Jonathan Cook

Rules of Production A critical look at two recent books on the british media ColdType The Author Jonathan Cook has been covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from Nazareth, Israel, as a freelance reporter for the past eight years. Before that he was a staff journalist at the Guardian and Observer newspapers. His latest books on the conflict are ‘Israel and the Clash of Civilisations’ (Pluto, 2008) and ‘Disappearing Palestine’ (Zed, 2008).

His website is www.jkcook.net

© Jonathan Cook, 2009

The books Flat Earth News, Nick Davies, Vintage, £8.99. NB: An excerpt from this book appeared as an Extra to The ColdType Reader Issue 24 – www.coldtype.net/reader.html Newspeak in the 21st Century, David Edwards and David Cromwell, Pluto Press, £16.99 ColdType Writing Worth Reading From Around the World www.coldtype.net

2 ColdType | December 2009 Rules Of Production In this essay, Jonathan Cook dissects and compares the key arguments in two recent books on the British media, Nick Davies’s, Flat Earth News, and Newspeak in the 21st Century, by David Edwards & David Cromwell. It’s worth noting that, while Davies’s book was discussed, reviewed, and applauded, far and wide in both print and broadcast media, Newspeak (published in September) has so far had just two, largely dismissive, reviews in mainstream outlets, in the Guardian and Times Higher Education (THE), totalling exactly 1,000 words. Edwards’ and Cromwell’s previous book, Guardians of Power (2006), has never been mentioned, let alone reviewed, in any mainstream national UK newspaper. There’s nothing surprising about that – dissident media analyses are consistently ignored this way. So Cook’s comparison of Davies’s mainstream view of the media with an analysis based on Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky’s “propaganda model of media control” is a rare event

December 2009 | ColdType | 3 Jonathan Cook

ith the internet’s rapid ists are deprived of the time and resourc- growth and an associated ❝ es needed to search for truth. flourishing of alternative The rules The consequence, Davies argues, is felt journalism, the traditional describe in a in limitations – which he groups together Wdisseminators of information to western very convincing as “rules of production” – on the ability audiences – our print and broadcast me- fashion some of journalists in a commercial environ- dia – have come under scrutiny as never of the main ment to aspire to truth-telling. The rules, before. There is a growing sentiment, par- practical reasons which encourage journalists to play safe ticularly on the left but also to be found why mainstream by avoiding troublesome or time-con- elsewhere, that mainstream journalism is reporting ends suming stories, include: running non- failing us, even if a variety of reasons are up distorting or controversial stories that are unlikely to proposed for this failure. misrepresenting attract public criticism; relying on official One of the more influential recent real events sources and adopting the line of power- analyses has been put forward by Nick ful lobbies to avoid the danger of legal Davies, a journalist with Britain’s Guard- challenges; basing stories on consensual ian newspaper, in his book Flat Earth assumptions, whatever their validity, to News. Many working journalists, myself avoid incurring unwelcome scrutiny; ar- included, would agree with his conclu- tificially balancing stories with a he said- sion that the media are ill-equipped to she said approach that strips them of realise their stated goal of truth-telling. their true significance; trivialising news, His dissection of the causes of this failure pandering to common prejudices and – his 10 “rules of production” – should stripping out complexity in the hope of be studied by anyone aspiring to work in increasing circulation; and promoting the media and any reader interested in unsubstantiated “moral panics” to pre- inoculating him or herself against many vent readers deserting to rivals. of the media’s worst excesses. The rules “Journalists who are denied the time describe in a very convincing fashion to work effectively,” he concludes, “can some of the main practical reasons why survive by taking the easy, sexy stories mainstream reporting ends up distorting which everybody else is running; reduc- or misrepresenting real events. But do his ing them to simplified events; framing rules of production provide the complete them with safe ideas and safe facts; neu- picture of media failure, as Davies claims tralising them with balance; and churn- and most of the book’s reviewers have ing them out fast.” Most journalists want accepted? That is much less certain. to do good, to change the world, to be Davies argues that, following the take- Woodward or Bernstein, but the limita- over of our major newspapers by large tions imposed by their working environ- corporations, the media have become ment rarely make achieving this ideal concerned solely with profit. In this cut- possible. They sacrifice the needs of jour- throat commercial environment, news nalism for the easy gratification of “chur- reporting comes to be treated no differ- nalism”. Faced with commercial pres- ently from car-making. Efficiency on the sures, under-staffed newsrooms and un- assembly line of the “news factory”, like sympathetic bosses, and under pressure that of the car factory, demands constant from government officials and the public cuts in staffing and overheads. As are- relations industry, journalists make bad sult, claims Davies, overworked journal- choices.

4 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production

There is an obvious problem with Da- journalists to make much of an impres- vies’ reading of journalistic intentions. ❝ sion on the media they serve? Again, Da- He assumes, with what appears to be a There is an vies finds succour in his rules of produc- mixture of naivety and professional self- obvious problem tion. The need of journalists to submit delusion, that journalists are basically with Davies’ to commercial pressures has ideological idealistic individuals whose desire to reading of consequences, he argues, reflected in do good is inadvertently crushed by the journalistic the media’s adoption of a conservative corporations who run our media. The intentions. He worldview. The rules of production, he free-spirit journalist is cast as Cinderella, assumes, with writes, “tend to favour the status quo. labouring unappreciated by her abusive what appears All of them, furthermore, are reinforced and dominating corporate sisters. to be a mixture by the impact of PR which... is primarily But why should we believe that jour- of naivety and a tool for the powerful.” nalists are motivated primarily by the professional In other words, the problem of jour- common good? Are they not like other self-delusion, that nalism, in Davies’ view, is one of consis- professionals, a mix of good and bad? journalists are tent cock-up. Is it not likely that many journalists do basically idealistic not care about truth or doing good but individuals whose Conspiracy Theories about staying employed, advancing their desire to do good Davies rejects other explanations for the careers or enriching themselves? (Inter- is inadvertently failure of journalism, especially what he estingly, in this regard, Davies ignores the crushed by the terms “conspiracy theories” promoted wealth of evidence provided in his fasci- corporations who by media outsiders. Corporations may nating chapter the Propaganda Puzzle run our media have taken over the media, but Davies that the intelligence services, especially is unwilling to concede that their inter- the CIA, have secretly financed media ests have any noticeable influence on the organisations in many foreign countries agenda or ideology of our media. The and infiltrated publications in the US to argument that rightwing or corporate place journalists whose job it is to spread bias in our media reflects the influence misinformation). of either advertisers or proprietors is dis- Reading Davies, one longs for a return missed as describing a phenomenon of to the golden era of an incorruptible and only marginal significance. From his con- conscientious media. But did such an era versations with fellow journalists, Davies ever exist? Strangely, Davies devotes al- relates, he and they ascribe “only 5% or most no space in his book to examining 10% of the problem” to such interfer- the history of journalism or to testing his ence. implied hypothesis that journalists were Davies argues that in 30 years of once successful at truth-telling. working in the media he has never come This weakness in Davies’ argument, across an instance of an advertiser influ- however, does not substantially under- encing an editorial line. “Nor can I find mine the significance of his chief obser- any other journalist who has ever known vation that the media as a whole is fail- it to happen. And nor, as far as I know, ing. Even if journalists are driven by a can the critics who promote the idea.” variety of goals – some good, some bad Well, let me offer an example. Al-Jazeera’s – the result is still a uniformly poor per- English-language channel has been un- formance by the corporate media. How able to secure a proper cable distribution do we explain the inability of the good deal in the US, where it might attract a

