How the World Sees You: Part 47
Today's lesson on the perspective the thinking foreigner receives on the US comes from the Gruaniad, and its story trailed on the front (electronic) page as "Fox News: Inside America's right wing propaganda machine."
[Update: Now I find this is a reprint of an article in Rolling Stone. Hmmm. I wonder if that fatally weakens my argument...]
In the article itself we read "Even Rupert Murdoch is afraid of Roger Ailes, the paranoid boss of Fox News. But 'the Chairman' is using his power to make Americans more rightwing, more ignorant and ever more terrified."
Some other things you may not have realized if you weren't smart enough to read a serious broadsheet:
- To watch even a day of Fox News – the anger, the bombast, the virulent paranoid streak, the unending appeals to white resentment, the reporting that is held to the same standard of evidence as a political campaign attack ad – is to see a refraction of its founder, one of the most skilled and fearsome operatives in the history of the Republican party.
- Ailes has used Fox News to pioneer a new form of political campaign – one that enables the Republican party to bypass sceptical [Emphasis added. You may prefer your own word.] reporters and wage an around-the-clock, partisan assault on public opinion. The network, at its core, is a giant soundstage created to mimic the look and feel of a news operation, cleverly camouflaging political propaganda as independent journalism.
- The result is one of the most powerful political machines in American history. One that plays a leading role in defining Republican talking points and advancing the agenda of the far right. [Emphasis added.]
- Ailes was also determined not to let the professional ethics of journalism get in the way of his political agenda. To secure a pliable news staff, he led what he called a "jailbreak" from his old employers, NBC, bringing dozens of top staffers with him to Fox News. [Just one of many strange non sequiturs.]
- "We'll never know whether Bush won the election in Florida or not," says Dan Rather, who was anchoring the election coverage for CBS that night. "But when you reach these kinds of situations, the ability to control the narrative becomes critical." [At least the second part is honest.]
- The typical viewer of Sean Hannity's show, to take the most stark example, is a pro-business (86%), Christian conservative (78%), Tea Party-backer (75%) with no college degree (66%), who is over 50 (65%), supports the NRA (73%), doesn't back gay rights (78%) and thinks government "does too much" (84%). [This is intended to show how extreme the viewership is. I'm thinking 'who are the 16% who don't think the government does too much?]
- From the time Obama began contemplating his candidacy, Fox News went all-out to convince its white viewers that he was a Marxist, a Muslim, a black nationalist and a 1960s radical. [So is Fox News all-powerful or not? Or is the contention that Obama would have won with 80% of the vote absent Fox?]
- According to recent polls, Fox News viewers are the most misinformed of all news consumers. They are 12 percentage points more likely to believe the stimulus package caused job losses, 17 points more likely to believe Muslims want to establish Sharia law in America, 30 points more likely to say that scientists dispute global warming, and 31 points more likely to doubt President Obama's citizenship. At the height of the healthcare debate, more than two-thirds of Fox News viewers were convinced Obamacare would lead to a "government takeover", provide healthcare to illegal immigrants, pay for abortions and let the government decide when to pull the plug on grandma. [I'll just leave that there.]
- Ailes ... has built the most formidable propaganda machine ever seen outside of the Communist bloc, pioneering a business model that effectively monetises conservative politics through its relentless focus on the bottom line.
The article is a bit of a hodge-podge, cobbled together from disaffected ex-Fox folks and liberal prejudices, and at the end of the day isn't quite sure whether Ailes is evil because he is right wing or because he is a capitalist. But by golly, he's evil.
To see the evil genius run rings around Peter Robinson and seem reasonable, you can watch the Uncommon Knowledge interviews.
Lest you think this is just something the bien-pensant Islington luvvies would believe, I assure you that the same article would run unchanged in The Times (left of center), The Financial Times (even more so) and The Economist (which, despite cries of disappointment on Rico when it becomes apparent, is and has always been of the left).
I ask, once again, how is a well-intentioned foreigner (who hasn't had the luck to stumble upon Ricochet) going to learn real facts about America if this is the only source-material they have ready access to? How does the truth get out? Because what foreigners believe really does matter. (But perhaps that is the topic of another post.)
- Comment (12)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
It can hardly be stressed enough that we're the source of some of the world's most powerful anti-American propaganda. And there's not much we can do about it: Any country with a free press and a robust tradition of self-criticism is going to churn out criticism of itself. The Right's castigation of the Left is also a powerful source of anti-American propaganda: If Americans keep telling the world, "We're in decline and our moral values have been corrupted," well, what is the world going to believe? And there's not much we can do about that, either. Insoluble problem.
Jul '11
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
genferei: [Update: Now I find this is a reprint of an article in Rolling Stone. Hmmm. I wonder if that fatally weakens my argument...]
I've only been a member a short while, but I just wanted to say that the motivation behind your update is but a small example of what I find refreshing about this site. Members here construct actual arguments - supported and everything! - and care about the soundness and strength of them. (Why should that be so unusual?)
