Conghaileach
20th July 2002, 13:13
ZNet(http://www.zmag.org/)
Wasted Freedom
by John Pilger
New Statesman
July 12, 2002
"Freedom of the press" is a phrase that sounds well. But in the world
of George W Bush and Enron, freedom is not meant to be that free.
On 4 July, the front page of the Daily Mirror was as powerful as any
I have known, a tabloid at its best. George W Bush was flanked by a row
of Stars and Stripes, chin up, eyes misted. "Mourn on the Fourth of
July," said the banner headline. Above him were the words: "George W
Bush's policy of bomb first and find out later has killed double the
number of civilians who died on 11 September. The USA is now the
world's leading rogue state."
The next day,Tom Shrager, a fund manager with the American investment
company, Tweedy Browne, phoned Philip Graf, the chief executive of
Trinity Mirror, to complain about the front page and the accompanying
article, which I wrote. He reportedly "did not threaten" to sell his
company's 4 per cent share of Trinity Mirror and "began by stating that
he respected the concept of freedom of the press".
The United States has the freest press in the world. Under the
constitution, journalists can push beyond limits of free speech
accepted in this country. It is a freedom that lies fallow. Even
Watergate, the Arc de Triomphe of modern journalism, was not quite as
it seemed. Among the 1,500 journalists who were "covering" Washington
at the start of the scandal, only two of the least experienced
reporters, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, sustained any curiosity
about the Watergate burglary that led to the fall of Richard Nixon.
Seymour Hersh, America's great maverick reporter, believes that,
contrary to the myth of a fearless adversary press, "the press did an
awful lot to bring us Watergate". He contends that some of the most
serious crimes of the Nixon/Kissinger years - the secret bombing of
Cambodia in 1969, widespread domestic spying, and the assault on the
Chilean government of Salvador Allende - were not disclosed until after
Nixon was elected for a second term in 1972, even though journalists
knew about them.
This was equally true of the "Iran-Contra" scandals during the years
of Ronald Reagan, whose terrorism in Central America,especially against
the government of Nicaragua, was ignored by many leading American
journalists, who knew about the secret deals. I remember reading at the
time an interview with Walter Guzzardi, the editor of Fortune magazine,
who poured scorn on the notion of American journalism as a "fourth
estate" steadfastly independent of government. Far from being a liberal
redoubt, he said, more than three-quarters of the press had always
endorsed the Republican Party. "The flow of news in America is
essentially benign," he wrote. "The press has become a tremendous - and
often unappreciated - force for legitimising governments, institutions
and free enterprise."
In the US these days, as in Britain, genuine investigative
reporting, which is costly, time-consuming and
often politically unpalatable, is rare. It is unlikely that
Woodward and Bernstein would be encouraged to
follow the presidential scent today. Presidents are protected;
Clinton was pursued by the media for
salacious reasons and has since been reinvented as
"misunderstood".
The same protection has been afforded the unelected George W
Bush. Since 11 September, the freest
media has put its collective hand over its heart, ending news
bulletins with "God bless America" ad
nauseam. The few who have explained the roots of the attacks
have been intimidated with
time-honoured abuse on being "anti American". This is the
"freedom of the press" that Tom Shrager no
doubt had in mind when he called the Daily Mirror's corporate
boss to complain about the paper reporting
the criminal actions and hypocrisies of the plutocracy running
Washington. In the world of Bush and
Enron, freedom is not meant to be that free.
I was in the United States the other day, to pay tribute to a
journalist whose work is the antithesis of the
kind Shrager and his fellow fund managers would approve. She is
Amy Goodman, who deserves to be
better known in this country. In Santa Fe, New Mexico, the
Lannan Foundation, which recognises the
often unsung voices of cultural and political freedom, was
honouring Amy.
Her radio programme, Democracy Now! on the Pacifica public
radio network is an unerring antidote to the
compliant mainstream. Her interview with Clinton on election
day 2000 stands as the only proper
interrogation of him I have read or heard. She simply asked the
questions the White House press corps
never ask.
For example: "President Clinton, what do you say to people who
feel that the two parties are bought by
the corporations, and that their vote doesn't make a
difference?" and "[Why did you] when you first ran
for president, go back in the midst of your campaign, to
Arkansas, and preside over the execution of a
mentally impaired man?" and "UN figures show that up to 5,000
children die in Iraq because of the
sanctions against Iraq".
Clinton's unguarded, blustering replies broke the oily surface
he has cultivated. He accused Amy of being
"hostile, combative and disrespectful". She was nothing of the
kind. Amy and Alan Nairn, another
exceptional American journalist who revealed Henry Kissinger's
complicity in the agony of East Timor,
were in East Timor when young people were being massacred by
Indonesian troops in the Santa Cruz
cemetery in Dili, in 1991. Her reporting was extraordinarily
brave. Surrounded by the dead and dying, she
held Alan in her arms; his head had been fractured by one of
the soldiers.
On 11 September, she was broadcasting from the basement of a
fire station only a few blocks from the
twin towers. Even then, as her colleagues gave shelter to
people, she mounted a discussion about
worldwide terrorism, "seeking perspective and explanation,
which is the job of journalism". She pointed
out that 11 September was also a significant day in Chilean
history. "It's the day," she said, "President
Salvador Allende died in the midst of the rise of the Pinochet
regime, fully supported by the United
States. It was President Nixon and Henry Kissinger who were
responsible for thousands of Chilean
dead." Her accuracy has a sure touch. In reporting Bush, she
always refers to the "president-select". She
would not pass the Shrager test.
