| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"can_o_worms" |
| Date: |
29 Jun 2006 10:10:10 PM |
| Object: |
Does NPR Slant Middle East News as does U.S. Televised Media |
I don't think anybody reports Middle East News quite
as selectively as the U.S. Televised Media does ( with the
possible exception of Time Warner's CNN International )
But here is one steady listener's opinion
*******************************************
An Open Letter to NPR
Warped Coverage of the Middle East
from the best site on the left : CounterPunch
http://www.counterpunch.org/pace06122006.html
By FELICE PACE
Dear Scott Simon and all Weekend Edition Sat folks:
Weekend Edition Saturday in general and Scott Simons
hosting and essays in particular have been among my
favorite news experiences for many, many years. But in
recent years, and as I have learned more from non-US
sources about events in the Middle East and elsewhere,
my enthusiasm has come to be tempered with frustration
and deep concern.
Saturday's show was a case in point. Scotts interview
with Beirut editor Rami Khouri was supposed to be
focused on reactions across the Middle East to Zarqawis
death. Mr. Simon began asking Mr. Khouri to gauge the
effect (of the killing) elsewhere in the region.Mr.
Khouri responded that Zarqawis death is seen as changing
little because he was only a symptom and symbolof the
dissatisfaction with US policy in the Middle East. He
then went on to cite Jordanian Security officials to the
effect that Israeli policies and actions toward the
Palestinians and US support for those policies and
actions, as well as the invasion and destabilization of
Iraq, are the underlying realitieswhich are the basis of
anti-American feelings. Because these realities had not
changed, Mr. Khouri suggested, Zarqawis death would
change little. Mr. Simon said Hmm- then quickly changed
the subject to recent Iraqi cabinet appointments.
I have come to expect reactions like Mr. Simon's
whenever an interviewee suggests to a US reporter that
the terrible situation in the Middle East and the hatred
of the US by Muslim's generally is directly related to
US policy and actions toward Israel and Palestine. Such
suggestions are almost universally treated by American
reporters as hot potatoes; there is the moment of
silence, then they are hurried into obscurity as quickly
as possible.
A seasoned reported would have been expected to seize on
Mr. Khouri's tantalizing suggestion and dig deeper in
order to decipher and report just what specific policies
and actions Mr. Khouri and the Jordanian security
officials believe are the bedrock cause of the symptom
and symbolphenomenon like Zarqawi. But not on THIS issue.
The question is why. Why is it that otherwise savvy
reporters run like frightened chickens whenever it is
suggested that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in
general and US policy in relationship to that conflict
in particular is central to US problems in the
Arab-Muslim world?
I would like you Mr. Simon and you the WE Sat editors
and producers to answer that question. I challenge you
to face the issue and to respond.
I have reached my own conclusions. I've taken note of
what happens when an NPR or any other US reporter or
academic suggests such a connection. I have noted, for
example, how quickly and pointedly NPR issues a
correction when a reporter (inadvertently or not)
describes an incident or condition in a way not
acceptable to the American Zionists and their allies.
Any reporter statement on any aspect of
Israeli-Palestinian relations that does not fall
comfortably within the confines of the Zionist-defined
narrative immediately triggers massive and relentless
reaction, attack and pressure both direct and subtle,
inside and outside, designed to force the reporter and
the organization back on the reservation. Like virtually
all other mainstream US news organizations, NPR scurries
back into line.
The problem with this sort of reporting, of course, is
that it helps create a US citizenry that is out of touch
with realities which folks most other places in the
world understand as matters of fact. Combine the myopia
of the US citizenry with the global reach and force of
US power and you have a situation which is prone to
manipulation, abuse and disaster. Ergo Iraq!
Blind adherence to and even promotion of the Zionist
narrative on the Middle East by the US Media has been
going on for so long and has been so effective that it
is emulated and reproduced by others who seek to control
the American People through the media. American
journalists have become so conditioned to accept such
narratives that they unconsciously censor out
connections and facts which contradict them. Thus the
view of world events that Americans receive from the
media is fundamentally different than the view citizens
in the rest of the world receive.
So it was that Scott Simons otherwise excellent essay
Saturday on US atrocities in Iraq failed to connect the
dots linking those atrocities and the refusal of U.S.
Army 1st Lieutenant Ehren Watada earlier in the week to
deploy to Iraq. For the first time since the start of
the war, a commissioned officer is refusing deployment.
Lieutenant Watada's courageous stand was announced on
Wednesday; a search today of NPR for the past week
returned no hits.
I am not surprised. A reminder that the occupation of
Iraq is illegal is not within the mainstream narrative
and therefore does not garner NPR coverage. Mr. Simon
was probably not even aware that a US officer had done
that very week what he was suggesting refusing to obey
illegal orders. I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Simon
ethical integrity is what we should expect of our troops.
But Mr. Simon extended the logic only to the
atrocitiesthereby ignoring the most illegal of orders
the order to deploy and serve in an illegal war.
To some extent all our thinking is influenced by the
defining narratives, the defining myths, perpetrated by
those who control messaging and by the accumulation of
messaging we call culture. At its most effective such
control produces the sort of group mind that lead the
American People to ignore key discrepancies and accept
the myth that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to our
security and therefore must be taken out. But it is
precisely the likelihood that the rich and powerful
would seek to control what information and which
narratives reached the People that prompted the Founding
Fathers to elevate the Fourth Estate as an essential
check on control of defining narratives by the rich and
powerful. And it is why Thomas Jefferson as president
defended and protected the press even when it attacked
him ruthlessly and without just cause.
Today the Fourth Estate has lost sight of its essential
function in this Republic. In loosing its way the media
has also lost its stature with and importance to the
People. Increasingly journalists are seen as
entertainers, not as central defenders of the People and
promoters of the Republic. Sadly, NPR News must be
included in this generalization. What a long, slow fall
it has been!
***
Felice Pace served for fifteen years as Conservation
Director of the Klamath Forest Alliance (KFA) where he
now volunteers as a senior counselor. While working for
KFA from 1989 through 2003, Pace spearheaded numerous
administrative appeals and several lawsuits to protect
forests from logging and road building. He was a
presenter at President Clintons Forest Conference in
Portland and an early champion of efforts to put timber
folks to work restoring forests and streams.
from the best site on the left : CounterPunch
http://www.counterpunch.org/pace06122006.html
--
Did you know ?...Juan Cole's appointment as head
of Yale's department of Middle Eastern studies
was recently nixed by the Israel Lobby.
War for hearts and minds in academia rages on.
Juan Cole's website :
http://www.juancole.com/
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
