It's the Media, Stupid.
William E. Jackson, Jr., www.editorsandpublishers.com: There is one inescapable conclusion from recent press coverage of the steady streams of threat information emanating from Washington and London and Pakistan.
National newspapers, however unwittingly, have been
drawn into "flooding the zone" with stories that move
to the forefront of public consciousness the issue
that the White House would like to have at the top of
the agenda in this election season: domestic security
and threats to the homeland.
On any given day, it is clear that presidential staff,
the Secretary of Homeland Security, or an anonymous
intelligence official, can crank up the cycle again by
feeding the frenzy. Consider two stories that ran on
August 13 in the country's two leading newspapers...
This sort of "warnings roulette" will play out over
and over again, whenever the executive branch wants to
inform us, and to scare us, with the White House
calling balls and strikes in a one-sided game.
It is so subtle, yet so obvious.
Break the Corporatist Stranglehold on the "US
Mainstream News Media," Show Up for Democracy in 2004:
Defeat Bush (again!)
http://editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/shoptalk_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000612547
The Al Qaeda Express: Newspapers help elevate an issue the White House wants to dominate the fall campaign. But the sources are usually unnamed, the evidence old or contradictory.
By William E. Jackson Jr.
(August 14, 2004) -- Last week I asked a sterling
reporter for a national newspaper: "Do you fellows
sometimes feel like you are on a runaway horse, and
cannot get off?" My point was that, starting with the
morning headlines of August 2, the national newspapers
have been preoccupied with government-inspired stores
citing anonymous sources (in the U.S., Britain and
Pakistan), talking about a "treasure trove" of old
discovered documents, just-captured agents of al
Qaeda, and fresh "streams of intelligence."
The Tom Ridge press conference of nearly two weeks ago
started the summer snowball rolling, and here has been
little sign of it slowing down. Just yesterday, on
Friday the 13th, came reports that the White House
really, really, expects a massive terrorist strike to
influence the election.
Headlines for the past twelve days recorded unfolding
events, based on carefully doled-out information, that
added up to a steadily evolving image of America at
war at home.
On Monday, August 2, every national newspaper led with
the raising of the color-coded alert to orange and
warnings from the chief of Homeland Security of al
Qaeda plans to attack major financial institutions.
The warnings were based on what all the papers at
first called new intelligence based on recently
discovered documents, chilling in their specificity.
By the next day, however, there was skepticism in the
air, reflected by The New York Times head: "Reports
That Led to Terror Alert Were Years Old, Officials
Say." On August 4 the administration counter-attacked.
The Washington Post observed: "Seriousness of Threat
Defended Despite Dated Intelligence."
The rest of the week's meatiest headlines on homeland
security trumpeted intelligence revelations, arrests
abroad, al Qaeda on the prowl, all occurring within a
remarkably short time frame. By Monday, August 9, the
immediacy of the danger from domestic terrorists
was kicked up a notch, with "Tourist Copters in New
York City a Terror Target" and "Capitol Still Al Qaeda
Target, Official Says."
In all of this, the vast majority of stories in The
New York Times, to cite one example,originated with,
or relied upon, information from unnamed sources.
There is one inescapable conclusion from recent press
coverage of the steady streams of threat information
emanating from Washington and London and Pakistan.
National newspapers, however unwittingly, have been
drawn into "flooding the zone" with stories that move
to the forefront of public consciousness the issue
that the White House would like to have at the top of
the agenda in this election season: domestic security
and threats to the
homeland.
On any given day, it is clear that presidential staff,
the Secretary of Homeland Security, or an anonymous
intelligence official, can crank up the cycle again by
feeding the frenzy. Consider two stories that ran on
August 13 in the country's two leading newspapers.
Mike Allen reported in The Washington Post: "The Bush
administration believes more strongly than ever that
al Qaeda terrorists plan to try to influence the
presidential race with a massive pre-election attack,
a strike that is more likely to come in August or
September than in October, a White House official said
yesterday. The official ratcheted up administration
warnings of an election-related
attack on a day when President Bush and Vice President
Cheney were on the campaign trail contending that Sen.
John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) would be a weak commander in
chief. Some Democrats accuse the White House of
issuing repeated
terrorism warnings to inspire fear so voters will
hesitate to change leaders with the nation under
threat.
"The White House official, who spoke to reporters on
the condition of anonymity, said the government had
not gleaned any new information about political
motives for an attack since the spring, when
administration officials began saying they were
concerned about an attack in conjunction with the Nov.
2 election. Nothing to date indicates 'an imminent
operation,' the official said."
Meanwhile, David Johnston and David Sanger of The New
York Times reported: "Al Qaeda operatives updated
surveillance conducted at five financial institutions
in New York, New Jersey and Washington as recently as
this spring, according to a senior White House
official who said on Thursday that the authorities
still had no direct evidence of an active terror
plot."
Then, in Saturday's Post, Dan Eggen and John Lancaster
declared: "The new evidence suggests that al Qaeda is
battered but not beaten, and that a motley collection
of old hands and recent recruits has formed a nucleus
in Pakistan that is pushing forward with plans for
attacks in the United States, according to U.S. and
Pakistani officials....
"The Bush administration generally views the recent
arrests and intelligence discoveries not only as a
window into al Qaeda's operations, but also as a
serious blow to what remains of the network....Some
Pakistani intelligence officials are more cautious.
They say that such arrests may have a limited impact
both on al Qaeda, which they view as already
dispersed, and Islamist terrorists who are inspired by
bin Laden but not beholden to him."
This sort of "warnings roulette" will play out over
and over again, whenever the executive branch wants to
inform us, and to scare us, with the White House
calling balls and strikes in a one-sided game.
It is so subtle, yet so obvious.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Jackson Jr. ,a frequent contributor, served
as executive director of President Carter's General
Advisory Committee on Arms Control.