December 2009 | ColdType | 5 Jonathan Cook significant following among disillusioned whom he disagreed in the stomach in full Americans keen for a different perspec- ❝ view of the newsroom. Presumably, pro- tive, particularly on the Middle East. All It seems naive on prietors rarely need to strong-arm their the indications are that this is because Davies’ part to staff to that extent. On the issue of edito- Washington and corporate America have reject outright rial interference, Desmond told the court: jointly made clear that they will not sup- the idea that the “If I ordered the editors or the reporters port the channel. corporate owners to write a feature they would not do it.” Interestingly, exactly the same prob- of much of the Maybe not (though I doubt it), but any lem afflicts Al-Jazeera Arabic, which British media, career-minded journalist on the Express, has never been profitable, and has to be most obviously at or other British newspapers, should not heavily subsidised by the emir of Qatar, the popular and need to be told what to write by their even though it is the most popular news widely read end proprietor – they already know. channel in the Arab world. Western ana- of the market, Furthermore, one would not need to lysts usually ascribe Al-Jazeera Arabic’s create a very be psychic to work out what Desmond is problems to the fact that it is an indepen- strong climate likely to think on a host of political and dent broadcaster trying to operate in the of bias in favour economic matters. Helpfully, like other undemocratic environment of the Middle of their own proprietors, he regularly gives voice to East. What does this suggest about Al- interests his opinions. Thus, we know that he Jazeera English’s problems? thinks that corporation-friendly British Clearly, any fledgling commercial me- prime minister Gordon Brown is using dia organisation – if it did not already tax to “squeeze the middle classes out of understand the commercial imperatives existence”; that “it’s not fair” that immi- facing a broadcaster in the West – would grants come into the country; and that have been able to draw obvious conclu- he regards himself as a socialist because sions from Al-Jazeera English’s treatment. he understands socialism to be a political In fact, one could plausibly argue that Al- creed that gives poor people the freedom Jazeera is starting to draw the right con- to get filthy rich, as he has done – or, in clusion itself, toning down its own cover- his words, to achieve “the redistribution age to ensure it does not sound too much of wealth [with] no privilege for the up- like its more “controversial” Arabic sister per classes”. Maybe ensuring his journal- channel. And it may yet choose to make ists understand his worldview is what further compromises in the hope of gain- he meant when he referred to his role at ing entry to the US market. his papers in the following terms: “The Similarly, it seems naive on Davies’ editors are the chefs and I’m the owner part to reject outright the idea that the saying, ‘Why not just put a cherry on the corporate owners of much of the British cake?’” media, most obviously at the popular Is Desmond an aberration? That and widely read end of the market, cre- seems unlikely. Can there really be any ate a very strong climate of bias in favour doubt that other current and former cor- of their own interests. porate owners of the British media, from During a libel case in Britain over the Rupert Murdoch and Robert Maxwell to summer it emerged that Richard Des- Conrad Black and the Barclay Brothers, mond, owner of the nationally read Ex- have not had the same kind of control- press and Star newspapers, had once ling influence as Desmond on their staff? punched a senior editorial executive with If a proprietor like Murdoch needed to

6 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production be courted by a prime minister like Tony two media outsiders – should be read Blair in a desperate bid for the tycoon’s ❝ as companion analyses, both offering support, are journalists really likely to be On this view, highly critical accounts of journalistic be- any more principled? Owners like Mur- the media’s goal haviour but from opposing perspectives. doch, after all, have the power to make is not truth- An understanding of the media’s failure or break a journalist’s career. telling, as Davies is broadened and deepened by reading maintains, but the them together. The Propaganda Model presentation of a Edwards and Cromwell adopt the “pro- A rival model for explaining media failure view of the world, paganda model” – developed by Edward is the theory that its much-prized inde- often distorted, S Herman and Chomsky in their book pendence is in truth a facade and that that promotes Manufacturing Consent – to argue that in reality it is organically tied to elite in- the interests of the failure of the media is neither cock- terests. Perhaps not surprisingly, Davies the powerful up nor conspiracy, but rather structural reserves particular disdain for this argu- corporations and therefore systemic. Like Herman and ment, casually dismissing it as one made that have come Chomsky, they claim that media organi- by those either ignorant of newsroom to dominate our sations rarely need to intervene directly practices or in thrall to radical leftwing societies in journalists’ decisions; instead the me- agendas. Noam Chomsky, one of the most dia “filter” out unwelcome ideas through, trenchant critics of the modern western in Herman and Chomsky’s words, “the media, is presumably the chief object of selection of right-thinking personnel and his scorn, though Chomsky’s name ap- by the editors’ and working journalists’ pears nowhere in Davies’ book – an un- internalisation of [elite] priorities and forgivable omission in a work claiming to definitions of newsworthiness”. offer a no-holds-barred analysis of jour- On this view, the media’s goal is not nalistic failure. truth-telling, as Davies maintains, but Chomsky himself would probably not the presentation of a view of the world, be surprised that the dustjacket of Da- often distorted, that promotes the inter- vies’ book is adorned with enthusiastic ests of the powerful corporations that reviews from the great and the good of have come to dominate our societies. British journalism. The mostly warm re- That is the mainstream media’s rationale, ception of Davies’ book by fellow jour- even if their staff are unaware of it. Jour- nalists will doubtless not be accorded to nalists do not need consciously to choose the latest book from two of Chomsky’s to serve corporate power to be useful to most astute students on media matters, its goals. At their website, Edwards and David Edwards and David Cromwell, ed- Cromwell invite visitors to help dissect itors of the British website Media Lens. instances of media failure as they occur, Their book, Newspeak in the 21st Century, often challenging by email the journal- published in August by Pluto Press, gar- ists responsible. Reading the journalists’ nered praise from only one journalist, defensive – and invariably baffled – re- John Pilger, the leading dissident reporter sponses is enlightening. of our era. A possible reason why a journalist like Pilger, it should be noted, is also en- Davies appears incapable of considering thusiastic about Davies’ book, and with the arguments for the propaganda mod- good reason. Together these works – el, let alone rebutting it, was explained one by a media insider and the other by by Chomsky during an interview in 1996