Wasted Freedom
by John Pilger
New Statesman
July 12, 2002
"Freedom of the press" is a phrase that sounds well. But in the world
of George W Bush and Enron, freedom is not meant to be that free.
On 4 July, the front page of the Daily Mirror was as powerful as any
I have known, a tabloid at its best. George W Bush was flanked by a row
of Stars and Stripes, chin up, eyes misted. "Mourn on the Fourth of
July," said the banner headline. Above him were the words: "George W
Bush's policy of bomb first and find out later has killed double the
number of civilians who died on 11 September. The USA is now the
world's leading rogue state."
The next day,Tom Shrager, a fund manager with the American investment
company, Tweedy Browne, phoned Philip Graf, the chief executive of
Trinity Mirror, to complain about the front page and the accompanying
article, which I wrote. He reportedly "did not threaten" to sell his
company's 4 per cent share of Trinity Mirror and "began by stating that
he respected the concept of freedom of the press".
The United States has the freest press in the world. Under the
constitution, journalists can push beyond limits of free speech
accepted in this country. It is a freedom that lies fallow. Even
Watergate, the Arc de Triomphe of modern journalism, was not quite as
it seemed. Among the 1,500 journalists who were "covering" Washington
at the start of the scandal, only two of the least experienced
reporters, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, sustained any curiosity
about the Watergate burglary that led to the fall of Richard Nixon.
Seymour Hersh, America's great maverick reporter, believes that,
contrary to the myth of a fearless adversary press, "the press did an
awful lot to bring us Watergate". He contends that some of the most
serious crimes of the Nixon/Kissinger years - the secret bombing of
Cambodia in 1969, widespread domestic spying, and the assault on the
Chilean government of Salvador Allende - were not disclosed until after
Nixon was elected for a second term in 1972, even though journalists
knew about them.
This was equally true of the "Iran-Contra" scandals during the years
of Ronald Reagan, whose terrorism in Central America,especially against
the government of Nicaragua, was ignored by many leading American
journalists, who knew about the secret deals. I remember reading at the
time an interview with Walter Guzzardi, the editor of Fortune magazine,
who poured scorn on the notion of American journalism as a "fourth
estate" steadfastly independent of government. Far from being a liberal
redoubt, he said, more than three-quarters of the press had always
endorsed the Republican Party. "The flow of news in America is
essentially benign," he wrote. "The press has become a tremendous - and
often unappreciated - force for legitimising governments, institutions
and free enterprise."
In the US these days, as in Britain, genuine investigative
reporting, which is costly, time-consuming and
often politically unpalatable, is rare. It is unlikely that
Woodward and Bernstein would be encouraged to
follow the presidential scent today. Presidents are protected;
Clinton was pursued by the media for
salacious reasons and has since been reinvented as
"misunderstood".
The same protection has been afforded the unelected George W
Bush. Since 11 September, the freest
media has put its collective hand over its heart, ending news
bulletins with "God bless America" ad
nauseam. The few who have explained the roots of the attacks
have been intimidated with
time-honoured abuse on being "anti American". This is the
"freedom of the press" that Tom Shrager no
doubt had in mind when he called the Daily Mirror's corporate
boss to complain about the paper reporting
the criminal actions and hypocrisies of the plutocracy running
Washington. In the world of Bush and
Enron, freedom is not meant to be that free.
I was in the United States the other day, to pay tribute to a
journalist whose work is the antithesis of the
kind Shrager and his fellow fund managers would approve. She is
Amy Goodman, who deserves to be
better known in this country. In Santa Fe, New Mexico, the
Lannan Foundation, which recognises the
often unsung voices of cultural and political freedom, was
honouring Amy.
Her radio programme, Democracy Now! on the Pacifica public
radio network is an unerring antidote to the
compliant mainstream. Her interview with Clinton on election
day 2000 stands as the only proper
interrogation of him I have read or heard. She simply asked the
questions the White House press corps
never ask.
For example: "President Clinton, what do you say to people who
feel that the two parties are bought by
the corporations, and that their vote doesn't make a
difference?" and "[Why did you] when you first ran
for president, go back in the midst of your campaign, to
Arkansas, and preside over the execution of a
mentally impaired man?" and "UN figures show that up to 5,000
children die in Iraq because of the
sanctions against Iraq".
Clinton's unguarded, blustering replies broke the oily surface
he has cultivated. He accused Amy of being
"hostile, combative and disrespectful". She was nothing of the
kind. Amy and Alan Nairn, another
exceptional American journalist who revealed Henry Kissinger's
complicity in the agony of East Timor,
were in East Timor when young people were being massacred by
Indonesian troops in the Santa Cruz
cemetery in Dili, in 1991. Her reporting was extraordinarily
brave. Surrounded by the dead and dying, she
held Alan in her arms; his head had been fractured by one of
the soldiers.
On 11 September, she was broadcasting from the basement of a
fire station only a few blocks from the
twin towers. Even then, as her colleagues gave shelter to
people, she mounted a discussion about
worldwide terrorism, "seeking perspective and explanation,
which is the job of journalism". She pointed
out that 11 September was also a significant day in Chilean
history. "It's the day," she said, "President
Salvador Allende died in the midst of the rise of the Pinochet
regime, fully supported by the United
States. It was President Nixon and Henry Kissinger who were
responsible for thousands of Chilean
dead." Her accuracy has a sure touch. In reporting Bush, she
always refers to the "president-select". She
would not pass the Shrager test.