bellum
I was so caught up in the melodrama of my own life that I completely neglected my blog. And more importantly, everything that was going on about the Iraq war. Shameful, but possibly a good thing. As all the media coverage of the war was bullshit anyway.
I recently watched a program (French produced, Americans would never have either the courage or the integrity to do such a thing) on the coverage of the war called US Media Blues. Eye-opening to say the least.
The American media basically just lapped up and regurgitated everything that the military fed them, augmenting it for impact here and there. The razing of Sadam's statue was a complete farce, the only Iraqis there were those who worked for the Americans as interpreters, drivers, etc, and a handful of locals. They filmed it twice, once with the American flag and once more with the Iraqi flag so they could decide which would have the impact better suited for their purposes later. The press was embedded into the army, so they only went to the places the military allowed them into, they missed the devastation caused because most nuclear weapons used travelled for something like 40 km before exploding and by the time the press had travelled the 40 km, all the bodies had been cleared away. The commentating of the reporters was like the commentating at a sports game. The news programs sold the war, producing whatever they thought would get the best ratings, not showing the other side because it wouldn't sell. When they finally released information such as the prison scandals, it was too late, and moreover, it was not because they felt they had to, but because if they didn't, someone on the internet was going to release it anyway.
However, though they are partially to blame, if it weren't for the American people and their outlook, coverage may not have been this way. In the Vietnam war, the coverage showed both sides because the people spoke up against war. During this war, because of September 11, they were all screaming for blood. Where were Bush's Christian values then? Forgiveness? Though shalt not kill? Sound vaguely familiar? One pro-war guy actually told a pacifist priest that this was exactly what Jesus would have done. I have never felt so violent as I did in those 55 minutes.
The media also exploited the collective American ignorance of the world around them, in fact they knew nothing about anything in the Middle East. How else would Osama bin Laden=Sadam Hussein, or Afganistan=Iraq=Iran=Any other country in the area? Exploitation, nasty thing for the media to do, certainly, but gee, who were the ones who lapped it up?
And now they've voted Bush back in. I shudder to think of the damage he'll manage to inflict in the next 4 years.
Well done guys, not only have you approved of the destruction of a country and the killing thousands, but you've voted the man who managed to do it back in. I applaud you.
I recently watched a program (French produced, Americans would never have either the courage or the integrity to do such a thing) on the coverage of the war called US Media Blues. Eye-opening to say the least.
The American media basically just lapped up and regurgitated everything that the military fed them, augmenting it for impact here and there. The razing of Sadam's statue was a complete farce, the only Iraqis there were those who worked for the Americans as interpreters, drivers, etc, and a handful of locals. They filmed it twice, once with the American flag and once more with the Iraqi flag so they could decide which would have the impact better suited for their purposes later. The press was embedded into the army, so they only went to the places the military allowed them into, they missed the devastation caused because most nuclear weapons used travelled for something like 40 km before exploding and by the time the press had travelled the 40 km, all the bodies had been cleared away. The commentating of the reporters was like the commentating at a sports game. The news programs sold the war, producing whatever they thought would get the best ratings, not showing the other side because it wouldn't sell. When they finally released information such as the prison scandals, it was too late, and moreover, it was not because they felt they had to, but because if they didn't, someone on the internet was going to release it anyway.
However, though they are partially to blame, if it weren't for the American people and their outlook, coverage may not have been this way. In the Vietnam war, the coverage showed both sides because the people spoke up against war. During this war, because of September 11, they were all screaming for blood. Where were Bush's Christian values then? Forgiveness? Though shalt not kill? Sound vaguely familiar? One pro-war guy actually told a pacifist priest that this was exactly what Jesus would have done. I have never felt so violent as I did in those 55 minutes.
The media also exploited the collective American ignorance of the world around them, in fact they knew nothing about anything in the Middle East. How else would Osama bin Laden=Sadam Hussein, or Afganistan=Iraq=Iran=Any other country in the area? Exploitation, nasty thing for the media to do, certainly, but gee, who were the ones who lapped it up?
And now they've voted Bush back in. I shudder to think of the damage he'll manage to inflict in the next 4 years.
Well done guys, not only have you approved of the destruction of a country and the killing thousands, but you've voted the man who managed to do it back in. I applaud you.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home