A propaganda opportunity?
Quote:
Refugee who fled Iran's mullahs becomes first woman space tourist . . .
As the first Iranian-born astronaut was circling Earth last night, her remarkable journey from Tehran to the International Space Station was being hailed also as evidence of the continued power of another dream: the American one.
Mrs Ansari was 16 when her family emigrated in 1984 as the Islamic Revolution in Iran was at its peak and girls faced a strictly limited future. . .
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...364282,00.html
It seems to me that we (the US/west) should be making a big deal about this. If we are serious about defeating the philosophy of radical Islam then shouldn’t we be pointing this out as an example of our system being better than theirs? That was at least part of how we won the Cold War.
Building a better soapbox
Stay up on the soapbox, Steve!
This is exactly the sort of story that would be perfect - not only internationally, but at the grass roots level. I can almost see the agit-prop:
Steve, you are definately right about the self-flagellating tendencies of the Western Press. In some cases, we have a tendency to disregard "good news" as internal propaganda. I know, it's silly as a general rule, but it's a fairly normal reaction to decades of symbolic manipulation by politicians and advertising.
One of the really hopeful signs has been the develpment of the online media which can bypass the regular channels and reach a wide audience. Maybe SWJ should look at "publishing" an RSS feed that deals with good news :).
Marc
Take the self imposed hand cuffs off
There is nothing wrong with the press quoting the Muslim cleric's reaction, which is their job; however, what is missing is a very vocal response to these idiotic comments. These clerics should be portrayed realistically as simple minded idiots. Where are the western voices (not just government, but academic, artists, etc.) condemning radical Muslim behavior that fans hatred between the religions? Where are the factual statements on Muslims threatening the existence of Israel? Where are the factual statements of Muslims slaughtering Christian children in Indonesia in an attempt to start an ethnic conflict? Where are the statements about these clowns issuing death warrants against authors and movie directors that they disagree with? or encouraging, authorizing, and applauding the murder and wounding of thousands of innocent civilians in mindless terrorist attacks? Where are the factual statements about their ineffective economic models and corruption that condemns their people to a living a hell?
Oh no, we can't do that, we may offend the enemy. Obviously the Pope has no right to engage in an intellectual discussion/debate about Islam. Has the West lost all of their ability to reason and moral courage? Have we submitted to Islam at the tip of the car bomb? We don't need more military adventurism, that isn't the answer. There are several terrorists that still need killing, but that can be done without trying to establish democracies in the Middle East. We won't win the war of ideas by building schools in Iraq. What we need is more moral courage, the moral courage that enables the West and other allies to collectively describe radical Islam as the joke that it is. We need more cartoons, more movies, and more debate about it. They need to be on the defensive, not us! We need to destroy a cult, and the way to do that is attack their ideology, not submit to it. Our entire approach to winning this war has been off track.
Media as Part of the Environment
I think of the media in general, the western global media in particular, as an economic group. This group is burdened by a dual impetus for editorial decision - profit and journalistic ethic. I'm not evaluating the group's relative success in the latter or impugning them for pursuit of the former. I'm just describing.
The journalistic ethic is periodically the subject of scrutiny, typically in the wake of an incident that appears to include some agregious violation of propriety in reporting what has happened and what it means.
The profit interest was alluded to in earlier posts in this thread. What will people watch? What will people read? Who are these people, and what are their interests? What captivates their attention? A lot of effort is devoted to finding answers to these questions, and these answers shape editorial decisions through time. I think that the media's creative ability to frame news in a compelling story has come to be dominated by sensational stories that impugn western governments and institutions. I think that creative reporting of news which casts a postive light on those governments and institutions has been deemphasized through time in part due to the influence of profit interest. Okay, nothing earth shaking here.
We shouldn't be surprised that stories presented to a US audience are weighted against western governments and institutions. Check the most popular TV shows, movie box office and rental trends, and it paints a specific picture.
If I see the media as part of the environment in which I operate, I can then apply some thought to getting information operations off the ground that, without omniscience, foresee some possible and some probable opportunities to benefit from reports that address mistakes made on my part, and that capitalize on mistakes made by my adversary. In COIN this suggests a focus on both sustaining domestic and coalition national will, and addressing the population at the center of the conflict.
A positive story concerning reconstruction and return to operation of specific civil infrastructure is one that can be presented with a human interest approach detailing the benefit experienced by the local population. Likewise, an attack on that infrastructure by an adversary can be presented as negatively impacting the local population.
