A few weeks ago when a US District Court sided with a relatively unknown satirist Al Franken and admonished the right-wing Fox News empire calling its arguments ‘extremely dubious’, it ‘officially’ broke a taboo of silence against the omnipotent mainstream US media.

In the face of the relentless pseudo-patriotic demagoguery that these networks have been demonstrating lately, this episode can be viewed as a valuable milestone. Fox News’s unsuccessful bid to stop the publication of Franken’s upcoming book, is not only evidence of partisan mind-set of this network it also a reflection of the undeniable insularity that the US media suffers from today. In his book ‘Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right’, an obvious swipe at the trademarked slogan of the Fox network, Franken had only to state the obvious saying,‘ The mainstream (US) media has many biases, including sensationalism and negativity. They have a right-wing agenda and they are relentless about it’, to incite the wrath of entire media industry in the US.

Adding to a growing chorus of dissenting voices, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour recently stirred up another controversy when, on a CNBC talk show she courageously denounced the mainstream war coverage in Iraq by saying, ‘The press was muzzled. The media was intimidated by the Administration and its foot soldiers at Fox News and it put a climate of fear and self-censorship in the work we did. The administration, the intelligence, the journalists, whoever, did not ask enough questions…It looks like this was disinformation at the highest levels.’ Needless to say to Amanpour was endlessly chastised for her non-conformist views, called an ‘enemy of the American people’, a ‘friend of Saddam’ etc. But the Fox News’s retort, which claimed, ‘It’s better to be viewed as a foot soldier for Bush than a spokeswoman for al-Qaeda’, best summed up the rigidity of the mainstream viewpoint against such dissension.

Across the narrow spectrum of U.S. mainstream punditry however where every critic of U.S. foreign policy is faced with charges of ‘anti-Americanism’, it is not insignificant that the voices of such dissent are persuasively making themselves heard. And it certainly is about time that these powerful networks, who have lately been riding high on the excesses of American wars, were cut down to size. Undeniably, although the US military considered itself the ‘victor’ in the Iraq war, the real winners were the handful of these US media networks. With millions of people tuning in to Fox News, CNN and NBC etc for what has been called the most televised military conflict of all times, the Iraq war did for these networks what Enron has done for corporate mismanagement. Using sensationalism to sell war shamelessly, these media houses on the one hand augmented their assets by huge proportions and on the other they audaciously led their viewers to a point where people became immune and insensitive to the brutality of military aggression.



Extensive analysis by independent US media watch groups like the FAIR, Centre for Public Integrity etc has recently professed that ‘democracy was poorly served by the Iraq war coverage’ and that ‘the Americans were misled into war by outrageously biased programming’. With an over-reliance on official sources leaving little room for independent policy critics or grassroots voices, these networks largely ignored anti-war opinion in the U.S. and worldwide, at a time when dissent was quite visible in U.S. society. Opponents of this war were notably underrepresented. Then turning human atrocity and suffering into a spectator sport, ironically the periodic broadcasts from the Iraq war front spent most of their time rationalizing and defending the accuracy of their precision guided weapons systems instead of describing the reality that existed on the other side of the fence where the bombs were landing. There was hardly a verification of the loss of Iraqi lives, barely the mention of the horrifying living conditions amidst all the destruction and no questions asked beyond what the official military statements offered. If anything was candidly conveyed it was the obvious fact that these reporters were furthering the interest of the US military more than that of honest journalism.

During the war coverage in Iraq it was also difficult to actually discern whether it was the US media or the military that was actually fighting this war, with the ubiquitous ‘embedded journalists’ in their military fatigues driving into the Iraqi cities more like victors rather than reporters. Their payment being the thrilling rides into the adventure strewn war-front that offered them spine-tingling stories of their life times and the opportunity to capture tantalizing scenes of victory and defeat. Prominent journalists like Dan Rather openly claimed on the Larry King show saying, ‘When my country is at war, I want my country to win, whatever the definition of "win" may be. I can’t and don’t argue that that is coverage without a prejudice. About that I am prejudiced’.

The unabashed jingoism that was brazenly promoted in the media has clearly been indicative of the self-complementing relationship that it has developed with the military. It also comes as no surprise when recent surveys reveal that 76 per cent of all TV commentators during the Iraq war coverage were current or former government and military officials. Analysis by these paid pro-administration military commentators often blended into cheerleading for the military’s actions. Using these ‘journalists’ as advocates to promote their policies and vindicate their actions, the American military on their part found an easy way to choreograph their own brand of war.

Needless to say the war in Iraq was a landmark which exposed the real face of the US media. The war has perhaps physically ended in Iraq but the media in the US is still at war. Evolving into what has been called a ‘mega media-military complex’, these networks have become home to an appeasing army of right-wing military think tanks and CIA sidekicks. Taking on from where the military has left, the electronic media has become the perfect instrument for furthering the imperialistic mind-set of the US policy. The self-righteous newscasters and reporters have become the self-appointed soldiers, albeit without their uniforms, incessantly doling out military propaganda in their patronizing programs. Their new job being to unleash psychological slander and defamation campaigns against states, organizations or even individuals who dare dissent to their belief. Inspite of the fact that a vast numbers of people in the United States disagree with Washington’s assumptions and actions, the media has become a mouthpiece platform for the White House propaganda. Their routine aim being to disparage and stigmatize activities or sentiments which displease policymakers in Washington. Thus, their targets span from al-Qaida terrorists, to angry Iraqis tiring of occupation, to recalcitrant French or Russian leaders, to any American gauged to be insufficiently supportive of U.S. government policies.

All this is significant because the US media has been a powerful instrument in shaping the world opinion, until now. In a world where anti-American sentiments are widespread, there is serious concern on the US side that the impartiality in some international networks might endanger US interests. Such neutrality could lead to the formation of an ‘alternative media bloc’, which would counter the unilateral domination of the US networks. The instigation of massive hysteria earlier this year against the BBC for condemning the US media policies, is clear evidence of this unease. All such networks or individuals, who are willing to stand their ground against the American hegemony, need to be commended wholeheartedly. Infact all independent media worldwide, especially that from the Muslim countries, should be actively encouraged to come together to evolve into a counter balance to the US hype.

In the meanwhile without the façade of the UN to hide behind and the Europeans on the other side of the fence, the US and its media will keep carrying on their pretense single-handedly. Perhaps they expect the rest of the world to just sit by and watch them manufacture a world that suits American interests.