Hey, the LAT is rock-solid.

And if they were ever wrong, they'd want to be the ones to break that story.

FEA.

Factual but one-sided describes the LATimes' story today on Bush's Iraq speech. Thanks for the link to my post on it! I've long coveted linkage from INDCJournal.

- Hobbs

why do they have to pay to get them into print?

"basically factual" i hate the word basically.

You're being ridiculous.

There are plenty of things that are "basically factual" yet are still propagadistic. If I write a story which a (admittedly bad) headline of, say, "Iraqis support U.S. troops," it's "basically factual" when I interview and quote people who do, in fact, support U.S. troops. The propaganda comes when I don't mention that many other Iraqis want us gone and others are counted among those currently killing U.S. troops.

Which is essentially the same thing that the mainstream media does, except in reverse. The "factually accurate" statement coming on the heels of a factually inaccurate NYT editorial made me laugh.

And "propaganda" is a loaded term. So the US is trying to get factually accurate pro-US stories printed in the Iraqi press? I'm supposed to be upset by this?

If I say the glass is half full, am I a propagandist for water?

I say we declare victory in our battle with the MSM...

They have moved from praising "fake, but accurate" stories to criticizing "factual stories" as "propoganda". The MSM have shown themselves entirely. They are naked and it ain't pretty.

Look. Since I've done this stuff before, I'll give you an example. When I was a public affairs type in the Navy, I had a warrant officer explain the job of public affairs this way. I remember it, I think, word-for-word.

If the admiral smoked crack in the nursery of the hospital and, in the process, burned the hospital down, our job is to write a story about what a good job the base fire department did.

"Basically factual" can sometimes mean full of crap.

Here is another Los Angeles Times fantasy fisked.

nitpicker: No shit. Here's a few funny examples of that sort of thing.

My only beef is with the word "propaganda", because it is a loaded negative term. I don't see the situation as being fundamentally different from PR work or even mainstream journalism.

And the LATimes doesn't give us much info on the stories in question, which would give us some idea of how one-sided they are. (Unless they expect them to print the "other side" in articles "with headlines such as 'Iraqis Insist on Living Despite Terrorism'." Maybe they should've gotten quotes from Iraqis who Refuse to Live in the Face of Terrorism.)

This whole controversy is sort of stupid when you consider the bigger picture.

Does anyone doubt the insurgents are planting stories in Iraqi media, with threats and cash? Does anyone think they're making any attempt to be "basically factual?"

You're right, TallDave. I forgot that the insurgents and terrorists set the standards of conduct for America to follow. I apologize.

Uhh, no, my point was we're behaving far better than the insurgents in this regard, and every other.

But I appreciate, and accept, your apology.

"I forgot that the insurgents and terrorists set the standards of conduct for America to follow."

You know, I am really getting tired of hearing this as a fucking argument. Should I stop breathing, eating and taking shits because the terrorist do too?

propaganda

1 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

2 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

Oh. My. GOD! Are we using this on civilians??

it's "basically factual" when I interview and quote people who do, in fact, support U.S. troops. The propaganda comes when I don't mention that many other Iraqis want us gone and others are counted among those currently killing U.S. troops.

You're joking, right? That happens on the network, cable and local news every fucking night.

"Experts say..."

"Some people we talked to..."

"But many disagree..."

"One man we talked to said..."

"We talked to one scientist who said..."

Where's the OUTRAGE at Paul Moyers from the Channel 7 News?

Picker of nits, you have an absolute right to your opinion. Along with that right you are also free to be an idjit.

If you can't see a fundamental difference between please place this story and we'll pay you $50, or, place this story or we'll cut your head off, your just dense.

As Jeff Jarvis so famously said:

"No, sir, our job is to get more than the facts. Anybody can get facts. Facts are the commodity. The truth is harder to find. Justice is harder to fight for. Lessons are what we’re after."

So, the left will continue to serve up lessons via its stooges in the media until they are back in power.

Perception is reality in the reality based community. Control the narrative and you control perception. Unfortunately the left failed to allow for Al Gore inventing the internet, and thereby establishing venues such as this one to challenge the prevaiing narrative.

You can't be 70007 serious?!?

We recommend you to visit excellent apple site. qY0ptan0x