December 2009 | ColdType | 7 Jonathan Cook with another senior British journalist, obedience by media all seeking to maxi- Andrew Marr, then of the Independent ❝ mise profits within state-capitalist soci- newspaper and today of the BBC. Marr A discomfited ety – tend to respond to events in the and other senior journalists, said Chom- Marr maintained same way.” sky, had risen to their present positions that he had never precisely because their work did not chal- self-censored Conformist Journalism lenge the corporate interests they served. and that there In a recent alert on their website, Ed- A discomfited Marr maintained that he were lots of wards and Cromwell set out what they had never self-censored and that there “disputatious” see as the problem of professional jour- were lots of “disputatious” people in people in nalism. Western journalists “do consis- journalism. Chomsky replied: “If you be- journalism. tently promote the same propaganda lieved something different, you wouldn’t Chomsky replied: obscuring the same crimes in defence of be sitting where you’re sitting.” “If you believed the same vested interests. Most journal- To journalists like Davies and Marr, something ists manage to misperceive the world in this sounds like conspiratorial nonsense. different, you an identical, system-supportive, career- Surely, for the propaganda model to be wouldn’t be furthering way.” true, some group must be policing jour- sitting where Davies’ book offers a wealth of factual nalism to ensure that anyone found to you’re sitting” information about the media that ap- be violating the rules is dismissed. How pears to back such a conclusion, even if could such a cabal be kept secret from he himself is unable to reach it. Edwards the journalists themselves? and Cromwell have no such inhibitions. Edwards and Cromwell, however, re- The pair would doubtless agree with Da- tort that no conspiracy is needed, no vies that his rules of production provide rules have to be imposed. The media’s serious practical limitations on a journal- own lengthy selection processes weed ist’s ability to accurately and fairly cover out journalists who do not subscribe to news. But to these 10 rules, they would the profession’s core value, which is sup- add an eleventh, more important one porting a world subordinated to corpo- that subsumes the other 10: rate power. Dissenting journalists are ex- “The corporate media system, while cluded from positions of influence in our masquerading as an honest, indepen- mainstream media – though a token dis- dent source of unbiased news and views, sident or two, they admit, are usually in- has in fact evolved to protect the pow- corporated into the more liberal publica- erful corporate and political interests of tions, usually in their commentary pages, which it is a part. The corporate media in an attempt to give the impression of is not owned by big business, as is often diversity and pluralism. A truly dissident claimed – it is big business. It does not corporate journalist is, in their view, as watch over concentrated power – it is rare as a Trotskyite banker, and for much power. The media system does not fail the same reason. in its task of guarding the people against Edwards and Cromwell offer an in- power – it succeeds in its task of protect- teresting analogy. “When a shoal of fish ing power at the expense of people and instantly changes direction, it looks for planet.” all the world as though the movement Power is protected domestically, they was synchronised by some guiding hand. argue, by a media whose role is “brain- Journalists – all trained and selected for washing under freedom”. Journalists are

8 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production there to reassure us that we live in a mor- vertising. ally superior universe. Western leaders ❝ In a revealing chapter on manifesta- “are presented as sober, dignified and ra- Alan Rusbridger, tions of journalistic self-deception, Ed- tional – serious people who have ascend- editor of the wards and Cromwell highlight the impla- ed (with a little divine inspiration, and Guardian, twists cable refusal by corporate journalists to perhaps even intervention) to the summit and turns as he accept that the media’s absolute depen- of a meritocratic and benevolent social concedes in an dence on proprietors and the advertising order”. By contrast, journalists invariably interview with industry influences its agenda. In particu- portray foreign leaders who challenge the Edwards the lar, Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guard- interests of Western power as enemies, obvious reality ian, twists and turns as he concedes in an “both foolish and menacing”. that newspapers interview with Edwards the obvious re- Journalists manage to serve power are susceptible ality that newspapers are susceptible to without being aware of their complicity, to the pressures the pressures of advertising and owners argue the pair, because they are “able to of advertising but still balks at the inevitable conclusion perceive only that which allows them to and owners but that the media cannot therefore be truly thrive as successful components of the still balks at independent, let alone the watchdogs of corporate system”. Edwards and Crom- the inevitable power they profess to be. well point to the extensive psychological conclusion that literature on self-deception and “group- the media cannot A Dissection Of Media Failure think”. They quote psychologist Daniel therefore be truly Rather than taking on easy examples of Goleman: “when one can’t do anything independent, media failure, such as coverage of the to change the situation, the other re- let alone the millennium bug that supposedly threat- course is to change how one perceives watchdogs of ened the world’s computers or stories it.” In other words, there is nothing self- power they about the royals, as Davies tends to do, conscious or cynical in the way journal- profess to be Edwards and Cromwell tackle some of ists promote power; they believe what the most important issues of our time. they write, even when it is easily refuted The pair take an especial interest – as or obviously distorts reality. they did in their earlier book, Guardians Davies and others, however, point to of Power – in the coverage of two long- the BBC and the Guardian as proof that running major news stories: Iraq and cli- the corporations do not control all our mate change. media. After all, they note, both the BBC Regarding Iraq, the pair concentrate and the Guardian are run by trusts while on British and American journalists’ con- the BBC is funded by a licence fee levied sistent refusal to make reference to the on the British public. That is a red her- most probable death toll of Iraqis as a ring, Edwards and Cromwell counter. result of the 2003 invasion of their coun- The BBC is organically tied to powerful try by the US and UK. The significance of elites through its government-controlled this topic is that a high death toll would funding and its oversight by directors undermine both the moral case made for and a trust comprising individuals drawn the war against Iraq and the media’s as- from corporate Britain. Likewise, the sumption that western forces are waging Guardian’s Scott Trust is dominated by the “cleanest” fight possible in difficult business leaders, while the newspaper it- circumstances. Much of the legitimacy self, like all the Guardian Media Group’s of the war, at least for supporters who publications, is heavily dependent on ad- claimed it would end a savage tyranny

