Examples of exploitation
First, we have MoveOn.Org's taking advantage of British soldiers by trying to pass them off as American ones, as James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal first found out (Hat tip: The Original Musings). A US Army Captain complained about an offensive ad the moonbat website put out, described as following:
...it is a Bush-bashing ad that pretends to be arguing for American solders' families as they will miss the holidays, and it shows turkey and crying wives and blames Bush for it all. Here is the crucial part of the ad that I would like to bring to your attention. As they pretend to argue on my behalf they show a group of soldiers standing around a table in the Middle East.But, as was discovered, those were actually British soldiers in the picture! And so, besides insulting American soldiers, MoveOn.Org also insulted British ones too, and IMO, they exploited them as well.
The Mudville Gazette also shows that, while British soldiers usually don't have a hat included with their uniform, US soldiers usually do.
Even old articles can be just as good for learning about the problems which media moonbats suffer from as new ones, and here's an example, in this case, of MSM personnel who exploited naive anti-warrists to advance their crappy causes. For example, here's an excerpt from the ultra-knee-jerk Oklahoma Gazette, via the Free Republic, in which the reporter is basically taking advantage of one opposer of the Iraq war:
Speaking outThat doesn't sound very realistic at all, if you ask me. Why would the military do anything harmful against the woman's son, just because she opposes the war? Could it be that the reporter/newspaper put words in the woman's mouth, for their own ludicrous anti-military purposes?
Jeri Reed doesn’t swell with pride when the war in Iraq is promoted with a Toby Keith song. Her son faces death every day and is already changing as a young Army soldier in a ‘morally wrong’ war, she said.
By Brian Brus
Jeri Reed wants her son back home. Not just because she has the same concerns any loving mother has for her child when he’s in a deadly situation daily as a target for angry personal and physical attacks in Iraq, but because the entire war “is morally wrong on many levels,” she said.“I was really concerned that they were going to have my son and all our kids go in to wage a war against the Iraqi people, and that was bad enough. … And now the risk to his own safety is growing every day because the Iraqi people, they just want to retaliate against someone, anyone,” Reed said from her home in Norman.
“The loss of life for Iraqis is so high. Our own family members are dying over there. … It’s becoming more obvious that this occupation should not have happened.” That’s what she said last Sept. 11, too, when she and other members of the group Military Families Speak Out addressed a congressional briefing on ending U.S. military involvement in Iraq.
“I’ve been pretty outspoken about my feelings about the war,” she told the Gazette, explaining that she doesn’t want her son’s last name in the news for fear of repercussions against him from within the military.
Needless to say by now, what's said about this being a war against the Iraqi people is otherwise false, as even Iraq the Model could confirm, and also the Kurdish community, as shown in this op-ed by Massoud Barzani, the president of the Kurdistan region of Iraq.
The Free Republic poster provides some extra excerpts from the Oklahoma Gazette rag:
"Like, they've got (singer) Toby Keith on all the time to promote it...They're not really trying to show the news; they're showing a lot of flag waving and that's it. Like it's supposed to be enough," she said.No kidding. By now, as sources such as Blackfive and The Mudville Gazette, to name but some, have confirmed, such implications are an outright lie. Dadmanly (and also Arthur Chrenkoff) sums it up the best in the following:
Nationally, the networks will sometimes provide a critical perspective, Reed said, but they don't really show what's going on in Iraq...Because I keep in communication with my son and because I talk with a lot of other parents in the same situation, and I know there's areas of Iraq that are almost entirely chaos right now."
Letters from her son and conversations with other people with family members stationed in Iraq reveals to Reed that the U.S. occupation of Iraq is further undermining stability.
"As a member of the U.S. Military in Iraq, let me say something very clearly to Newsweek, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, CBS, ABC, and any other media organization of any integrity.Amen. How DARE even weekly newspapers like the Oklahoma Gazette try to smear decent and honest soldiers trying to put a stop to the repugnant work of a dictator, one who even had fully approved rape gangs who specialized in the systematic rape of women in Iraq, no doubt in accordance with what's told in the Koran in Sura 4:23-24. (See also this earlier topic for additional notes.) Which, lest we forget, is also exploitation, namely, of women.
