Army paying for storys in Iraqi News papers

[The_Dark]

So, it has come to light that the Army is paying for stories to be run in Iraqi news papers. The articles in question are all positive toward the US and US forces. The articles also, on inspection, happen to be factual and true...

Yet, the Democrats in Congress are throwing fits... Why? it's not like we are paying them to run false stories. Whats wrong with trying to show the people of Iraq some positive information? Are they afraid that some US papers will start printing positive stories? it makes no sense to me.

[phee]

So, it has come to light that the Army is paying for stories to be run in Iraqi news papers. The articles in question are all positive toward the US and US forces. The articles also, on inspection, happen to be factual and true...

Yet, the Democrats in Congress are throwing fits... Why? it's not like we are paying them to run false stories. Whats wrong with trying to show the people of Iraq some positive information? Are they afraid that some US papers will start printing positive stories? it makes no sense to me.

It is a tricky issue.... I have not made up my mind yet... but paying Newspapers to run articals factual or otherwise seems like something that would not happen within our borders...

[Fierce Critter]

How can paying for a news story ever be a good thing, no matter who is bankrolling the column space?

[pharoh]

This is gonna depend if it's the goverment funding this or if it's actual news companies. Either way if it's the goverment, it's gonna be Far right or if it's news companies it's gonna be far left.

[Ginevra]

Some could easily see it as propaganda.

[Mikielikesit]

Its seems today most NEWS papers have a slant one way or another and could be considered propaganda but this is just another trick of our great administration .....those fuckers are so corrupt its pitiful....I understand the stories are factual but stiill come on ......ok thats enough of my twizted opinion.......carry on

[The_Dark]

Really, whats wrong with it if it is Propoganda? Is there a law against Propoganda during a war? The stories are factual and put our forces in a good light... Why is it wrong to try and get people to like us for a change? Why is it bad to report good things? hoenstly, i think if a few good stories were reported in our borders things would be a lot different. We never hear any good news out of Iraq. Hrmm, we never hard any good news out of Vietnam either....

Look.. lets compare it to Vietnam, as the Dems in Congress so love to do... In Vietnam, we actuall won almost every major battle. A good example is the Tet Offensive. From a military stand point, we won. We defeeated the North's Army. They were at the point of chaos and confusion with almost no leadership left or any plans. The US media painted it as a complete Failure... hell, some schools still teach that it failed... because the media of the time said so... It doesn't seem to matter that the N. Vietnamise generals to this day say they lost that battle... that they didn't win the war.. They say the US media won the war for them, by running propoganda for them... and here 30 years later.. our media is doing it again. They refuse to run any story that puts what we are doing in a positive light.. they wont tell us about any of the good things that happen there.

Our military on the other hand already learned that lesson. They know that to win a war on the battle field is not enough, you have to win in the hearts and minds of the people too. So they are using propoganda, truthfull propoganda, to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people... So fewer of our boys and girls have to die, So they can come home sooner. What exactly is the harm in that?

[The_Dark]

OH, and before I forget... During WW2, all news reports.. ALL of them, that any US media put out... were checked over by the US government before they ran. No negative stories were allowed to be run, ever. Also, the government supplied a good portion of the stories for the Media to run. With and without payment.

[Head Wreck]

if thier factual. i can see no harm.

the coalition forces reputation has been marred by one or two out of a fair batch of late (the whole prisoner fiasco etc, the faked shots of brit soldiers etc.) so we need possative press.

its worrying. i'm agreeing with the dark more and more these days( )

[Shade Everdark]

I find it troubling, because it's the top of a slippery slope. How do we know, if we blithely allow the military to pay for truthful stories, that the stories will remain truthful? How will we know if the stories go from being truthful, to being embellished, to being outright lies, to being a completely fabricated account? Unless there are some well-respected, independent news sources there free from the military payroll, we won't. And if we allow it in another country, who is to say that the military won't at least start trying it over here? Maybe you have the kind of faith our military that would allow you to trust that they won't do that, but I remain skeptical.

OH, and before I forget... During WW2, all news reports.. ALL of them, that any US media put out... were checked over by the US government before they ran. No negative stories were allowed to be run, ever. Also, the government supplied a good portion of the stories for the Media to run. With and without payment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That doesn't make it right.

[The_Dark]

I didn't say that made it right or wrong. Just pointing out that it's not something new. Infact, it goes to show how little of it is being done now as compared to the past.

The other thing.... Noone is forcing the papers to run the stories. They off them cash to run the story, the papers are taking it. Thats still a Freepress deciding what it is going to run and hey... making some cash along the way.

[saechalyn]

Passing off stories as news articles written by independent reporters when they were not is flat out deceitful.

From the NY Times:

Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism.

Ironic, ain't it.

On the other hand...

From an LA Times article about this subject:

Some of the newspapers labeled the stories as "advertising," shaded them in gray boxes or used a special typeface to distinguish them from standard editorial content. But none mentioned any connection to the U.S. military.

This I have no problem with. Even if they don't state the source of the information I think if it is distinguished from the rest of the paper then that is fine. I have no problem with people being presented with a US-positive side, but material that was not written by independent journalists doing their own research should not be labeled as such.

[The_Dark]

Exactly when did someone pass a law that requires countries to not be decietful when fighting a war?

[saechalyn]

I didn't say it was illegal.

[The_Dark]

Then why is it a problem? We didn't start this war to loose. To win, we have to use all tools availible... propoganda is one of the most usefull non-lethal tools a Country has when fighting a war. Why limit our ability to win?

[saechalyn]

*shrug* All I know is that I think it's wrong to deliberately deceive people, but that is my opinion as an everyday civillian. In the context of a war going on where lives are being lost daily, I don't know, maybe it's not a problem. Or maybe it's a huge one. My ability to gauge wartime ethics as a member of neither the military nor the government is slim to none; I admit that.

[DisturbedMania]

To be honest I'd rather see politicians lie or attempt to deceive (they do that anyway) than loose peoples lives over a war.