December 2009 | ColdType | 9 Jonathan Cook and bring western-style democracy to line editor for two magazines, the Busi- Iraq, therefore hangs on the question of ❝ ness and Spectator, making just this point: the numbers killed in Iraq. Big business has “Iraq is the most difficult conflict in any The most credible academic study much at stake of our lifetimes to report... Much normal of the deaths caused by the invasion – in continuing to reporting is simply impossible.” published by the world’s leading medi- be allowed to So why do journalists still turn, just like cal journal the Lancet and already three pillage a war-torn the White House and Downing Street, to years out of date – put the most likely Iraq, exploiting the Iraq Body Count for their death toll total at 655,000. Instead journalists uni- its oil resources figure? For Edwards and Cromwell the formly rely on the very limited assess- and creating answer is to be found in a corporate in- ment made by a group known as Iraq new markets terest in promoting the legitimacy of the Body Count that tots up Iraqi deaths re- vulnerable war and its aftermath. Big business has ported by the western media and a few to western much at stake in continuing to be allowed reliable local sources. Their figure has penetration to pillage a war-torn Iraq, exploiting its been much lower, at about a tenth of the oil resources and creating new markets academic study’s. vulnerable to western penetration. In ad- Even using Davies’ 10 rules of produc- dition, corporate capitalism needs to cre- tion, it is difficult to account for this con- ate a facade of western moral sensitivity sistent failure by journalists. The well- in the treatment of Iraq to prop up the publicised carnage in Iraq makes a very assumption in media coverage that our high figure credible, even commonsensi- governments have only the interests of cal; a respectable study offers insurance the Iraqi people at heart. against criticism, ridicule or legal action; Assessing the media’s coverage of an- the unpopularity of the war (particularly other topic, climate change, is possibly the among many liberals) means few read- most significant gauge of the strength of ers of newspapers like the Guardian and Edwards and Cromwell’s argument. Ac- Independent would object; and there has cording to the proponents of a truly free been plenty of time for journalists to fa- press, even one hampered by the limita- miliarise themselves with this aspect of tions enumerated by Davies, our media the Iraq story. One of Davies’ rules – that should revel in the chance to report on of balance – should at the very least en- a simmering threat that may in the not- courage journalists to mention this figure too-distant future wipe out the human at the same time as they cite the Iraq species – climate change is the ultimate Body Count’s numbers. moral panic. But for critics of this theory In addition, most journalists’ profes- such as Edwards and Cromwell, climate sional training should enable them to change is more likely to create the ulti- understand that in an anarchic and war- mate clash of interests for a media that, torn country like Iraq there is little hope on the one hand, is faced with the irrefut- that most deaths are being reliably re- able science of imminent catastrophe for corded by the media. To most correspon- which evasive action needs to be taken dents trapped in the relative comfort of and which, on the other, depends for its the Green Zone, it must be obvious that own survival on the need to generate the the Iraq Body Count’s figures are only a very consumption destroying the planet. fraction of the real death toll. Edwards If Edwards and Cromwell are right, and Cromwell quote James Forsyth, on- we ought to see a great deal of equivo-

10 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production cation and evasiveness from the media like other newspapers, survives economi- on climate change. In fact, on the basis ❝ cally only because of the many millions of their argument, we ought to see the On the basis of of pounds of revenue it receives each media dealing with climate change very their argument, year from advertisers promoting luxu- similarly to the corporations: that is, we ought to ry products. That may explain why the by acknowledging the threat of climate see the media only practical advice the paper offered its change but at the same time adopting a dealing with readers to avert the doomsday predicted variety of strategies to downplay its sig- climate change on the front-page was “10 things you can nificance so that we, the customer, con- very similarly to do at home”, including turning off elec- tinue to consume as eagerly as ever. the corporations: trical appliances not in use. Similarly, an Which theory fits the reality of the that is, by editorial warned that individuals should media’s coverage of climate change? acknowledging take responsibility by cycling or walk- Edwards and Cromwell’s contention the threat of ing rather than driving. “A failure to act is: “The mainstream media do report the climate change now,” it concluded, “will not be forgiven latest scientific findings on climate change but at the same by future generations”. … [but] the content of these reports and time adopting Even in the best-case example – the related commentary comes with gaping a variety of Independent of December 3 2005 – argue holes. The material surrounding them strategies to Edwards and Cromwell, a whole set of vi- also serves to powerfully dissipate their downplay its tal issues concerning climate change were impact.” The pair look at the role of the significance simply incapable of being discussed, such Independent newspaper, widely regarded so that we, as: the legal obligation on corporations to as the champion of environmental issues the customer, prioritise profit over human welfare and in the British media. They examine, for continue to the environment; the goal of advertising example, its coverage on the day it pub- consume as to generate artificial needs and thereby lished probably the boldest frontpage on eagerly as ever promote unsustainable consumption; the climate change ever adopted by a British collusion between corporations and west- newspaper. The banner headline of De- ern governments in installing compliant cember 3 2005 read “Climate Change: dictators in client states to exploit their Time for Action” and listed the likely sce- resources; and the use of loans and tied narios facing humanity: “killer storms, aid to trap poor countries in debt so that rampant disease, rising sea levels, devas- the West can control their markets and tated wildlife, water shortages, agricul- development. tural turmoil”. In 2006, on a rare occasion when pre- Deserved as these scare tactics were, cisely these types of concerns were raised Edwards and Cromwell point out that by the Commons all-party climate change the coverage was framed by dozens of group, their proposals for “turning estab- pages of “relentless propaganda promot- lished principles of British economic life ing mass consumption”, including adverts upside down” were aired seriously only for Vauxhall cars; PC World’s X-Box game in an Independent news report. A com- consoles; “1p flights” from flymonarch. mentary by the London Times ridiculed com; Dior Christal watches; British Air- the parliamentary group as a “cream-puff ways London-Malaga return flights for army”, while the rest of the British media £59; Canon offers on cameras, camcorders averted their gaze. Revealingly, none of and printers; Citroen cars; and so on. the media used the group’s findings as Statistics show that the Independent, an opportunity to explore or investigate