"You are creating greater risk for me personally. You are creating incredible hostility in Muslim countries due to incessant negative reporting out of context and ignoring orders of magnitude of good news in doing so. Yet, in your jaded imaginations, you believe every misconception you spin is ever more confirmation of what you always knew about the U.S. Military. These unrelenting Vietnam analogies are like press versions of drug addled flashbacks.
"You create added danger for my soldiers. You feed into enemy (yes, enemy) propaganda efforts in yielding unlimited access to pre-staged voices with calculated intent. You are entirely ignorant of the countries you claim to cover, and you know as little about the U.S. Military, its culture, climate, training, procedures, and ways of operation. You diminish and demean our service.
"You cause greater concern, fear and worry for our friends and family. You expand pinpoints of data into grossly distorted exaggerations of fact, and paint broad brush strokes of violence without any context or comparison to relative levels elsewhere. You have no sense of proportion or equivalence. You have no regard for collateral damage, and yet see imagined carnage with every surgical strike, precision bomb, or targeted raid. You can speak of cities destroyed with the destruction of a single building.
"We daily see the gross distortions. We cannot recognize the caricatures you scratch out, neither in our fellow soldiers, nor in the battlespace we inhabit. Your vain and callous search for what you indignantly claim as objectivity is really nothing more than neutrality in the face of absolute evil. Even though you are neither architect nor sponsor of that evil, you are accomplice in its result. And you continue to ignore the consequence.
"We are proud of our Military, our Country, and how, for over 200 years, the U.S. has tried to improve both ourselves and the world around us, usually for little thanks and much scorn and insult. We police ourselves. Every scandal you report, from My Lai to Iran Contra to Abu Ghraib, has been first reported to authorities by military personnel. And that has resulted in prosecutions and punishment. And what do you stress in your reporting? The sins, crimes, and misdemeanors and rarely if ever remark on the ability and willingness for us to identify and correct malfeasance in our ranks.
"Never, never claim to support the soldiers, you don't, you never will in any meaningful way until you can see your prejudices for what they are, work to eliminate them, and for once try to view the world with an open and not a closed mind. You need to rethink how you consider the idea of a just war after 9/11. You need to acknowledge that you don't know the modern U.S. Military or the men and women who serve.
"Only then can you hope to develop any kind of truly objective view of your world."
Getting back to the Oklahoma Gazette's distortions, one of the respondants to the topic on the Free Republic says:
Have you seen this? We nearly fell over laughing--and then we realized what a tragedy it was. The whole "gazette" is pretty much of a waste product.And the reporter who filed this DS, as far as I know, was let go about a year after writing it. Which is just as well. I wouldn't be surprised if the OK Gazette got such negative responses for publishing such a travesty that they had to give that journo-crapper the boot, which, if they did, was richly deserved.
It's true that, as the category under which this was filed, "Bleeding Heart Liberal" says, that the reporter is of pretty much such a position. But at the same time, I can't help but find it exploitation at worst.
And while we're at it, let's not forget the left's own exploitation of Cindy Sheehan, the moonbat mom who made the MSM headlines Reed didn't succeed in getting. She was in the UK recently, and who would take to exploiting her there, other than The Guardian (Hat tip: Mark in Mexico.) She tells them exactly what they want to hear, to a newspaper that's run by the most utter Chomskyites you can find in Europe, and the most hilarious line of all from her is probably:
"I really feel I'm carrying the whole world on my shoulders."Tell me, Mrs. Sheehan, is it very heavy? Considering that a lot of lefties have left even you, I guess that could explain the very difficult time you're having in carrying it around for the rest of the time you do, eh? Really, for all it's worth, don't strain yourself!
That said, it's a real shame that even in the UK, the MSM is tripping over itself in the rush to exploit this woman, as despicable as she is.
And in the Boston area, there was a case of teachers trying to brainwash students with political messages, as Michelle Malkin explains over here. IMO, that is both a betrayal of the public who wanted an education for their children, NOT a stuffing of politicized nonsense into their English class, and an attempt by the teachers to take advantage of the students whom they were expected to teach (the students thought it was "funny"?!? Oh yeah, that's the best excuse I've heard all day). A teacher, generally speaking, should enable the students to be able to form their own opinion without having to have the teacher do it for them. And what's the big deal to the teachers regarding the political spectrum? IMO, it's really nothing special.