7 of 56

Write now Article Tools

Page 8 of 8

occurs that lends "urgency to the case for armed intervention to bring about a rapid restitution of normality.'" This stage was triggered by the sudden and seemingly unexpected September 11th attacks. The media reported, as predicted by Ottosen, that the nation stood on the brink of war. A sudden and tangible threat to national security was posed, and military retaliation by the U.S. was imminent and deemed appropriate.

The third stage consists of "Demonization of the Enemy's Leader." The Bush administration denounced Al-Qua'ida and Osama Bin Laden as evil and deranged, guilty not only of murdering thousands of innocent Americans, but also of perverting the tenets of the Islamic faith. Prior to the invasion of the 2003 invasion, Bush (and/or his speech-writers) even went so far as to label Iraq, along with Iran and North Korea, an "Axis of Evil," a term not used in serious political terminology since Roosevelt's "date which will live in infamy" speech in War World II. While Bush's rhetoric did create some criticism in the international political climate (largely because an "axis" implies a relationship between the three countries that does not exist), it served to further the American peoples' conception of the Hussein regime in Iraq as an evil empire to be resisted at all costs.

Through its official press releases and color-coded levels of danger to the homeland, the Bush administration is capable of instilling fear in the minds of U.S. citizens. Critics of the five-level color-coded system have even suggested that it was raised to orange, or general terrorism warnings issued in the months leading up to the 2004 presidential election in an attempt to bolster support for the Bush administration, and that is simply a mechanism used to aid in the continued, fear-induced manufacture of consent to the government's aims, regardless of the means.

The actions taken by the Bush administration and the U.S. military following the September 11th attacks, and the public's initial overwhelming support for them are evidence of the supreme power held by those who control the dissemination and nature of information in today's global climate. By instilling in the American people a sense of cohesiveness, patriotism, and fear of an "evil" enemy of freedom, and by maintaining meticulous yet subtle regulation of the information supplied to the mainstream media, the government ensured cooperation from its people and support for a war that it would later come to regret. That is the reason for which the actions of our ruling body, and those of its enforcer, the military, demand the constant criticism and vigilance of the people and the mass media, lest it be further stripped of its democratic rights in years ahead.

Works Cited:

Herman, Edward S., Chomsky, Noam. Manufacturing Consent; The Political Economy of the Mass Media. (Pantheon Books, New York, 1988).

Shah, Anup. Global Issues Home. Thursday, March 31, 2005.
http://www.globalissues.org/Hu manRights/Media/Military.asp#M ilitaryControlo fInformation

FAIR - Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. April 10, 2003

Wikipedia - Manufacturing Consent - A Propaganda Model. 20 April 2006.

White, Josh. Washington Post - Confidence In Military News Wanes.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005.
< http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp- dyn/content/article/2005/08/23 /AR2005082301290.html>

McCall, Jeff. Depauw University News - "Incessant" Coverage of Natalee Holloway Case. July 8, 2005.

Gordon, Neil. The Center for Public Integrity- General Electric Company. Mar 31, 2004.

Johnson, Peter. USA Today - Trust in media keeps on slipping. 5/27/2003.

CNN - Poll: Bush approval mark at all-time low. November 14, 2005.

Learn more about this author, Matt Dubois.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• ...
• 6
• 7
• 8

Add your voice

Know something about Making informed decisions on whether to trust the media?
We want to hear your view. Write now!