that this interview is hosted by a website that continuously peddles Clinton propaganda...

Thanks for that interesting bit of history about the Spanish Flu, certainly relevant.

And, not that it matters, but Aaron Brown was KIRO-7 in the Emerald City, no?

I know for a fact that the Dems could get much better press if they had better media message management. The congressional Dem media people really, really suck. They don't return calls. They don't know how to craft an effective message that is usable to a reporter. A lot of reporters in DC, believe it or not, would use a message like that.

The people you describe as needing an "effective message" are not reporters but rather stenographers.

Reporters look for facts, not messages, it is stenographers who "would use a message like that".

What you say above is an indictment of the news gatherers rather than the Democrats.

Just wondering - how many "pro war," or "pro illegal aggressive invasion" Generals or variation of the same were invited on Democracy Now, or Air America, etc?

And, many seem to forget, in spite of the relentless propaganda, not to mention the 935 LIES (what happened to that scandal) repeated thousands of times:

"A January 2003 CBS News/New York Times poll found that 63% of Americans wanted President Bush to find a diplomatic solution to the Iraq situation..."

"Days before the March 20 invasion, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll found support for the war was related to UN approval... And if the Bush administration did not seek a final Security Council vote, support for a war dropped to 47%."

It would appear Operation War Mongering Profiteering Military "Analysts" was a failure... as if it ever mattered whether the brainwashing worked or not.

"F**k Saddam. We're takin' 'em out!"

Actually the last line that you quoted should read "Sweet family will die"..

Which makes it even more prophetic.

"I'm gonna get my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" - More prophesy from Jim Morrison

Yes, that's right. The mainstream media is every bit as complex as, say, the justice system, for example, or as I like to call it, the system of laws and punishment. Just as you have criminal and civil, state and federal, appellate, superior, municipal, and so on, you can look at the structure of the mainstream media and see its complexity as well.

You have print (national and regional) and broadcast (radio, network and cable TV), for example. I'm simplifying, of course.

Within national print you have the wire services, the opinion-driver nationals, and you can put network television here, as well.

You have the foreign desks, the investigative teams, the national desks, the political desks, the White House and Congressional reporters, the punditry. You can look very closely and see huge differences in how these different functions operate, and with what rules, just as you can look at the difference between the criminal courts, the civil courts, the family courts.

In my opinion, the political press is the biggest culprit, the most corrupt, and the most ripe for reform. You have to start somewhere. The political press is, by no accident, where the right has their biggest foothold, but it isn't just that. It's the way they do their job. They aren't all corrupt. Some of what we find egregious has a lot to do with the news operations and news-gathering process itself.

So, understanding that process can help a lot in both reforming the corrupt parts and also in actually getting your message out. The Dems would help themselves if they stopped the wailing and handwringing and learned how to use and manage the existing apparatus, in my humble opinion.

Glenn, you are to be commended for behaving more like a journalist than most people who wear that title. You conducted research, set up an interview with a not-insignificant media figure, and truly reported something of substance and importance.

Yet another instance of an unwashed blogger doing a journalist's job better than many journalists.

Further on that topic, I just put up a new post that underscores just how badly, yet again, reporters are failing at their jobs with regard to a new story - the North Carolina Republican Party's refusal to pull their Reverend Wright ad despite McCain's "imploring" them not to run it. Link at signature.

A New Strategic Bomber Coming

Norman Polmar | April 14, 2008

The U.S. Air Force is developing a new strategic bomber. Known as the Next Generation Bomber, the effort is in response to Department of Defense and congressional mandates to produce a new long-range strike aircraft to be operational by 2018. This means that the Air Force's plans to acquire a new bomber aircraft have been accelerated by about 20 years...

http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,165805,00.html

Don't throw away those Saturday Night Fever disco suits.

'...despite McCain's "imploring" them not to...'

Shades of "I just fired a campaign staffer for distributing an offensive attack on Obama. Here it is in case you need to see it," from several weeks ago.

She can read daily bogs for me and keep me up. A hope she is nor a acrophobia Lady who is irrationally afraid of heights.

pow wow? wow! @ 2:30......

`

Ignore some commenters?

A image of me is a hick with no front teeth. A long ear red-mule bit my left leg calf, and then decided to kick me in the front teeth. I now chew Red Mule Brand Mule Donkey Tobacco in a metal tin. I'll finish a though, maybe, later? I'll spit via no front teeth? A morel Picker knocked at my door. Wow. Guest stop by with much morels. adios.

One of the historical turning points in the relationship between the military and television was the 1971 CBS documentary, "The Selling of the Pentagon". A summary can be found at:

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/S/htmlS/sellingofth/sellingofth.htm

This show, coming late in the Vietnam War era, caused quite an uproar within the military and other portions of the government.

Coincidentally, Roger Mudd just published a book that discusses this show and its aftermath. Here's an interview from three weeks ago that includes segments of the show's transcript:

http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1173

Here's a historical journal article from last year that discusses the CBS show, placing it in the context of the government's attempts to transition to an all volunteer force:

http://www.indiana.edu/~jah/teaching/2007_06/article.shtml

or

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/94.1/pdf/bailey_jah94.1.pdf

"The PROVIDE report insisted that even with pay increases, 'unless the Army is viewed favorably, our ability to attract voluntary personnel will be greatly limited.' It also called for the Army to move from public-service announcements (PSAs) to large-scale commercial advertising. That was a major proposal, as no federal agency or institution (according to later Army research) had ever used commercial broadcast advertising and the legitimacy of such a move was not clear."

Unfortunately, the author doesn't cite a source for her assertion that spending tax dollars on marketing was new.

Here's a somewhat relevant study on marketing military ventures:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1995/JJF.htm