32 votes

Did the Mainstream Media Fail Bradley Manning?

Alleged Wikileaks whistleblower says he tried contacting major newspapers before going public

By Janet Reitman | Rolling Stone | March 1, 2013

For over a year, the story of Bradley Manning has been covered by a handful of journalists, many of them young, independent bloggers or reporters who have tirelessly shown up at hearing after hearing while more mainstream press has largely stayed home. The clearest example of this came during the hearings on Manning's pretrial punishment, which I write about in the new issue of Rolling Stone, when – after a series of scathing tweets from some of the aforementioned independent reporters – The New York Times' public editor called her own newspaper on its negligence. The Times then began sending a reporter to the proceedings. Now, thanks to Manning's stunning testimony in court yesterday, we learn that both The Washington Post and The New York Times – the papers that broke Watergate and published the Pentagon Papers, respectively – were offered the entire trove of Iraq and Afghanistan War Logs long before Manning turned to Wikileaks as a last resort. According to Manning's statement, they failed to respond.

This is remarkable on several levels. Where Manning himself is concerned, many observers of the Wikileaks case believe his overall treatment is suggestive of a broader governmental agenda to put pressure on Manning to give up Julian Assange. In many ways, Manning has been a proxy for Assange – cast as a sinister "co-conspirator" in a form of technological espionage. In fact, Manning's motives, by his own account, were wholly mainstream. "He was a traditional leaker," says Michael Ratner, a lawyer for Assange who has monitored the Manning case. "He was 22, he had information he felt was important, he was upset by it, and he wanted to get that information out. He tried the Post, he tried the Times, and then he looked at Wikileaks. That shows the importance of having an alternative way of getting out information, because without Wikileaks, this information would never have seen the light of day."

Continue:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/did-the-mainstream...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Nope

It did exactly as it was told to do on Bradley Manning.

the MSM . . .

has failed everyone but "its" owners.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

You beat me to the punch.

You beat me to the punch. Nailed it.

I think this nicely defines the msm in this country:

The lot of them are very good students indeed.
I've highlighted the more pertinent bullets.

GOEBBELS' PRINCIPLES OF PROPAGANDA

1. Propagandist must have access to intelligence concerning events and public opinion.

2. Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority.
a. It must issue all the propaganda directives.

b. It must explain propaganda directives to important officials and maintain their morale.

c. It must oversee other agencies' activities which have propaganda consequences

3. The propaganda consequences of an action must be considered in planning that action.

4. Propaganda must affect the enemy's policy and action.
a. By suppressing propagandistically desirable material which can provide the enemy with useful intelligence

b. By openly disseminating propaganda whose content or tone causes the enemy to draw the desired conclusions

c. By goading the enemy into revealing vital information about himself

d. By making no reference to a desired enemy activity when any reference would discredit that activity

5. Declassified, operational information must be available to implement a propaganda campaign

6. To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.

7. Credibility alone must determine whether propaganda output should be true or false.

8. The purpose, content and effectiveness of enemy propaganda; the strength and effects of an expose; and the nature of current propaganda campaigns determine whether enemy propaganda should be ignored or refuted.

9. Credibility, intelligence, and the possible effects of communicating determine whether propaganda materials should be censored.

10. Material from enemy propaganda may be utilized in operations when it helps diminish that enemy's prestige or lends support to the propagandist's own objective.

11. Black rather than white propaganda may be employed when the latter is less credible or produces undesirable effects.

12. Propaganda may be facilitated by leaders with prestige.

13. Propaganda must be carefully timed.
a. The communication must reach the audience ahead of competing propaganda.

b. A propaganda campaign must begin at the optimum moment

c. A propaganda theme must be repeated, but not beyond some point of diminishing effectiveness

14. Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans.
a. They must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses

b. They must be capable of being easily learned

c. They must be utilized again and again, but only in appropriate situations

d. They must be boomerang-proof

15. Propaganda to the home front must prevent the raising of false hopes which can be blasted by future events.

16. Propaganda to the home front must create an optimum anxiety level.
a. Propaganda must reinforce anxiety concerning the consequences of defeat

b. Propaganda must diminish anxiety (other than concerning the consequences of defeat) which is too high and which cannot be reduced by people themselves

17. Propaganda to the home front must diminish the impact of frustration.
a. Inevitable frustrations must be anticipated

b. Inevitable frustrations must be placed in perspective

18. Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred.

19. Propaganda cannot immediately affect strong counter-tendencies; instead it must offer some form of action or diversion, or both.

http://www.psywarrior.com/Goebbels.html

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

Great Post

In a way, I think Gobbels is one of the most influential people on our country today. The MSM is the propaganda arm for our government.

If the Military were to kill him, the BACKLASH would be

unbelievable. The "unintended" consequences would be unbelievable, and that is what they fear right now more than anything else, but giving him some kind of lifetime sentence would also be EXTREME, and would also carry with it all the aforementioned, so the Military really needs to REconsider what they are doing.

The best thing they could do is to give him a dishonorable discharge, and to let him go with the condition he not write a book. They really need to think about what they are doing...

no...

The "Mainstream media" has failed us all.

to answer the title of the post

yes

Thank you for a bump my friend

I am in tears over the last line from the article:

"His court martial is slated to begin in June. If convicted, he faces life in prison. The judge, however, can always opt for the death penalty."

Liberty Movement has to do something to correct this injustice.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

the death penalty

yes, the reality of the situation is that he faces the death penalty. No matter how many times it is reported that he faces life in prison as a maximum that is incorrect. The maximum sentence for what he is charged with is the death penalty. MSM is trying to downplay that fact. Kudos to The Rolling Stone for printing the truth.