December 2009 | ColdType | 11 Jonathan Cook these issues further. Body Count figures as regularly as the Edwards and Cromwell conclude that, ❝ hacks of the tabloid Daily Mail? despite the media’s stated concern that Many modern readers would be bored by endless dis- journalists try News As A Science cussion of the detailed reasons for cli- to insinuate that To Davies’ credit, he does not fall back on mate change, “the same journalists go on the strangely the conventional defence for journalistic repeating the same empty blather about consensual conformity, one that might account for ‘the need for all of us to act now’.” The worldview of our the media’s failures even in cases like the media’s message is that “something must media reflects the Iraq death toll and climate change. Many be done”, but the argument never pro- fact that it is now modern journalists try to insinuate that gresses beyond admonitions to cycle and a professional the strangely consensual worldview of recycle more, and turn off electrical appli- media. The our media reflects the fact that it is now ances. “Journalists and editors, and per- professional a professional media. The professional haps much of the public,” they say, “fail journalist, they journalist, they suggest, is trained to seek to notice that the discussion on climate suggest, is out facts from which he or she constructs change has somehow managed to stay on trained to seek an “objective” news report. On this view, ‘square one’ for the past 20 or 30 years. out facts from journalists select facts in the same way Our point is that the media are structur- which he or she that, adopting an analogy used by Ed- ally obliged to remain on square one. Af- constructs an wards and Cromwell, a geologist collects ter all what can a corporate business like “objective” rocks for research. “Geologists have no the Independent possibly say about the news report emotional attachment to their rocks – impact of corporate advertising of mass journalists should be similarly disinter- consumption on environmental collapse, ested.” This view of journalism has be- on the stifling of change?” come increasingly prevalent both inside In both these cases, Davies’ theory is and outside the trade. put severely to the test. He argues that Rightly, however, Davies joins Edwards most journalists want to search for truth and Cromwell in dismissing the idea of but are usually constrained by practical journalistic objectivity as nonsense. He pressures resulting from the commercial points out the obvious truth that all re- environment in which they work. This, porting involves selection – of the subject possibly, might explain why the majority matter of a report, of the tone in which it of journalists – especially those working is narrated, of the values that inform the for the most commercial outfits, such as reporter’s research, as well as of the facts the tabloids – fail to cover stories like included, the people interviewed, and the climate change or the Iraq death toll in quotes used. The process of selection is a convincing way. But it can hardly ex- governed not by objective criteria but by plain why almost all journalists, even on the assumptions a journalist or his news the most serious newspapers, fail in this organisation brings to a story. Davies use- task. Surely, according to Davies’ reason- fully illustrates this point with several ex- ing, there ought be exceptional journal- amples of consensual wisdom from other ists, especially specialists and those with periods of history, including sympathetic tenure in the liberal papers, who consis- reports from mainstream US newspapers tently get it right. How can it be that the about Ku Klux Klan activities in the pre- Guardian and Independent’s Middle East civil rights era. correspondents cite the unlikely Iraq But if journalism is not about objec-

12 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production tivity, but rather about adopting a view- guing, for example, that Tony Blair and point, then newspapers ought to be a ❝ George Bush are war criminals, no differ- cacophony of competing and conflicting Reporters ent from Saddam Hussein or Slobodan views. Davies tries to explain the stultify- hunting in packs Milosevic, who need to stand trial at the ing atmosphere of consensus with his 10 for royal scandals Hague? And why does that very sugges- rules of production. He is helped by the are one thing, but tion make me automatically sound like a fact that he has so many different rules why are the same “radical leftist”, as Davies would dismiss that it is easy to find at least one that kinds of group- those he disagrees with, or as a Trot, covers every example of mis-reporting think evident in crackpot or loony as the talkbackers who he unearths. But how plausible is it that the comment dominate the websites of liberal media these rules are solely responsible for dis- pages of the like the Guardian describe those espous- torting media coverage? broadsheets, even ing progressive opinions. His argument might be more persua- of the so-called sive if journalistic failure occurred pri- liberal papers? Is Comment Really Free? marily in the case of breaking news and One of the problems for dissident jour- fast-moving events. That is when journal- nalists that very effectively excludes ists are most vulnerable to a whole range them from expressing an opinion of this of pressures: from the reliance on official sort in the corporate media is what might sources and the fear of making costly be termed a manufactured “climate of as- mistakes, to the danger of not being first sumptions”. This climate of assumptions with the news. But Davies appears to is shared by all western media whatever want his rules of production to serve as their ostensible political orientations. a tool for explaining long-term reporting Thus, the Guardian, like the rightwing failures too, such as the Iraq death toll Telegraph or Mail, holds that western gov- or climate change, even though, as we ernments are led by those who have the have seen, they appear inadequate to the best interests at heart not only of their task. own people, but of other peoples around Even more significantly for Davies’ the- the globe and even of the planet itself. In ory, it is difficult to see how the rules of Iraq, Tony Blair and George Bush made production can account for the fact that mistakes – they thought there were a whole array of opinions are largely ex- WMD when there were not; they mis- cluded in the commentary of our “quali- read the intelligence; they misunderstood ty” media. Reporters hunting in packs for international law – but they did not act royal scandals are one thing, but why are in bad faith or actively pursue goals that the same kinds of group-think evident in they knew to be illegal, immoral or dam- the comment pages of the broadsheets, aging to the delicate fabric of global rela- even of the so-called liberal papers? Al- tions. They are not war criminals, even though a broad range of opinions can be when all the evidence shows that this is entertained in our most liberal media, precisely what they are. there are nonetheless many reasonable, Edwards and Cromwell make a useful persuasive and sometimes plain com- point about the media’s vital role in re- monsensical views that is all but impos- inforcing a set of assumptions that “our” sible to get published anywhere in the leaders are morally superior to “their” mainstream. leaders. “Controlling what we think is Why have there been no op-eds ar- not solely a matter of controlling what we

December 2009 | ColdType | 13 Jonathan Cook know – it is also about influencing who its regional monopoly on nuclear weap- we respect and who we find ridiculous. ❝ ons, and consequently its dominant and Western leaders are typically reported “Controlling what exclusive military alliance with the US without adjectives preceding their names we think is not – is considered unsuitable for discussion. … The leader of Venezuela, by contrast, solely a matter Nor is it possible to cover the vigorous is ‘controversial left-wing president Hugo of controlling debate in Israeli academia on whether Is- Chavez’.” what we know – rael can be classed as a democracy when In practice, this means that, although it is also about it is a self-declared ethnic state. Equally, the British liberal media have run com- influencing who there is no hope of being allowed to ar- mentary hugely critical of the Iraq war we respect gue that all the evidence suggests that all and of Blair, the criticism is almost en- and who we Israeli leaders have been in bad faith in tirely restricted to the government’s han- find ridiculous. the so-called peace process, not just Ben- dling of the details of the war rather than Western leaders jamin Netanyahu, and none has wanted questioning the war’s goals or the mo- are typically to reach an agreement on a viable Pales- tives of those who led it. Jonathan Steele reported without tinian state. has been one of the war’s harshest op- adjectives Also, for most of the time since the oc- ponents in the Guardian but has always preceding cupation began in 1967 it has been for- maintained that Blair and Bush, and their their names bidden to suggest that Israel operates a neocon advisers, wanted to bring democ- … The leader system of apartheid in the occupied terri- racy to the Middle East. They were badly of Venezuela, tories (let alone inside Israel). Thankfully, advised and unrealistic in adopting that by contrast, is there are the first signs that this tradi- position, says Steele, but they were never ‘controversial tional taboo has been dented by publica- less than idealistic. They may have used left-wing tion of Jimmy Carter’s recent book ‘Pales- immoral means (doctored intelligence president tine: Peace Not Apartheid.’ and so on) but they never pursued im- Hugo Chavez’ ” The climate of assumptions is essential moral ends. Or as Edwards and Crom- in ensuring that there is no danger of a well argue, “balance” in the commen- free marketplace in ideas – a cacophony tary pages “tends to involve presenting of opinions – in our liberal media. Strik- a ‘spectrum’ of views ranging from those ingly, there are a whole host of progres- heavily supportive of state policy to those sive voices – some of them the greatest mildly critical”. thinkers of our age – who simply cannot I have experienced this climate of as- get into print. Where are the op-eds by sumptions myself when trying to write Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn, for op-eds about my specialist interest, Israel example? and the Middle East. There are many ra- Similarly, there are other voices – peo- tional positions that cannot be adopted ple eminently qualified to speak on topi- on the regional conflict in either the Brit- cal issues at the time when they most ish or American media. It is impossible, need to be heard – who are denied space, for example, to question the media con- too. Where, for example, was Scott Rit- sensus that Israeli concerns about Iran’s ter, the former UN weapons inspector in nuclear ambitions (assumed, of course, Iraq, during the build-up to the Iraq war? to be military ambitions) are rooted in a At that time, his opinion ought to have justified fear that Tehran wants Israel’s been one of the most sought-after for the destruction. The far more likely explana- global media. Not only was he not con- tion for Israel’s panic – that it might lose tacted by reporters when compiling their

