Major US News Broadcasters Still Suppressing News

Mark Heide · #1 02-09-2003, 06:33 PM

My complaint last time I posted was that the broadcast news media in the US, specifically ABC, NBC, and CBS which are watched by most Americans did not even mention the BBC World story about Tony Blair's Dossier which was broadcast on PBS in the USA and posted on the BBC News web site.

After doing some searching on the internet, I had discovered that MSNBC posted a story about it on Friday, but I have seached the CBS and ABC sites and there is no mention of the story. I have emailed both CBS and ABC and asked them why they have not covered it. So far, I have not had a reply back. Anyway, my point is that most Americans watch the three major network news channels CBS, NBC, and ABC. Since, the story was not aired, I believe that these news organizations were told by the Bush administration to not cover it, so public opinion for war would not decrease.

Lastly, the only two major American organizations that I know that covered the story on the internet were MSNBC and CNN. Here's the links:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/870100.asp#BODY

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...ier/index.html

Since, most people in the US watch the tube for information, they will not hear about this story.

Mark

Jimbo · #2 02-09-2003, 06:44 PM

Mark I know just what you mean! Less than 3 months ago my neighbors cat had kittens and I never saw this televised although it made the front page in our Homeowners Association newsletter. Since, the story was not aired, I believe that these news organizations were told by the Bush administration to not cover it, so public opinion for kittens would not increase.

morgan · #3 02-09-2003, 08:38 PM

Mark, thanks for the post, as I also believe the major US news centers make "interesting" decisions on what to broadcast and what not to. However I can't say that I agree the White House had anything directly to do with it. I think the reasons can be complex. I know that Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky wrote about the media workings in "Manufacturing Consent". I've been meaning to read it, as it has come highly recommended.

As for Jimbo's neighbor's cat... well who knows who dropped the ball there. [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Peace,

Morgan

Gabe · #4 02-09-2003, 09:46 PM

Could it be because it is incredibly boring?

Mark Heide · #5 02-10-2003, 03:12 PM

Jimbo,

I'm using this issue with the Tony Blair Dossier to prove a point about news suppression in this US. It was briefly mentioned in NBCs Meet The Press, but it was reported as Blair got his information from magazines and didn't mention anything in detail in order to play it softly. You can read the BBC and Channel 4 stories about how old the information is. From the response here I think this news story would change some of the public opinion polls in new directions. None of the major networks in the US are questioning Powell report, but you can read the news at the BBC.

Putting politics aside, my issue is that the major news networks in the US only report what they want and what they are told to do by the government and the corporations that run them. This story about Tony Blair's Dossier is a perfect example. Lastly, it makes the US no different from any other country when it comes to biased news reporting.

Mar

Mark Heide · #6 02-10-2003, 03:21 PM

Morgan,

Many people in the US think that since we have freedom and can basically do what we want can't imagine the US government suppressing news events and suggesting or asking news organizations not to report it.

An older post I put up about Clouzot's Wages of Fear movie won the Cannes Film Award back in 1953. But, because the move depicted US oil companies taking advantage of cheap labor, Hollywood edited the 22 minutes out of the film. The unedited version of the film was finally released in 1998, 45 years later. This had to do with Hollywood's ties with the oil companies back in the fifties.

Mark

MMMMMM · #7 02-10-2003, 03:21 PM

In my view it isn't that big a story anyway--it doesn't change the case substantially, and it doesn't mean that the report was farcical. So they didn't footnote everything--OK, mistake--but as the Jane's pointed out, use of open source materials in intelligence dossiers is quite common.

MH: "Lastly, it makes the US no different from any other country when it comes to biased news"

If you're just talking bias rather than censorship, maybe--but the US is still head and shoulders above countries with state-run news media.

Mark Heide · #8 02-10-2003, 03:24 PM

Can you see why I can make the assumption to accuse the US government of surpressing news?

It wasn't boring on this forum.

Mark Heide · #9 02-10-2003, 03:32 PM

M,

You stated,"If you're just talking bias rather than censorship, maybe--but the US is still head and shoulders above countries with state-run news media."

I'm talking about both. The US run media is owned by large corporations and are forced to be biased by their owners. Censorship comes with bias. There are many examples in the past and I don't think the US media is any different in it's biases from the Iraqi, British, French, Soviet, or German media.

Mark

MMMMMM · #10 02-10-2003, 03:47 PM

French, German, maybe Russian--you might well be right regarding them--but no different from the Iraqi media??? Well then, how do you feel about the North Korean media?