With respect to your concern that your argument is undercut by the actual source of the article, I'm not sure it is. This whole tiresome "Faux News" meme is so entrenched here that it's no surprise the left-leaning outlets around the world would parrot it. I'm sure if those at the Guardian hadn't found a suitable Rolling Stone piece, they would have settled for one from Mother Jones or, if they got really desperate, the NYT. After all, the goal is not to inform, but to vilify opponents.
Edited on Aug 11, 2011 at 6:00amRe: How the World Sees You: Part 47
I didn't think it weakened it, although it changes it a bit. It's a pretty important point that a lot of this stuff comes from the American press and then gets recycled in the foreign press.
May '10
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
Objection!
You seem to suggest a moral equivalence here that I can't abide.
True journalism (including opinion journalism) aims at providing information so that the citizenry can make sound judgments. Propaganda aims at spinning reality so that the citizenry will think and do as the propagandist wants.
When foreigners read an article like the one Genferei describes here, they are being misinformed about America.
When they read op-ed pieces about the disaster of American debt and the decline of American values, they aren't.
Apr '11
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
I think that for a people to hear and undestand the truth, they have to WANT to be told the truth and open to the possibility that there is another point of view. As an Italian immigrant, I can tell you from personal experience that the "truth" of America is pre-ordained in the minds of the political and intellectual elite, who are 99% from the north. They have historically seen southern Italians as lazy, dumb hicks who are worthy of nothing more than welfare and disdain. I have been to Milan, Genoa and Florence and quickly learn to speak only English so as to not give away my origins with my accent when I speak Italian. The fact that 90% of Italian immigrants to America came from these areas, sets in their minds a picture of a vulgar land full of easy-to-manipulate half-breeds. That all these hicks can immigrate somehwere and create a country far superior to the land they left behind is too dangerous a reality for the folks in charge.
America must remain a subject of scorn or it becomes too scary a reflection of their own historical prejudices and political beliefs.
Edited on Aug 11, 2011 at 6:55amRe: How the World Sees You: Part 47
katievs When foreigners read an article like the one Genferei describes here, they are being misinformed about America.
When they read op-ed pieces about the disaster of American debt and the decline of American values, they aren't. · Aug 11 at 5:57am
I'm not saying that there's no difference between truth and a lie. I'm saying that to the vast majority of the world, it's no easier to tell what kind of article is true than it is for Americans to evaluate what's written in the Turkish press. Very few people have been to America, or if they have, it's been for a brief tourist visit--and they're very wealthy and educated to begin with. It can both be true that we are weak, broke, and morally unappealing right now and true that it is an exceptionally dangerous thing for the whole world to see this observation in our own headlines. There's no solution to this.
Edited on Aug 11, 2011 at 7:10amAug '10
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
If you think the Guardian is bad you should take a look at the Independent.I pay little attention to opinion or editorial pieces in the former but find it reliable enough on factual reporting. For instance, it's the only newspaper I can recall referring to the Israeli/Egyptian blockade of Gaza. The Independent is a self-regarding but entirely unreliable (except in its unrelenting bias) rag.
May '10
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
I'm not saying that there's no difference between truth and a lie. I'm saying that to the vast majority of the world, it's no easier to tell what kind of article is true than it is for Americans to evaluate what's written in the Turkish press. Very few people have been to America, or if they have, it's been for a brief tourist visit--and they're very wealthy and educated to begin with. It can both be true that we are weak, broke, and morally unappealing right now and true that it is an exceptionally dangerous thing for the whole world to see this observation in our own headlines. There's no solution to this. · Aug 11 at 7:08am
Edited on Aug 11 at 07:10 am
Granted. But, wouldn't you agree that we should be less concerned with the way foreigners interpret the true things they learn about America than with the fact that they are routinely lied to about America?
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
katievs
Granted. But, wouldn't you agree that we should be less concerned with the way foreigners interpret the true things they learn about America than with the fact that they are routinely lied to about America? · Aug 11 at 8:46am
Yes and no. I'm very worried that the impression we're giving--which is accurate--of being out of money, retreating in defeat, demoralized, and let by a weak, vacillating incompetent will prove just too tempting to one of the world's many adventurous thugs.
May '10
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
I'm worried about that too. But I'd be even more worried if we were given the world a lying impression of strength and invincibility.
The habit of self-critique and the commitment to free speech are among our real great strengths. Our present vulnerability comes from our bad habits of lying and indulgence.
Mar '11
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
The excerpts from this article represent perfectly two facets of the leftist mind: cognitive dissonance and psychological projection.
Apr '11
Re: How the World Sees You: Part 47
The problem is America seems week but I don't really think we are. Certainly not militarily. I mean as liberals like to point out our defense budget is larger then the next several put together. Our greatness weakness is being tiered and uninterested rather then impotent. The danger is that one of those thugs will be smart and only reach out enough to annoy us not infuriate us. Then we will probably let it slide. If they did something really dramatic and hurtful to us I think we would rally together rather quickly to smash them. Though I don't think any one would do something that brazen, like Sadam invading Kuwait.