14 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production news stories, but he was relegated to assumption sound like conspiracy theo- writing commentaries on obscure web- ❝ rists, or – in the language of the talkback- sites. How do Davies’ rules of production That thinkers like ers – like “loonies”. explain the failure by “truth-seeking” Chomsky and journalists in our liberal media to invite Zinn are rarely Mainstream Dissidents an indisputable expert to comment on given a platform If Davies ignores the fact that there are Saddam Hussein’s arsenal in the build- in the corporate many critical thinkers excluded from our up to war? media is often media, he still has one trump card up his Edwards and Cromwell, at least, do ascribed to the sleeve. How do those who support the provide an answer: “an opinion barely ex- fact that their propaganda model explain the existence ists if it doesn’t matter, and it doesn’t mat- ideas either sound of dissident writers in the British lib- ter if it is not voiced by people who matter. like conspiracy eral media? If Chomsky’s theory is right, The full range of opinion, then, represents theories, as how is it that Seumas Milne and George the full range of power.” In other words, Davies suggests, Monbiot write for the Guardian, Robert Ritter’s voice was excluded because his or are difficult for Fisk does so in the Independent, and John outspoken views on the lack of WMD ordinary readers Pilger has a platform in the small maga- in Iraq challenged the US and UK’s case to grasp. This zine the New Statesman? for war. Similarly, influential intellectuals is a self-serving It should be noted that this list is al- and public figures in the West who speak argument, and most exhaustive. Genuine progressive out in dissident ways are rapidly neutra- another way writers are extremely thin on the ground, lised by being mocked by the media for of describing even in the liberal media. (Rightly, I sus- their political views, which supposedly the power of pect, Fisk would not want to be included reflect a flaw in their character. Edwards the climate of alongside these other progressives. His and Cromwell highlight the campaigns of assumptions? key concern, justice for the peoples of ridicule heaped on figures such as John the Middle East, is not unrelated to fairly Le Carre, Chomsky and Harold Pinter: traditional liberal Arabist positions long “if even high-profile dissidents can be adopted by officials in the Foreign Of- presented as wretched, sickly fools, then fice, though ignored by other branches of which reader or viewer would want to be the British establishment. He is certainly associated with them?” on the extreme margins of this group, That thinkers like Chomsky and Zinn but closer to them than he is to Pilger are rarely given a platform in the corpo- or Milne.) In fact, the inclusion of a few rate media is often ascribed to the fact progressive thinkers in the liberal media, that their ideas either sound like con- it can be argued, actually serves its cor- spiracy theories, as Davies suggests, or porate interests. Using the propaganda are difficult for ordinary readers to grasp. model, it is possible, I would suggest, to This is a self-serving argument, and an- identify several goals newspapers like the other way of describing the power of the Guardian and Independent achieve by in- climate of assumptions. This climate is cluding occasional dissident voices. manufactured by our media through its First, they gain extra circulation by consensual presentation of a certain view attracting a small but still significant of the world. If western governments are readership of progressives. In doing so, always shown to be pursuing laudatory, they also diminish the danger that these if occasionally erroneous, goals, then crit- readers might search elsewhere for more ics of western power who challenge that consistently progressive news and com-

December 2009 | ColdType | 15 Jonathan Cook mentary. A trend that, if realised, might appear to most readers as extremist, eventually lead to the emergence of more ❝ driven by conspiracy theories, or crack- prestigious radical internet publications, The existence of pot, and are therefore easily dismissed. or to the development of different kinds dissident writers The boundaries of legitimate dis- of new media that could challenge the in the liberal course are set by the acres of conven- power of the corporate media. A fringe media usefully tional commentary; by stepping outside benefit, at least for the corporate - inter persuades its those boundaries, dissidents sound no ests behind our media, is that progressive core readership more reasonable than their opponents readers who are persuaded to buy liberal that their on the far-right. The “sensible centre” newspapers because they include a Mon- newspaper precludes Monbiot and Milne just as eas- biot or a Milne are likely over time to of choice is ily as it does the British National Party have their views tempered simply from genuinely liberal and David Duke. By being pitted against being constantly bombarded with the and tolerant, the climate of assumptions, progressive non-progressive news and views con- and that it offers dissidents are forced into a battle they tained in the rest of the paper. a platform are likely to lose from the outset. Second, the existence of dissident even to those With that said, it should be noted writers in the liberal media usefully who subscribe that this situation is far from static. The persuades its core readership that their to heterodox corporate media in the West is facing a newspaper of choice is genuinely liberal opinions crisis both of financial viability and of and tolerant, and that it offers a platform legitimacy that could yet destroy it. As even to those who subscribe to hetero- readers look to other media for their in- dox opinions. It reassures the bulk of formation, such as the internet, Monbiot readers that the newspaper is uphold- and Milne sound increasingly credible to ing the values it espouses. Importantly a growing number of readers. That sets for the liberal readership it offers what up a demand for more such writers that might be termed the “smugness factor”: it will be hard for the liberal papers to I do not agree with you, but I’ll defend to ignore if they are to survive. The media the death your right to be wrong. have so far held shut the floodgates but it And third, the inclusion of a few pro- is not given that they will continue to do gressive voices – and the extra readers so. Dissident writers in the liberal media they buy the paper – actually comes at may in the end play a significant role in very little cost to the corporate interests destroying such media from within. the media represent. The arguments ad- opted by dissident writers challenging Watchdog Or Lapdog? the goals of western power sound so alien Because Davies simply dismisses the as- to readers daily tutored in the manufac- sumptions of the propaganda model, he tured climate of assumptions that they makes no serious attempt to defend his are hard to stomach for most readers. The own theory against it. Which requires me very “strangeness” of such views simply – presumptuously – to try to make the highlights the extent to which they have case on his behalf against those I shall re- been excluded in the first place. Because fer simplistically to as the “Chomskians”, Monbiot or Milne’s columns appear in an or supporters like Edwards and Crom- ideological vacuum, because they remain well of the propaganda model, in an ef- isolated dissidents surrounded by more fort to test the value of their respective conventional opinions, their arguments arguments.

