CNN: The US Department of Defense plans to add more sites on the Internet to provide information to a global audience – but critics question whether the Pentagon is violating President Bush’s pledge not to pay journalists to promote his policies.
This will undoubtedly be a lively and protracted debate. My question would be: Where is the line you draw with any government or state-related communication channel that separates independent commentary and reporting from propaganda?
The CNN report today comments on two existing websites that are run by US military troops trained in “information warfare,” which CNN says is a specialty that can include battlefield deception. CNN’s report quotes Pentagon officials as saying the goal is to counter “misinformation” about the United States in overseas media.
That doesn’t sound as though we can expect much in the way of independent reporting nor trust any of the information contained in any other US government website.
And it does come down to trust in the end. For instance, I trust the news and information I see and read that’s broadcast by the BBC on television and on the internet. Yet the BBC is hardly independent – it’s not a private company with shareholders, such as CNN’s parent is – with great influence wielded on its organization by the British government.
So why do I trust the BBC? Because it’s never given me any reason at all to cast doubt on anything it reports. Over time, that gives me trust. And at the heart of that trust is a belief that its reporting is fair and independent, without government control or influence.
The CNN report quotes Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, saying there is a reason why rules exist to separate journalism from government information:
Anytime that the government has to assure you, “Believe me, take my word for it, I’m telling you nothing but the truth,” you know you should be worried.
Yes, it all comes down to trust.
I think it also comes down to an increased responsibility on the part of the consumer of news/information/propaganda to triangulate what she/he is reading. I never trust only one source…rather by reading/watching many sources, I can make up my own mind.
Of course, however, one can’t do that for every topic (who has the time?)But I would argue one should do that for the really important ones.
Yes, I agree, Elizabeth. But I wonder how that would actually work in some of the countries that such DoD websites are aimed at.
I would imagine that in such countries where educational standards are much less than in developed countries, people might simply believe what they see and read without the advantage of being able to contrast and compare with other information sources (which, if such sources are domestic, are unlikely to be trusted much anyway).