This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Saturday, May 10, 2008 12:00 AM

How the military analyst program controlled news coverage: in the Pentagon's own words

"We develop a core group from within our media analyst list of those that we can count on to carry our water. They become the key go to guys for the networks and it begins to weed out the less reliably friendly analysts by the networks themselves."

Read other letters about this article

  • Saturday, May 10, 2008 11:39 AM

    @ Cabdriver

    You're adding your assumption there, Pedinska- that the military tendency to view the press as I described- "disloyal, indiscreet, and incompetent"- is solely due to their own discomfiture over having "the truth" of their actions exposed by journalists.

    I was not making an assumption. I was addressing your statement that "the army carries a chip on its shoulder" about the media because of their "feelings" that "the journalists ... were mostly made up of people with hostile biases."

    I have little doubt that there were 'biased' journalists, but I do wonder what would cause a journalist to be labelled as such and, from what I've seen of the embedding program in the Iraq war, and the propaganda objectives (clearly laid out by Glenn in this piece), the takeaway seems to be that 'biased' means journalists who are not onboard with the Pentagon objectives.

    As for your statement that

    the truth is ugly (as it always is in war)

    that would read to many experienced observers as an overgeneralization-

    I should have left out the parenthetical sentence. Having made that concession though, I would really like to hear the positives that you think justify the death, destruction and dislocation we have wrought in Iraq. There would be no need for redemption if a debt had not been incurred in the first place, no?

    Characterizing soldiers as a class simply as bloodthirsty premeditated murderers is unfair.

    I have never, nor will ever, make this characterization. If you are going to address your posts to me, then please address my points and not those of others here who are more single-minded than I.

    Remember what underpins the touchiness of many soldiers on questions of military morality, even moreso when hurled as accusations by uninvolved civilians: they've put more on the line than you ever have.

    I am not "hurling accusations" and I am certainly not "uninvolved". I have friends and family members who are at stake here, so your assumptions about me need to be reconsidered. I am saying, as Glenn has, that ex-members of the military, officers who should know better because they were well-educated as to their duties and responsibilities by the military, have assisted the Pentagon in its disregard for laws regarding the spreading of domestic propaganda.

    Let's ask some of our other soldiers here, RMP or quickstrategy, if I am making them "touchy".

    BTW, I appreciate your engagement with me but I may be spotty at responding for the rest of the weekend as I have plans which will take me away from my computer. Just didn't want you to think that I'd abandoned a good discussion.

Most Active Letters Threads

671

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
439

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
209

Bigotry wins in Switzerland

By voting to ban the construction of minarets, Switzerland apes the most extreme intolerance in the Muslim world
169

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon