A very long, but important read. For justice to prevail...the TRUTH needs to get out. The MEDIA is a crucial way that happens, so good to keep that in mind. This article is a good reminder. Donna-----------------------------Cronkite's Unintended Legacyby Robert Parryhttp://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/20-9Original: Published on Monday, 07/20/09 by Consortium Newshttp://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/071909.htmlWith his measured calm and seriousness of purpose,Walter Cronkite set a high standard for televisionjournalism that has rarely been met since hisretirement in 1981. But the legendary CBS anchorman whodied Friday also may have unintentionally contributedto the American Left's dangerous complacency aboutmedia.The feeling of many Americans (especially liberals)about the Cronkite era was that journalists could betrusted to give the news reasonably straight.Though far from perfect, the Cronkite generation stoodup to Sen. Joe McCarthy's red-baiting, showed thenation the injustices of racial segregation, revealedthe brutality of the Vietnam War (even while beinglargely sympathetic to its goals), exacted some measureof accountability for President Richard Nixon'spolitical crimes and took a generally serious approachto informing the citizenry.Cronkite personified the notion that TV news was apublic service, not just a revenue stream or anopportunity to place ads around feel-good features.Yet, in that way, Cronkite contributed to complacencyamong many mainstream and liberal Americans whobelieved that the U.S. news media, though flawed, wouldcontinue to serve as an early-warning system for theRepublic - and that they could focus on other concerns.The American Right, however, had a differentperspective. Right-wingers saw the Cronkite-era newsmedia as the enemy - undermining McCarthy'santi-communist crusade, laying the groundwork for anintegrated America, eroding public support for theVietnam War, hounding Nixon from office, andconcentrating public attention on various socialproblems.Cronkite was singled out for contempt because of hisperceived role in turning Americans against the VietnamWar, especially after the surprise communist TetOffensive in 1968. After returning from a trip toVietnam, Cronkite closed his Feb. 27, 1968, newscastwith a personal analysis of the situation."To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the onlyrealistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion," Cronkitesaid. "It is increasingly clear to this reporter thatthe only rational way out then will be to negotiate,not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived upto their pledge to defend democracy, and did the bestthey could."After the broadcast, President Lyndon Johnson isreported to have said, "If I've lost Cronkite, I'velost the country." Johnson began serious negotiationsaimed at ending the war before he left office, anendeavor that the Nixon campaign surreptitiouslysabotaged.In 1972, Cronkite also gave traction to theinvestigation of Nixon's Watergate spying by devoting14 minutes of one newscast to explain the complexpolitical-corruption story.Plotting on the RightBy the mid-1970s, with the Vietnam War lost and Nixonousted, key strategists on the Right pondered how tomake sure another Watergate scandal wouldn't unseat afuture Republican President and how to guarantee thatanother anti-war movement wouldn't sink a futureVietnam War.The Right settled on a two-pronged media strategy:build an ideologically committed right-wing media andorganize anti-press attack groups that would putmainstream journalists on the defensive.Led by Nixon's former Treasury Secretary Bill Simon,conservatives at key foundations coordinated theirgrants to support right-wing magazines and to fundattack groups. Later, other right-wing financiers, suchas Korean theocrat Sun Myung Moon and Australian mediamogul Rupert Murdoch, joined the mix.Through the 1980s and 1990s, a vertically integratedright-wing media machine took shape, reaching fromprint forms like books, newspapers and magazines toelectronic forms like cable TV, talk radio and theInternet. Wealthy right-wingers poured tens of billionsof dollars into this process.The investment made sure that Americans across thecountry got a steady diet of right-wing propaganda fromradios, TV and print products, while mainstreamjournalists who dug up information that challenged theRight's propaganda came under coordinated attack. Manyindependent-minded journalists were pushed to themargins or forced out of the profession altogether.The mainstream news personalities who survived knewthat their livelihoods could be stripped away at amoment's notice if they were deemed by the Right topossess a "liberal bias." Many journalists twistedthemselves into contortions so as not to anger theRight.Meanwhile, the American Left made the opposite choice.Apparently believing that professionals like