16 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production

Davies could try to defend his theory in question, British MPs and ministers by pointing to the media’s track record ❝ lost the moral high ground and with it of exposing establishment malpractice. It is interesting any hope, admittedly already feeble, of He could highlight, for example, the me- that the turning on the bankers. With the par- dia’s extensive coverage in recent months revelations about liamentary system in crisis, the banking of the expenses scandal involving Brit- the British MPs system faced little threat of significant ain’s elected representatives. He could emerged in the reform, which would have required an likewise point to revelations by his own immediate wake unprecedented assertion of political will. newspaper, the Guardian, over the sum- of a far more Even efforts to make the banks more mer that Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid paper important scandal accountable lost momentum during this the News of the World illegally hacked involving the period. In fact, while our elected repre- into hundreds of private phones to dig banks’ extortion sentatives were being flayed by the me- up dirt on MPs, cabinet ministers, royals, of western dia, the bankers quietly went back to actors and sports stars, and then covered governments to business as normal. By personalising the its tracks by paying at least £1 million to save themselves issue of graft and directing popular anger those victims who threatened to expose from liquidation, at a few individuals – at first, the most its crime spree. Does this not prove Da- and the later visible bankers and then many MPs – vies’ contention that the bottom line for feathering of their the economic system itself was given a the corporate media is guaranteeing prof- own nests from reprieve from a serious debate about its its rather than supporting the powerful? public finances. merits and failings. Scandal sells papers, and the powerful Another possible line of defence by are often the victims of such exposes. Davies might concern the media’s relent- But for a Chomskian these examples less pursuit of embarrassing stories in- fall far short of making Davies’ case. It volving wealthy celebrities, including the is interesting that the revelations about Guardian’s revelations that the News of the British MPs emerged in the immedi- the World hacked into private data con- ate wake of a far more important scandal cerning football managers, actors, politi- involving the banks’ extortion of western cians and models. The Murdoch paper governments to save themselves from even targeted members of the wealthi- liquidation, and the later feathering of est family in Britain, the royals. How their own nests from public finances. does the hounding of the royal family, Whether it was the goal or not, the trick- for example, square with Edwards and le of reports of parliamentary graft over Cromwell’s theory that the media serve several months very effectively distracted power? The royals, after all, are powerful attention in Britain both from the banks’ – in fact, they are the heart of the estab- shocking behaviour and forestalled a lishment. tentative debate about the profound cri- But again, Davies’ theory looks weak- sis facing corporate capitalism. er once this incident is examined. For In addition, a Chomskian might sus- the British media, the royals are chiefly pect that the timing of the attack on our celebrities. In a post-monarchy society, elected representatives, using informa- nothing is left of their role apart from pro- tion leaked to the establishment’s favou- viding spectacle. Without it, one might rite newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, had a wonder how long the House of Windsor beneficial consequence for the embattled would survive. For Chomskians, the me- finance sector. With their own integrity dia’s endless cat-and-mouse games with

December 2009 | ColdType | 17 Jonathan Cook wealthy individuals already in the public ing expanded. Why were the police high eye – whether actors, politicians or roy- ❝ command so keen to distract attention alty – are part of the distraction from far To prevent legal from the full implications of the News more important issues that, if properly action, Murdoch of the World’s systematic law-breaking, covered by the media, might bring into had paid off the seemingly approved by its senior man- question the moral basis of our political victims. As the agement? By misleadingly suggesting and economic systems. The press’ perse- new revelations that this was a misdemeanour commit- cution of the royals gives the misleading, mounted, it ted by one rogue reporter – again, by but useful, impression of an independent became clear personalising the story – the police as- media that refuses to be cowed even in that the police sisted the law-breaking paper. the face of great wealth. had failed to For a Chomskian, the cover provided In fact, it could be argued that the ob- investigate these by the police to the news organisation session with royal-baiting substantially incidents properly might look suspiciously like one part of weakens Davies’ case. His rules of pro- at the time they the system of corporate power – the rule duction, with their presumption of the first emerged of law, embodied by the police – demon- media’s dependence on official sources apart from in the strating its inherent sympathy with an- and of its fear of angering the rich, who case of a single other part of the same system – the ma- might retaliate with costly legal action, reporter, and that nipulators of popular perception, the me- should make the royals untouchable. But the prosecution dia. Interestingly, Davies’ book is replete the opposite is true. Is that because Da- service and with examples of the police and courts vies fails to distinguish between types of courts had been protecting the media from the legal con- power in a corporate society, as well as happy to ignore sequences of their transgressions, though types of scandal? And, if so, is this fail- the affair, too he draws no conclusions from this. ure not a sign of his and the media’s own One aspect of the story, the Guardian’s inability to unmask the real centres of tenacious investigation, appears more power? These are questions we will re- difficult to explain. Should the paper turn to shortly. not have sided with its corporate sister There is another aspect of the News and kept quiet? Nonetheless, the Guard- of the World’s data-hacking that is worth ian’s determination can be explained highlighting. The police, it seems, had too. The broadsheet has its own com- been aware of the Murdoch paper’s ille- mercial imperatives, including its interest gal activities when the incidents occurred in discrediting a more powerful media several years earlier. To prevent legal ac- rival. But more significantly, at least for tion, Murdoch had paid off the victims. a Chomskian, the investigation not only As the new revelations mounted, it be- failed to threaten the corporate system came clear that the police had failed to to which the Guardian belongs, it actu- investigate these incidents properly at ally reinforced the system’s credibility. the time they first emerged apart from in The Guardian’s self-declared liberal val- the case of a single reporter, and that the ues were entirely consistent with an at- prosecution service and courts had been tack on law-breaking by journalists at happy to ignore the affair, too. the News of the World. For the Guardian’s As the Guardian dug deeper, the po- journalists and readers, the paper’s inves- lice continued actively colluding with the tigation was proof of the veracity of its – Murdoch tabloid in an attempt to avert and the wider media’s – claims to being the threat of the investigation’s scope be- accountable as well as independent. The

