Words of War: Iraq and the Rise of "Neoconzo" Journalism

[chlamor]

Words of war: Iraq and the rise of "Neoconzo" Journalism

Stephen Smith, Electronic Iraq

"That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he . ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." <2> While Suskind found his lesson disturbing, other writers are only too willing to embrace "history's actors". In return they gain access denied to the mainstream press. This gives rise to what we can call "neoconzo" journalism. It stands aloof over the cold contracting of language. Beyond Orwell, "newspeak" now enters a cybernetic zone. This is the standardization of sensations and emotions. Cliches such as "trust" and "good vs. evil" create the Media of Fear. <3>

<snip>

The knack of the neoconzo columnist is to anticipate news from the Bush or Howard camps. Gerard Henderson's "Terrorism as seen though public eyes and by cynical media" <5> appeared on the morning of Howard's Iraq "bullet points". The piece proved to be a colorful segue from Howard's flat tone. Henderson kept the "war on terror" and the Iraq war linked in the same frame. Using this "big lie" with emotive words such as "trust" and "Islamism" may have been enough to capture readers who don't bother to continue past the first six lines.

He asserts that since 9/11, "Americans, Britons and Australians have come to believe their nations are at war." He defines this war - and this enemy - as "Islamism". The public, he says, will trust its leaders "unless criminal or grossly unprofessional conduct" can be shown. Fallujah, Abu Ghraib, or the false trail of WMD, do not in his book represent such conduct. But nor are Australians off the hook in cases of US misconduct. One officer, Major George O'Kane, was aware of torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib in October 2003 while working with the senior US legal officer in Iraq. He then helped to write a rebuttal of a Red Cross report on Abu Ghraib. When the scandal broke, the Australian government denied all knowledge of it; they simply stated that none of its staff had ever witnessed abuse. <6>

<snip>

"Perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them". Thus the rank and file should know better than to question the wisdom of "history's actors". The ends justify the means -- even lies. Those in control will only ever be a tiny faction with no obligation to those outside the cabal. To them, world public opinion (eg. against the war in Iraq) is itself under suspicion; such dissent, to use a phrase from Lenin, is like an "infantile disorder". How ironic to see the gonzo journalist's lone fight against the abuse of power be so mangled. What we call neoconzo journalism acts to reverse this code. Their words have become a tool of war. The "endless war", of which Iraq is seen to be a part, cloaks an abuse of power. It sees the lone figure of the citizen ever more cut off from collective action.

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m10731