2Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteIt's already done who can forget the famed fictional Libyan hitsquads sent here of the 80s? It's just emabarrassing when they get caught
The rest of the article is here:An amendment that would legalize the use of propaganda on American audiences is being inserted into the latest defense authorization bill, BuzzFeed has learned.
The amendment would “strike the current ban on domestic dissemination” of propaganda material produced by the State Department and the independent Broadcasting Board of Governors, according to the summary of the law at the House Rules Committee's official website.
The tweak to the bill would essentially neutralize two previous acts—the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act in 1987—that had been passed to protect U.S. audiences from our own government’s misinformation campaigns.
The bi-partisan amendment is sponsored by Rep. Mac Thornberry from Texas and Rep. Adam Smith from Washington State.
In a little noticed press release earlier in the week — buried beneath the other high-profile issues in the $642 billion defense bill, including indefinite detention and a prohibition on gay marriage at military installations — Thornberry warned that in the Internet age, the current law “ties the hands of America’s diplomatic officials, military, and others by inhibiting our ability to effectively communicate in a credible way.”
The bill's supporters say the informational material used overseas to influence foreign audiences is too good to not use at home, and that new techniques are needed to help fight Al-Qaeda, a borderless enemy whose own propaganda reaches Americans online.
Critics of the bill say there are ways to keep America safe without turning the massive information operations apparatus within the federal government against American citizens..............................
Congressmen Seek To Lift Propaganda Ban
My take on this:
Since I am living and always lived in a society where state propaganda is omnipresent, I think I have some form of immunity to it. I call it cynicism.
And judging by the US media, I always thought that the Americans too live in a society where state propaganda is omnipresent.
But when I browse American forums on the web, I don't see the same cynicism toward news about government's decisions that I used to see in Russian forums. It seems that the Americans have much higher degree of trust to those "news" than it would be normal for the people living in a propaganda-filled society.
It's already done who can forget the famed fictional Libyan hitsquads sent here of the 80s? It's just emabarrassing when they get caught
Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost.”
~Ronald Reagan
My take is that US government propaganda -while present everywhere- in no way compares to that of former Soviet Union (I have no idea of the level of propaganda in Russia today).
The "problem" is that the United States is such an open society, with freedom of speech and freedom of the press, that everything that comes from the government is minutely examined for B.S. (even Democrats, which is pretty amazing). I credit a lot of that media and public suspicion to Watergate.
I was re-reading John Barron's book of the MiG-25 pilot who is fondly and universally known by the Russians as "that traitor Belenko". If only 10% of what he said is true, then the pervasive and omnipresent propaganda was simply incredible and usually laughable.
Then of course I've since read in detail about North Korea and they made the Soviets look like bumbling amateurs when it comes to propaganda.
Times change. Now "that traitor Belenko" means nothing for, perhaps, the two thirds of the Russians, if no more
From recent Russian news: when two sisters on a popular TV show "The Most Beautiful" were asked "what is Holocaust?", one sister was unsure - "perhaps, office supplies?", the other was definite - "it's a glue for wallpapers". :-)
I meant that the phrase was universally used, just like a Muslim would use "Peace Be Upon Him" or "PBUH" after every reference to Muhammad.Originally Posted by andrew
You would think that his first, middle and last name was "That Traitor Belenko".
Surely the term "Great Patriotic War" still means something to the Russian youth?
"An amendment that would legalize the use of propaganda on American audiences is being inserted into the latest defense authorization bill, BuzzFeed has learned."
Effin seriously? That cat has been out of the bag for decades. Whats next? They going to legislate that the sun rises in the East and sets in the West.
There is government propaganda and there is establishment propaganda.Your press is free in the sense it is a private enterprise and nothing more.But is a big part of said establishment.
What is true is that the rise of the internet also saw the rise of freelance reporters thus there are alternatives to CNN&pals.Everyone is now both a producer and a consumer.
Those who know don't speak
Fools seem to be artificially made,'cause there's a hell lot of them and they have no disease
Why is the US doing this ?
Why is it doing it now ?
According to this official, “senior public affairs” officers within the Department of Defense want to “get rid” of Smith-Mundt and other restrictions because it prevents information activities designed to prop up unpopular policies—like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When S2 posted the article about Davis here, i got the impression that people agreed that what Davis said was a good thing.A U.S. Army whistleblower, Lieutenant Col. Daniel Davis, noted recently in his scathing 84-page unclassified report on Afghanistan that there remains a strong desire within the defense establishment “to enable Public Affairs officers to influence American public opinion when they deem it necessary to "protect a key friendly center of gravity, to wit US national will," he wrote, quoting a well-regarded general.
This new amendment will enable more hack jobs to be directed at people like him in the interests of 'making it go away'.
It will add more noise (spurious) into an already noisy channel.
Its going to get a lot harder to figure out what is happening in the US
Last edited by Double Edge; 27 May 12, at 13:06.
I wouldn't be terribly concerned about it.Its going to get a lot harder to figure out what is happening in the US
Even before the rise of the Internet, the U.S. press delighted in tearing apart the government press releases.
Yeah, but this move was made for a reason.
Do you think press coverage of the iraq-afghan wars has adversely affected home support.
With a long war there is always the chance that fatigue will set in.
You can't just cut & run regardless of what the press says.
I'm sure press coverage affected home support. But it was mostly because of their coverage of cut-and-run left-wing politicians, lying organizations like MoveOn.org and misguided lunatics like Cindy Sheehan.
Having said all that, after Vietnam and 9/11, the American public wasn't going to be so quick to believe them.
What about the Tea Baggers, er,... Tea Party? I think they are a bunch of liars and nuts, too.
So what is the appropriate take to be from this development ?
Right and if the govt pushes too hard the press will do more of the same.
Doing it at home seems like a redundant move for the govt. A waste of resources.
Doing it abroad is very different and infinitely more valuable.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: