De Commerciele Massamedia 25

'Media Critiques.

Why is the US press silent on Brzezinski’s warnings of war against Iran?
By Barry Grey in Washington DC

The major national newspapers and most broadcast outlets failed even to report Thursday’s stunning testimony by former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Brzezinski, national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, is among the most prominent figures within the US foreign policy establishment. He delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the policy of the Bush administration was leading inevitably to a military confrontation with Iran which would have disastrous consequences for US imperialism.
Most significant and disturbing was Brzezinski’s suggestion that the Bush administration might manufacture a pretext to justify a military attack on Iran. Presenting what he called a “plausible scenario for a military collision with Iraq,” Brzezinski laid out the following series of events: “Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in, quote/unquote, ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran...” [Emphasis added].
Thus Brzezinski opined that a US military attack on Iran would be an aggressive action, presented as though it were a defensive response to alleged Iranian provocations, and came close to suggesting, without explicitly stating as much, that the White House was capable of manufacturing or allowing a terrorist attack within the US to provide a casus belli for war.
It is self-evident that such testimony at an open congressional hearing from someone with decades of experience in the US foreign policy establishment and the closest ties to the military and intelligence apparatus is not only newsworthy, but of the most immense and grave import. Any objective and conscientious newspaper or news channel would consider it an obligation to inform the public of such a development.
Yet neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post carried so much as a news brief on Brzezinski’s testimony in their Friday editions. Nor did USA Today or the Wall Street Journal. All of these publications, of course, have well-staffed Washington bureaus and regularly cover congressional hearings—especially those dealing with such burning political questions as the war in Iraq.'

Lees verder: http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_23895.shtml

Dezelfde vraag geldt voor de Nederlandse commerciele massamedia. Stel de vraag eens aan uw krant of uw omroep waarom de uitspraken van Brzezinski niet weergegeven worden en geanalyseerd? Per slot van rekening wordt elke onbenullige oprisping van een Nederlandse politicus uit en te na behandeld.

In Guardian of Power. The Myth of the Liberal Media schrijven de Britse media-analisten van Media Lens, David Edwards en David Cromwell, over 'how media performance overwhelmingly promotes the views and interests of established power. It might seem curious that we have also consistently argued that this happens in the absence of any conspiracy, with minimal self-censorship, and even outright lying.' Dat hoeft ook niet 'the whole process of selection, training, and even qualification... has evolved so that professionals internalise the basic understanding that they should "subordinate their own beliefs to an assigned ideology" and not "question the politics built into their work."' En dat is geen bewering uit de losse pols, maar een vaststaand feit, zo weet ik uit directe ervaring tijdens meer dan 30 jaar journalistiek bedrijven.

Zie ook http://www.medialens.org/