U.S. Military Hires Public Relations Firm to Screen Prospective Embedded Journalists
August 26th, 2009Via: Stars and Stripes:
As more journalists seek permission to accompany U.S. forces engaged in escalating military operations in Afghanistan, many of them could be screened by a controversial Washington-based public relations firm contracted by the Pentagon to determine whether their past coverage has portrayed the U.S. military in a positive light.
U.S. public affairs officials in Afghanistan acknowledged to Stars and Stripes that any reporter seeking to embed with U.S. forces is subject to a background profile by The Rendon Group, which gained notoriety in the run-up to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq for its work helping to create the Iraqi National Congress. That opposition group, reportedly funded by the CIA, furnished much of the false information about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction used by the Bush administration to justify the invasion.
Rendon examines individual reporters’ recent work and determines whether the coverage was “positive,” “negative” or “neutral” compared to mission objectives, according to Rendon officials. It conducts similar analysis of general reporting trends about the war for the military and has been contracted for such work since 2005, according to the company.
“We have not denied access to anyone because of what may or may not come out of their biography,” said Air Force Capt. Elizabeth Mathias, a public affairs officer with U.S. Forces Afghanistan in Kabul. “It’s so we know with whom we’re working.”
U.S. Army officials in Iraq engaged in a similar vetting practice two months ago, when they barred a Stars and Stripes reporter from embedding with a unit of the 1st Cavalry Division because the reporter “refused to highlight” good news that military commanders wanted to emphasize.
Professional groups representing journalists are decrying the Pentagon’s screening of reporters.
“That’s the government doing things to put out the message they want to hear and that’s not the way journalism is meant to work in this country,” said Amy Mitchell, deputy director for Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism.
“The whole concept of doing profiles on reporters who are going to embed with the military is alarming,” said Ron Martz, president of the Military Reporters and Editors association.
“It speaks to this whole issue of trying to shape the message and that’s not something the military should be involved with,” he said.
I guess if the US gov does not like your report in Pravda (Fourth Estate) you get Pat Tillman’ed deep in Tali-Land?
“It speaks to this whole issue of trying to shape the message and that’s not something the military should be involved with,” he said.
Based on the above statement, this fellow Ron Martz is either just another idiot-level talking head OR a just another low-level goon for Team Wurlitzer. Or both.
Of course, his quote puts a the correct “anti-” emphasis at the end of the article as the editor demanded of the poor prole doing the actual composition, to keep the broader perception of the readers in question properly managed, but to say something like he’s attributed with saying bluntly and blindly ignores the ENTIRE history of US covert intel and propaganda and the military’s core role in its technological and operational development over the last century.
That it’s a well-known cutout like RENDON doing the screening only adds insult to injury — and there’s sure to be injury involved if and when someone does sneak past the editorial firewall.
I mean, what a f**king retard. How does one get to be the president of a “reporting” organization with an apparent ZERO score in the category of military propaganda history?
In reality, he probably said no such thing — he is simply the most convenient/best-titled dupe to wear the responsibility for a quote most likely penned by said same editorial prole buried in a cubicle deep within the cancerous bowels of the Pentagon…