Cronkitewould stay in charge of mainstream news, well-heeledliberals put their money into almost everything butmedia.The Left largely ignored media in favor of "grassrootsorganizing" and embraced the slogan: "think globally,act locally." Progressives increasingly put theirresources into well-intentioned projects, such asbuying endangered wetlands or feeding the poor.So, while the Right engaged in "information warfare" -seeking to control the flow of information to theAmerican public - the Left trusted that Walter Cronkiteand future Walter Cronkites would keep the nationhonestly informed.However, in 1981, just as right-wing Republican RonaldReagan took control in Washington, Cronkite retired asthe CBS Evening News anchor at the age of 64. He soonfound himself excluded from any significant role at thenetwork he helped build.Then, backed by the Reagan administration'stough-minded "public diplomacy" teams, the Right rampedup the pressure on Washington news bureaus to rein inor get rid of troublesome journalists - achieving thatgoal with a stunning measure of success. [For detailson this strategy, see Robert Parry's Secrecy &Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate toIraq.]Failure on the LeftAs those right-wing pressures began to take a toll onreporters at the national level, the progressivesfocused on more immediate priorities, such as fillinggaps in the social safety net opened by Reagan'spolicies.With the numbers of homeless swelling and the AIDSepidemic spreading, the idea of diverting money to aninformation infrastructure seemed coldhearted. Afterall, the social problems were visible and immediate;the significance of the information battle was moretheoretical.In the early 1990s, I first began approaching majorliberal foundations about the need to counterright-wing pressure on journalism (which I had seenfirst-hand at the Associated Press and Newsweek), but Ireceived dismissive or bemused responses.One foundation executive smiled and said, "we don't domedia." Another foundation simply barred mediaproposals outright.On occasion, when a few center-left foundations didapprove media-related grants, they generally went fornon-controversial projects, such as polling publicattitudes or tracking money in politics, whichcondemned Democrats and Republicans about equally.Meanwhile, through the 1990s, the Right poured billionsof dollars into their media apparatus.Young right-wing writers - such as David Brock and AnnCoulter - found they could make fortunes working withinthis structure. Magazine articles by star conservativesearned top dollar. Their books - promoted on right-wingtalk radio and favorably reviewed in right-wingpublications - jumped to the top of the best-sellerlists.(Brock broke from this right-wing apparatus in the late1990s and described its inner workings in his book,Blinded by the Right. By then, however, Brock hadgotten rich writing hit pieces against people whointerfered with the Right's agenda, like law professorAnita Hill whose testimony about sexual harassmentendangered Clarence Thomas's Supreme Court nomination.)As the 1990s wore on, mainstream journalists adapted tothis altered media environment by trying desperatelynot to offend the Right. Working journalists knew thatto do so could damage or destroy their careers. Therewas no comparable danger from offending the Left.Thus, many Americans journalists - whether consciouslyor not - protected themselves by being harder onDemocrats in the Clinton administration than they wereon Republicans during the Reagan-Bush-41 years.Indeed, through much of the 1990s, there was little todistinguish the Clinton scandal coverage in theWashington Post and the New York Times or on thenetwork news from what was in the New York Post and theWashington Times or on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh'sshow.The animus toward Clinton spilled over into Campaign2000 when the major media - both mainstream andright-wing - jumped all over Al Gore, freely misquotinghim and subjecting him to almost unparalleled politicalridicule. By contrast, George W. Bush - while viewed asslightly dimwitted - got the benefit of nearly everydoubt. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Al Gore v. the Media"or "Protecting Bush-Cheney."]Siding with BushDuring the Florida recount battle in November 2000,liberals watched passively as Republican activists fromWashington staged a riot outside the Miami-Dadecanvassing board, and the Washington Post's center-leftcolumnist Richard Cohen called for the selection ofBush as "a likable guy who will make things better andnot worse." [See Consortiumnews.com's "Bush'sConspiracy to Riot or "Mob Rule Wins for W."]Once five Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court blockeda state-court-ordered recount and handed Bush the WhiteHouse, both mainstream and right-wing news outletsacted as if it were their patriotic duty to rallyaround the legitimacy