The Columbus Institute of Contemporary Journalism (CICJ) has operated Freepress.org since 2000 and ColumbusFreepress.com was started initially as a separate project to highlight the print newspaper and local content.
ColumbusFreepress.com has been operating as a project of the CICJ for many years and so the sites are now being merged so all content on ColumbusFreepress.com now lives on Freepress.org
The Columbus Freepress is a non-profit funded by donations we need your support to help keep local journalism that isn't afraid to speak truth to power alive.
Some people are suspicious that President Bush will go for a
"wag the dog" strategy -- boosting Republican prospects with a
military assault on Iraq shortly before Election Day. But a
modified approach now seems to be underway. Let's call it "wag the
puppy."
After a number of GOP luminaries blasted his administration's
war scenarios, Bush claimed to appreciate "a healthy debate." The
president offered assurances that he would consult with Congress
rather than take sudden action. But his handlers were simply
adapting to circumstances that probably make it impractical for the
Pentagon to kill a lot of Iraqis prior to Nov. 5.
Before initiating vast new carnage abroad, the White House
wants its propaganda siege to take hold at home. Countless hours of
airtime and huge vats of ink are needed to do the trick. Like
safecrackers trying first one combination and then another, the
Bush team will continue to twirl the media dials till their
war-making rationales click.
The most widely publicized critics of attacking Iraq are
hardly inclined to withstand the hot rhetorical winds that would
accompany the first U.S. missile strikes. Objections from the likes
of Dick Armey and Brent Scowcroft are apt to swiftly morph into
pseudo-patriotic deference if Bush gives the order for the initial
terrorizing launch of missiles against Iraqi cities. And history
gives the president ample reasons to believe that most
hand-wringing punditry will turn into applause when the Pentagon
begins its slaughter.
Delaying war is very different than preventing it. In fact,
many of the arguments marshaled in the mainstream media against a
precipitous attack on Iraq appear to be accepting the need for the
U.S. government to afflict that country with massive violence.
Whether on Capitol Hill or in media venues, most of the criticism
seems largely concerned with style, timing and tactics.
Quite a bit of flak has also come from pro-war commentators
who want Bush to get his militaristic act together. The
bloodthirsty editor of The Atlantic magazine, Michael Kelly, used
his Aug. 21 column on The Washington Post's op-ed page to lament
"the president's refusal to wage a coherent campaign to win
public -- and, let's force the issue, congressional -- approval for
the war."
While President Bush huddled with hawks at the top of the
pecking order in Crawford, war enthusiasts were on the offensive
across the nation's media landscape. Their efforts were adding to a
sustained volume of valuable news coverage. The mid-summer media
focus on Iraq has offered tangible benefits for Shrub's party --
including real progress in changing the subject.
The more that Iraq dominates front pages, magazine covers,
news broadcasts and cable channels, the less space there is for
such matters as the intensifying retirement worries of many
Americans, the Wall Street scandals, and specific stories about
entanglements that link Bush or Dick Cheney with malodorous
corporate firms like Enron, Harken and Halliburton.
In August, the "healthy debate" over Iraq has displaced a
range of negative economic stories from the top of the news. Bush's
advisers would hardly mind if a similar pattern held through early
November.
For the next couple of months, the president has domestic
political incentives to keep "wagging the puppy" while floating a
variety of unsubstantiated claims -- like references to wispy dots
that implausibly connect the Iraqi dictatorship and al Qaeda.
Meanwhile, sending more ships and aircraft to the Persian Gulf
region can be calculated to evoke plenty of televised
support-our-troops spectacles. With Old Glory in the background as
tearful good-byes are exchanged at U.S. military ports and bases,
how many politicians or journalists will challenge the manipulative
tactics of the commander-in-chief?
Even if the White House doesn't sic the Pentagon on Iraqi
people before the November elections, its efforts to boost pre-war
fever between now and then could have enormous media impacts with
big dividends at the polls. This fall, our country may see
something short of a "wag the dog" extravaganza provided by leading
officials of the Bush administration. But unless we can stop them,
the full-grown dogs of war are not far behind.
_______________________________________________
Norman Solomon's latest book is "The Habits of Highly Deceptive
Media." His syndicated column focuses on media and politics.