[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Resistance See other Resistance Articles Title: How the press can prevent another Iraq Lessons we thought had been learned from Vietnam were forgotten in the rush to invade Iraq. And now, as we cover President Bush’s ratcheting up of the rhetoric against Iran, it’s looking like the lessons we should have learned from Iraq may not have been learned at all. So at the risk of stating the obvious, here are some thoughts about what those lessons were. (Feel free to add more in comments.) You Can’t Be Too Skeptical of Authority Demand proof for their every assertion. Assume the proof is a lie. Demand that they prove that their proof is accurate. Just because they say it, doesn’t mean it should be make the headlines. The absence of supporting evidence for their assertion -- or a preponderance of evidence that contradicts the assertion -- may be more newsworthy than the assertion itself. Don’t print anonymous assertions. Demand that sources make themselves accountable for what they insist is true. Provocation Alone Does Not Justify War Demand to know what happens if the war (or tactical strike) doesn’t go as planned? Demand to know what happens if it does? What happens after “victory”? Ask them: Isn’t it possible this will make things worse, rather than better? Be Particularly Skeptical of Secrecy Alternately, assume that they do indeed know more than you do – and are trying to keep intelligence that would undermine their arguments secret. Watch for Rhetorical Traps Keep a particular eye out for the no-lose construction. For example: If we can’t find evidence of WMD, that proves Saddam is hiding them. Watch out for false denials. In the case of Iran, when administration officials say “nobody is talking about invading Iran,” point out that the much more likely scenario is bombing Iran, and that their answer is therefore a dodge. Don’t Just Give Voice to the Administration Officials Listen to and quote the people who got it right last time: The intelligence officials, state department officials, war-college instructors and many others who predicted the problem we are now facing, but who were largely ignored. Offer the greatest and most guaranteed degree of confidentiality to whistleblowers offering information that contradicts the official government position. (By contrast, don’t offer any confidentiality to administration spinners.) Look Outside Our Borders Raise the question: What do people in other countries think? Why should we be so different? Keep an eye out for how the international press covering this story? Why should we be so different? Understand the Enemy Send more reporters into the country we are about to attack and learn about their views, their politics and their culture. Don’t allow the population of any country to be demonized. All humans deserve to be humanized. Demand to know why the administration won’t open a dialogue with the enemy. Refusing to talk to someone you are threatening to attack should be considered inherently suspect behavior. Encourage Public Debate Cover the debate exhaustively and substantively. Write about Motives Don’t assume that the administration is being forthright about its motives. If no one in the inner circle will openly discuss their motives, then encourage reasonable speculation about their motives. Talk to the Military Poster Comment: Don’t assume anything administration officials tell you is true. In fact, you are probably better off assuming anything they tell you is a lie. Or as a tagline I once had here put it: "Expect the government to lie to you."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||