as the Iran-Contra
Affair. He is author of the book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the
Press
& Project Truth.

Posted by richard at March 6, 2004 04:30 PM