In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Propaganda is to democracy what violence is to totalitarianism. The techniques have been honed to a high art, far beyond anything that Orwell dreamt of. The device of feigned dissent, incorporating the doctrines of the state religion and eliminating rational, critical discussion, is one of the more subtle means, though more crude techniques are also widely used and are highly e¤ective in protecting us from seeing what we observe, from knowledge and understanding of the world. There are no Danchevs here, except at the remote margins of political debate. For those who stubbornly seek freedom, there can be no more urgent task than to come to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination. These are easy to perceive in the totalitarian societies, much less so in the system of “brainwashing under freedom” to which we are subjected and which all too often we serve as willing or unwitting instruments. —Noam Chomsky is an emeritus linguist at MIT and a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy and the media. His many books include Manufacturing Consent (with Edward Herman) and Deterring Democracy. Body-Bag Journalism Susan Douglas april 1997 “Here’s a story that just could save your life,” warns the baritone voice on the TV. “Experts will show you how you can protect yourself from being abducted. Details at 11:00.” The next night, another story that could save your life: how to stand in an elevator so that if anyone attacks you, you can protect yourself. The following night, a story designed to make us obsessive hand-washers à la Howard Hughes: a lurid account of all the lethal germs waiting to pounce on us from public doorknobs and escalator handrails, with tips on how to fend o¤ these invisible predators. This is the new journalistic standard: If a story can’t prevent your departure to the great beyond, it’s not worth putting on the air. Of course, these handy how-to stories don’t come on right away—Wrst you have to get through the murders, Wres, automobile accidents, and robberies. Then there’s the investigative reporting: an exposé on manicure shops that make all their clients soak their nails in the same water and, for Valentine’s Day, a probe into which Xorist has the best roses. Then comes cotton candy: coverage of Elvis look-alikes or a beauty contest for cows. Welcome to the local news. The “market” I live closest to, Detroit, is typical. The motto “If it bleeds, it leads” is in full force here, with as much as 54 percent of nightly news stories devoted to crime and disasters. Rocky Mountain Media Watch, in a 1995 study of 100 local newscasters around the country, found that 42 percent of their 192 part 9 freeing the media coverage reveled in mayhem. If there are no good disasters in the vicinity, the local news uses the wonders of satellite technology to import them: One night, a Detroit station led with footage of a bus that had crashed into the Charles River in Boston. A study of the 11:00 news done by the Detroit News (just for the record, a scab newspaper) found that only 2 percent of the local news focused on the government and politics—that translates into eighteen seconds! There was zero coverage of poverty, education, race relations, environmental problems, science, or international a¤airs during the two months of the study. Watching the local news in Detroit, you would never know there was a state legislature , a state court system, or a governor. Just when citizens need increased journalistic oversight of state government, they are getting almost none at all. Clinton and his Republican allies are devolving responsibility for public programs to the states, welfare being the most deplorable example, and the local media show no capacity for monitoring the states’ actions. Instead, the onslaught of body-bag journalism bludgeons the viewer into a state of cynicism, resignation, and fear—sentiments that serve a conservative agenda. George Gerbner, the former dean of the Annenberg School of Communication, called it the “mean-world syndrome.” Simply put, the more TV you watch, the more inclined you are to exaggerate the level of crime in society, and to exaggerate your own vulnerability to crime. People who watch a lot of TV are much more likely to favor punitive approaches to crime—such as building more prisons and extending the death penalty—than are light viewers. The orgy of mayhem on the local news...

Share