Media pressured by pentagon to be Pro-war/Pro-Bush

May 29, 2008 / by ekyprogressive

From Salon.com...

CNN/MSNBC reporter: Corporate executives forced pro-Bush, pro-war narrative

(updated below - Update II)

Jessica Yellin -- currently a CNN correspondent who covered the White House for ABC News and MSNBC in 2002 and 2003 -- was on with Anderson Cooper last night discussing Scott McClellan's book, and made one of the most significant admissions heard on television in quite some time:

JESSICA YELLIN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think the press corps dropped the ball at the beginning. When the lead-up to the war began, the press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war that was presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president's high approval ratings.

And my own experience at the White House was that, the higher the president's approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives -- and I was not at this network at the time -- but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president.

I think, over time...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: You had pressure from news executives to put on positive stories about the president?

YELLIN: Not in that exact -- they wouldn't say it in that way, but they would edit my pieces. They would push me in different directions. They would turn down stories that were more critical and try to put on pieces that were more positive, yes. That was my experience.

The video of that exchange is here. As noted in Update II below, Yellin today said that she was referring to her time at MSNBC.

Yellin's admission is but the latest in a growing mountain of evidence demonstrating that corporate executives forced their news reporters to propagandize in favor of the Bush administration and the war, and censored stories that were critical of the Government. Katie Couric yesterday said that threats from the White House and accusations of being unpatriotic coerced the media into suppressing its questioning of the war. But last September, Couric revealed even more specifically the type of pressure that was put on her by NBC executives to refrain from criticizing the administration, after she conducted a "tough interview" with Condoleezza Rice:

After the interview, Couric said she received an email from an NBC exec "forwarded without explanation" from a viewer who wrote that she had been "unnecessarily confrontational."

"I think there was a lot of undercurrent of pressure not to rock the boat for a variety of reasons, where it was corporate reasons or other considerations," she said in an interview with former journalist and author Marvin Kalb during "The Kalb Report" forum at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

In April of 2003, then-MSNBC star Ashleigh Banfield delivered a speech at Kansas State University and said that American news coverage of the Iraq war attracted high ratings but "wasn't journalism," because "there are horrors that were completely left out of this war." She added, echoing Couric:

The other thing is that so many voices were silent in this war. We all know what happened to Susan Sarandon for speaking out, and her husband, and we all know that this is not the way Americans truly want to be. Free speech is a wonderful thing, it's what we fight for, but the minute it's unpalatable we fight against it for some reason.

That just seems to be a trend of late, and l am worried that it may be a reflection of what the news was and how the news coverage was coming across. . . . I think there were a lot of dissenting voices before this war about the horrors of war, but I'm very concerned about this three-week TV show and how it may have changed people's opinions. It was very sanitized.

Shortly thereafter, Banfield was demoted, then fired altogether, and -- as Digby put it in her great analysis of Banfield's speech -- "she's now a co-anchor on a Court TV show."

At the same time, MSNBC fired the only real war opponent it had, Phil Donahue, despite very healthy ratings (the highest of any show on MSNBC, including "Hardball"). When interviewed for Bill Moyers' truly superb 2007 documentary on press behavior in the run-up to the war, Donahue reported much the same thing as Yellin, Couric, and Banfield revealed:

BILL MOYERS: You had Scott Ritter, former weapons inspector. Who was saying that if we invade, it will be a historic blunder.

PHIL DONOHUE: You didn't have him alone. He had to be there with someone else who supported the war. In other words, you couldn't have Scott Ritter alone. You could have Richard Perle alone.

BILL MOYERS: You could have the conservative.

PHIL DONOHUE: You could have the supporters of the President alone. And they would say why this war is important. You couldn't have a dissenter alone. Our producers were instructed to feature two conservatives for every liberal.

BILL MOYERS: You're kidding.

PHIL DONOHUE: No this is absolutely true.

BILL MOYERS: Instructed from above?

PHIL DONOHUE: Yes. I was counted as two liberals.

A leaked memo from NBC executives at the time of his firing made clear that Donahue was fired for ideological reasons, not due to ratings.....(more)

The news was cancelled. Now you know...

 

1 comment on Media pressured by pentagon to be Pro-war/Pro-Bush

  • AngryRepublican said 2 months ago

    Welcome Aboard..!!

    We have been telling you for years that the mainstream media is bias.

    You will NOT see it until it is bias against what you believe in.

    But, today is a happy day, for your eyes are now open.

    You NOW see that MSNBC, CNN, CBS and NBC News care more for ratings then actual reporting of facts.

    Fox News leans conservative. So what, big deal. We all know that.

    (Kind of makes all that cutting and pasting you do on "sources" seem irrelevant. It is our own opinions that are important.)

    So MSNBC, and the like, were bias for the Iraq War because Bush's approval rating was sky high and all the democrats voted with Bush on the war. They thought that is what America wanted to hear so they left out objecting opinions.

    Today, they are bias towards Obama because his approval rating is high and the mainstream media is unwilling to print negative Obama stories.

    Nothing has changed here, EKY..!!

    The only thing that has changed is the fact that you now see it is possible.

    You should be angry..!!

    Your media and your democratic politicians didn't stop what you believe is an illegal war.

    I do not have that problem because I know the Iraq War was a necessary war.

    You cannot keep telling a foreign leader, for 15 years, that he MUST follow the rules, stop shooting at American pilots, "or else.."

    People will not take you seriously until they know what "or else" means.

    Today, everyone in the world knows what "or else" means…

    "Or else" means- Your a$$ will be dragged out of a hole in the ground and you will pay.

Add a comment

To add comments without entering your email and image verification, you must be logged in. Login or Join Blogster

  • Type the words in the box below the image.

Email this blog post to a friend

To email posts to friends, you must be logged in. Login or Join Blogster

Friends

View All