of the new President. [For moreon this phenomenon, see our book Neck Deep.]The protect-Bush consensus deepened after the Sept. 11,2001, terror attacks as the national news media -almost across the board - transformed itself into aconveyor belt for White House propaganda. When the Bushadministration put out dubious claims about Iraq'ssupposed weapons of mass destruction, the majornewspapers rushed the information into print.Many of the most egregious WMD stories appeared in themost prestigious establishment newspapers, the New YorkTimes and the Washington Post. The New York Timesfronted bogus assertions about the nuclear-weaponscapabilities of aluminum tubes that were really forconventional weapons. Washington Post editorialsreported Bush's allegations about Iraqi WMD as fact,not a point in dispute.Anti-war protests involving millions of Americancitizens received largely dismissive coverage. Criticsof the administration's WMD claims were ignored orderided. When Al Gore offered a thoughtful critique ofBush's preemptive-war strategy, he got savaged in thenational media. [See Consortiumnews.com "Politics ofPreemption."]Over several decades, by investing smartly in mediainfrastructure, the Right had succeeded in reversingthe media dynamic of the Cronkite era. Instead of aserious and skeptical press corps, most nationaljournalists knew better than to risk losing theircareers by getting in the way of the Republicanjuggernaut.Many on the Left began acknowledging the danger of thismedia imbalance. But even as the disasters of the Bushpresidency deepened, wealthy progressives continued tospurn proposals for building a mediacounter-infrastructure that could challenge the "groupthink" of Washington journalism and start pushing themainstream news media back to its old principles.The Left's media activities centered mostly on holdingconferences to discuss "media reform," not actuallydoing journalism or building new outlets.Some Hopeful SignsHowever, there have been some hopeful signs forAmerican liberals. The Air America radio network didget off the ground in 2004 (although only barely) andhelped catapult two rising stars into prominence (AlFranken who is now a U.S. senator from Minnesota andRachel Maddow who landed a liberal-oriented show onMSNBC).But even that limited progress is fragile. GeneralElectric has okayed an experimental lineup of liberalhosts on its evening MSNBC lineup (also including EdSchultz and Keith Olbermann), a decision that could beeasily reversed if ratings lag or corporate prioritieschange.Meanwhile, the Right continues to consolidate its mediadominance, either through direct ownership of outletsor from the residual impact of three decades ofsuccessfully intimidating mainstream journalists.While Fox News delivers its usual right-wing fare,similar viewpoints are common at outlets like CNBC andCNN. While the Rev. Moon's Washington Times stillpublishes its right-wing diatribes, the WashingtonPost, the flagship of the Watergate coverage in the1970s, has evolved into a neoconservative newspaper,especially its opinion pages.The media asymmetry is also not without real-lifeconsequences.Even after the resounding victories of Barack Obama andthe congressional Democrats in 2008, there remains aprimal fear among many Democrats from states dominatedby right-wing media when votes come up on health-carereform or other progressive goals.Indeed, it's hard to understand why Democrats fromMontana, Arkansas and other states remain so timid ifone doesn't factor in the continuing U.S. mediaimbalance, which is especially intimidating in parts ofthe country where the right-wing media dominance isalmost total, where a politician can be demonized byRush Limbaugh, Fox News and pro-Republican outlets withlittle opportunity to mount a public defense.Walter Cronkite was surely not to blame for thisongoing distortion of the American media-politicalprocess. It was the failure of CBS and other mainstreamnews outlets to live up to Cronkite's standards thatenabled the Right to take the United States down thisdestructive path.The blame also must be shared by the American Left,especially liberals with deep pockets, for not backinghonest journalists who told the truth despite threatsof career retribution - and for not investing in amedia infrastructure that could defend the principlesthat Cronkite left behind. (c) 2009 Consortium NewsRobert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories inthe 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. Hislatest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency ofGeorge W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Samand Nat. His two previous books are Secrecy &Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergateto Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press &'Project Truth'.
Comments
All i have to say to all the "Hawaiian Nationals" around the world is: "We Will Overcome."
Bruddah Kaleo