Comment

Mainstream Journalism and the war in Iraq: A lost cause

David Berry

On April 25th 2003 John Pilger wrote an article on the war in Iraq entitled: 'Something deeply corrupt is consuming journalism' (www.pilger.carlton.com). The article is about that most controversial of issues in journalism namely the pursuit of truth. This principle is fundamental to good journalistic practice and it not only provides guidance but equally it requires a deep sense of moral responsibility on the part of any practicing journalist. Some would argue that the pursuit of truth should be a duty of any journalist's work, but imposing working practices (duties) are in reality impractical and unworkable. No, this is about conscience and a moral responsibility to uphold truth as the cornerstone of good journalism. For anyone who may be unsure how to attain truth, perhaps just think of the purpose and objective that journalism seeks to achieve; that it is based on the public interest principle, which should ensure the production of full and accurate information. Pilger continues to argue:

'There is something deeply corrupt consuming this craft of mine. It is not a recent phenomenon; look back on the "coverage" of the First World War by journalists who were subsequently knighted for their services to the concealment of the truth of that great slaughter. What makes the difference today is the technology that produces an avalanche of repetitive information, which in the United States has been the source of arguably the most vociferous brainwashing in that country's history'.

War is perhaps the biggest test of any journalist to expose the truth, particularly if a journalist's national identity reflects that of the country at war. But journalists should have no boundaries, no allegiances that deflect from revealing the truth for there is nothing more insidious than concealment of information that the public have a right to know. War is made in our name and acts of terror in London killing many and injuring others are the consequence of an illegal invasion. It's not a war only of the military backed by the British government, it's our war; it's public property. This concealment of information by the mainstream media was once again raised by Robert Fisk in an article entitled: 'Secrets of the morgue: Baghdad's body count' where Fisk fulminates against the media for suppressing such relevant information. The American President, George W. Bush and his administration have constantly sought to downplay the number of dead in a war that had supposedly ended in March 2003. Fisk writes: 'July (2005) was the bloodiest month in Baghdad's modern history - in all, 1,100 bodies were brought to the city's mortuary; executed for the most part, eviscerated, stabbed, bludgeoned, tortured to death. The figure is secret' (The Independent, Wednesday, August 17th 2005).

Ari Berman writing in his 'Daily Outrage' for The Nation argues that the mainstream media are complicit in government deceit, claiming that the stories that matter, hardly ever reach the pages of the press and screens of the American broadcast media. Journalists who consort in concealment, who steadfastly refuse to confront the real issues occurring in Iraq today are not just guilty by association with all-powerful media institutions who impose 'organisational demands' onto dumb-passive journalists, but rather are responsible for actively peddling lies and deceit that very rarely question, until it is far too late, the reasons for invasion and for maintaining a military presence in a country originally carved-up and created by British imperial forces. The British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, always based his judgements for war not on verifiable evidence but on his 'belief' that Iraq was harbouring weapons of mass destruction. The result of the illegal invasion has been death, carnage, increased division amongst Iraqis and the creation of multiple militia groups who are engaged in a civil war, which is underway as we speak. Also the conditions are ripe for terrorist groups to exploit and export acts of terror to countries they see as responsible for creating conflict in Iraq.

In Ari Berman's article, 'Prelude to an exit strategy' (www.thenation.com) he writes: 'Thirty months into the Iraq War, and nearly 2,000 American deaths later, Republican leaders in Congress have yet to hold hearings on how or when to bring US troops home'. In The Debate (www.thedebate.org) they raise the issue of invasion and the possible reasons behind it: 'There is substantial evidence that America's interest in Iraq is motivated by oil, not just national security. Is the U.S. government being open and honest about their reasons for declaring war on Iraq?' Oil companies have for sometime now been dipping their snouts into Iraq's oil trough. We know that WMDs were not the real reason for invasion. We know that 9/11 was also a spurious reason for invasion. The Debate continues:

'The only people who will benefit from the war on Iraq are the elite wealthy oil men who finance Bush's election campaigns, and people like Bush who have huge personal investments in the oil industry. Oil company profits have already increased by fifty percent this year because of the war'.

The pursuit of truth in the name of the public interest with all the gory and sometimes unpalatable details that exposure of war can entail is a fundamental element of a democratic society. Truth allows us to debate issues. Truth allows us to discuss why terrorist attacks happen on our shores. The disclosure of information that is often concealed allows us to engage in free speech and offer criticisms of government policy. This is a truth that writers such as Thomas Friedman of the New York Times not only fears but despises if it's a truth that exposes the corrupt foreign policies of the US and British governments. According to Friedman 'we' who beg to differ and offer critique are as much the enemy of the US and British government ambitions as the terrorists who seek to kill other humans. Friedman not only represents the type of complicity that I speak of here as a mouthpiece of US policy, but he represents the lowest form of journalism that exists. He's managed to turn journalism into government spin; it's an extension of policy.

Certainly Friedman would be less than enthused by the Archbishop of Canterbury's statement concerning the meaning of public interest. In a speech given at Lambeth Palace on June 15th 2005, Dr. Rowan Williams shocked many in the media with his scathing attack on a media that 'distorts debate' and provided a very useful reminder to us all of the public interest principle:
'My argument is that the "public interest" if it is understood as the process of opening up conversation and debate between the real communities of learning that make up society, is a real and crucial priority for a society's health, for the common good…There is a real task which certainly involves unwelcome questioning of unaccountable power' (Article entitled 'This media tribe disfigures life', The Guardian, Thursday June 16th 2005).

Disclosure in the public domain, for the public interest is about empowerment and democratic rights to access information concerning a war made in our name. We don't always have to agree with each other and that's what democracy is also about - contention - differing opinions - disagreement and even dissent. Democracy is never built on consensus but always on competing interests. But we can never agree to disagree if our informational needs and requirements aren't fully met. We simply remain indifferent or in the dark. And here's another point. Journalism should jolt the spectator out of their complacency, to think and reflect before we rationally judge the politicians who make decisions on war.

The reasons that the war has continued and the economic plundering of Iraq's reserves have largely gone unnoticed is not only a result of media manipulation by government spin and propaganda, but also because of the complicit role that large sections of the mainstream media have played by not asking the questions that probe into the realities of the war. So perhaps one truth that we can establish is exactly that!