by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright December 4, 2005
All Rights Reserved.

ngaged in a pitched battle to win the “hearts and minds” of the Iraqi people, the Pentagon vitiated Iraq's fledgling free press, paying off editors and placing propaganda in Iraqi newspapers. Pure sloppiness exposed an age-old practice of exploiting the electronic and print media to advance U.S. military objectives. Past propaganda campaigns operated covertly, exerting maximum influence on local populations—whether in Iraq or elsewhere. Whether discrediting Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, Panama's former tyrant Manuel Noriega or ex-Serbian strongman Slobodan Milosevic, “psycops”—psychological operations—has always played a crucial role in winning military campaigns. Pointing fingers at foreign publications ignores the very real possibility that the same practice of planting news stories occurs routinely in the U.S. electronic and print industry.

     In 2002, the Pentagon had to “scrap” under intense public pressure its Office of Strategic Influence after reports it planned to plant false news stories in “foreign” media outlets. Going public always upends the best-laid plans of clever propagandists busily engaged in covert subterfuge. Once exposed, propaganda loses its power and becomes a cynical manipulation practiced by the world's most repressive regimes. All governments use disinformation to advance political and military objectives. When former New York Times reporter Judith Miller filed numerous stories about Saddam's alleged arsenal of dangerous weapons during the lead-up to war, it's unclear whether she was duped by her source former Vice President Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby—now under indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice—or participated in a propaganda campaign.

     Electronic and print media are routinely manipulated by strategic public relations experts working for the government or publicly traded corporations. Whether Miller was manipulated by Libby or whether the New York Times made front-page space available to disseminate government propaganda isn't clear. Today's revelation about the Pentagon, or its strategic communication contractor, The Lincoln Group, paying off Iraqi newspapers to place stories raises disturbing questions about today's journalism. A New York Times front-page story March 2, 2003, for example, touted Botox for treating strangled voices. It's unclear whether the drug maker Allergan Inc.—like the military— had a hand in getting the story in print. Trained in journalism, propagandists craft press releases, file extensive reports and find broadcast or print outlets in which to run concocted stories.

     Today's revelation about planting stories raises disturbing questions about the honor system in American journalism. If the military can pay to place stories in Iraq, it can do the same at home. It's hard to know whether major advertisers, like big insurance companies, the drug industry or even Wall Street, get special treatment placing news stories about their business. “This is a military program to help get factual information about ongoing operations into Iraqi news,” said Lit. Col. Barry Johnson, a military spokesman in Baghdad, justifying the practice of planting stories. When news and advertising become blurred, it causes problems for journalists seeking the truth, especially when it comes to national security. It's difficult to know now whether much of the prewar reporting involved the White House or military exerting undue influence on the broadcast and print industry.

     Countering pernicious propaganda has always presented a problem winning the information war in military conflicts. It's disingenuous smearing Mideast propaganda outlets like Al Jazeera when the U.S. military and private contractors buy off Iraq's fledgling free press to influence public opinion. All propagandists believe they exert undue influence for noble reasons, including companies like Ford who blamed fatal rollover crashes on Firestone Tires, rather than admit dangerous design flaws in their best-selling SUVs. Drug companies routinely tout the safety and effectiveness of drugs while they're poisoning or killing consumers. “I'm concerned about any actions that may undermine the credibility of the United States as we help the Iraqi people stand up for democracy,” said Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee worried about PR damage.

     Just like controversial interrogation techniques called “torture,” propaganda and disinformation are necessary elements to successful military campaigns. When covert activities become overt, it embarrasses the military and detracts from the intended mission. “We are seeking more information from the Pentagon,” said White House press secretary Scott McClellan, acting surprised about reports of planting stories in Iraqi newspapers. It's ludicrous for the White House or Pentagon to act clueless about the military's well-known propaganda campaign in Iraq. Heading the Information Operations Task Force in Baghdad, Lt. Gen. John R. Vines didn't act alone when he contracted with the strategic communication firm “The Lincoln Group” to plant news stories in Iraq. Whatever the unintended consequences, planting new stories raises real questions here at home.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.