18 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production role of the media as enablers of corporate with the Guardian, they admit that such power was never threatened by the in- ❝ self-regulation has woefully failed. vestigation. The pro-Israel For a Chomskian, the episode il- lobby, he The Electric Fence lustrates the fact that, while corporate writes, is “the The most revealing of Davies’ rules of journalists can debate some values, most potent production is number 3, which concerns such as what constitutes immoral or il- electric fence what he calls an “electric fence” sealing legal behaviour, all still believe without in the world”, off certain topics from debate. Davies question in the moral superiority of the its mission to highlights one issue – Israel – above all corporate society to which they belong. crush all critical others as being taboo for the western For the Guardian’s journalists, its revela- debate of Israel. media. The pro-Israel lobby, he writes, tions concerned a story of failure by indi- Interestingly is “the most potent electric fence in the viduals. The story certainly did not raise for such a world”, its mission to crush all critical questions about the media’s relationship controversial – debate of Israel. Interestingly for such a to corporate power. and, for most controversial – and, for most non-jour- Interestingly, when the Guardian’s edi- non-journalists nalists at least, counter-intuitive – re- tor, Alan Rusbridger, was summoned be- at least, counter- mark, Davies makes no effort to explain fore a Commons committee to explain intuitive – why. His confidence that his conclusion is his paper’s investigation – paradoxically, remark, Davies self-explanatory is misplaced. As a jour- alongside Nick Davies – he was at pains makes no effort nalist who has spent many years report- to highlight his opposition, not only to in- to explain why ing from Israel, and suffered more than creased regulation of the media, but also most at the hands of its lobby, I want to the law’s enforcement against the News such a statement justified. of the World’s senior editors. Questioned What is it, does he think, that makes about the Guardian’s motives in pursuing the Israel lobby so powerful and able to the story, he told MPs: “It wasn’t a cam- exert such absolute control over its fa- paign to reopen the police inquiry, or to voured cause? How is this lobby capable call for prosecutions or to force anybody of exercising so much influence when the to resign. We have not called for any of size of Britain’s Jewish population is so those.” small and Israel’s significance to the UK In other words, a Chomskian would ar- relatively marginal? And if the pro-Israel gue, this was an example of grand corpo- lobby can shape British (and western) rate hypocrisy. Rusbridger supported the media coverage so decisively, why does investigation in so far as it both helped Davies not presume that other more ob- boost the newspaper’s circulation and viously important lobbies – particularly revenues and reinforced the credibility of the banking and finance lobby, and the the corporate media of which his paper is military industries lobby – are able to a major component. But he opposed the exert at least as much, if not more, influ- legal consequences of the investigation ence? in so far as it threatened that same sys- Is it not possible that the reason Da- tem with greater scrutiny, regulation and vies can identify the phenomenal power safeguards. It is interesting to note that of the pro-Israel lobby is precisely be- all British newspapers favour without cause it has to work so hard and openly question the continuing self-regulation to get its way? Could it be that this lob- of the media even when, as is the case by’s very dependence on the other pow-

December 2009 | ColdType | 19 Jonathan Cook erful lobbies mentioned above makes its orthodoxy – that corporate capitalism influence so visible? Journalists “feel” the ❝ represents the summit of human mate- weight of the Israel lobby precisely be- One day we rial and moral achievement – precisely cause it has to resort to intimidating the may not need because its very rationale depends on the media to stop coverage of its otherwise newspapers – maintenance of that orthodoxy. only too obvious activities. certainly we may Conversely, could it not be argued that not need ones Conclusion the ability of the finance and military tied to corporate There is much that Davies’ and Edwards industries lobbies to cover their tracks interests that and Cromwell’s books share: both view more effectively than the Israel lobby is a depend on the media as essentially a corporate me- sign of their greater power? advertising and dia; both dismiss the idea of objective Unlike the Israel lobby that imposes our ever-greater journalism as a nonsense and agree that its will on behalf of a cause few people reliance on air journalists must, and do, take sides; and share, these other lobbies have created flights and l both regard the media’s reporting as an a presumption – through the media – in uxury cars that unreliable guide to what is really hap- favour of their cause that almost no one are destroying pening in the world. But on the issue of questions. We may now despise the bank- the planet the causes of this wholesale failure, a gulf ers for their behaviour, but who wants to separates them. see the end of the current banking sys- One day we may not need newspapers tem, or of our savings and pensions? We – certainly we may not need ones tied to may oppose wars, but who wants tens of corporate interests that depend on ad- thousands of workers laid off from the in- vertising and our ever-greater reliance dustries that depend on western military on air flights and luxury cars that are de- adventures? We may worry about climate stroying the planet. In an era of profound change caused by the extravagant needs economic and ideological crisis, our me- created for us by corporations, but who dia’s inability properly to address these wants to see a reversal of growth in our problems makes Davies’ book begin to economies, let alone their collapse? We look like an excessively indulgent excuse may worry about the evidence of global for this failure. Edwards and Cromwell’s warming, and fret for the polar bears, but book, by contrast, seems to have much who wants to eschew air travel or to live greater power to explain the strangely without a car? consistent blind-spots from which our And here lies the crux of the problem media suffer. with Davies’ theory. In promoting a view I was once a journalist of the Davies’ of journalistic failure that can be ex- school, believing that our media enjoyed plained only by laziness, cost-cutting and an inalienable freedom both to get it right public relations pressures he grapples and, as often, to get it wrong. The dis- with the visible but marginal problems turbing conclusions reached by Edwards of our media. The much larger structural and Cromwell are easier for me to accept issues – the media’s selection processes, today in part because I have spent so long its ideological strait-jacket, its profound in Israel, an overtly ideological and ruth- connectedness to the interests of a cor- lessly colonial society whose leaders have porate capitalist society – are invisible so transparently co-opted their own me- to him. Our media cannot engage in a dia. Israeli journalists, even of the most debate about the merits of the current liberal variety, have been recruited to

20 ColdType | December 2009 rules of production the task of mobilising local Jewish pub- political and economic system that ben- lic opinion in the pursuit of racial goals, efits corporate power. such as maintaining Israel’s ethnic pu- It is precisely Davies’ intimate fa- rity, that are shocking to an outsider but miliarity with the British media that go unquestioned by the overwhelming makes him a fascinating but ultimately majority of Israeli Jews. Israeli journal- unreliable companion as he surveys the ists are as blind to the idea that they are media’s role. In this case, outsiders like manufacturing consent for an aggressive Edwards and Cromwell prove the more ethnic state as journalists like Davies are useful guides. to the idea that their role is to prop up a

December 2009 | ColdType | 21 Writing worth reading from around the world

ColdType

www.coldtype.net