;”>I highly recommend reading the New York Times article on the Pentagon’s propaganda machine, if only to understand the catastrophic failure on the part of journalists to provide accurate coverage of the war, but also the complete violation of the public trust on the part of our government. The network’s response to finding out many of the “analysts” they had hired were part of a coordinated Pentagon propaganda effort was unbelievable:

Some network officials, meanwhile, acknowledged only a limited understanding of their analysts’ interactions with the administration. They said that while they were sensitive to potential conflicts of interest, they did not hold their analysts to the same ethical standards as their news employees regarding outside financial interests. The onus is on their analysts to disclose conflicts, they said. And whatever the contributions of military analysts, they also noted the many network journalists who have covered the war for years in all its complexity.

This is an abdication of one of the only two responsibilities news organizations have to the public:

1. To provide the public with relevant information.

2. To ensure the information is accurate.

Regardless of whether the networks feel the “onus” is on analysts to disclose conflicts, it isn’t, because in the end news organizations, by putting these people on the air, are vouching for the quality and content of the information. Failing to adequately explore the connections of people they put on the air essentially means that the networks cannot, with any certainty, assure you that what they broadcast is accurate. What exactly, is the point of journalism (Ducats, I know) if it cannot provide, at the very minimum, information that can be trusted?

And they wonder why they’re struggling for viewers?

Related Posts with Thumbnails