When News becomes Propaganda

[Scotty]

I start from an old-fashioned notion, that news should be news, and as unbiased as possible. I disdain the media which slant news, one way or another, or give only one side of a story. I enjoy opinion pieces, but they must be clearly labelled as such. And I don't like "News" coverage of nonsense which is not actually news. I don't care what Charlie Sheen or the Kardashians are doing, and don't hold much respect for news media which focuses so zealously on their exploits.

I also don't like propaganda. Give me the facts, and let me decide. Give me one side, and push an agenda, and I get my back up.

What inspired this is the current propaganda series the Globe and Mail has decided to run telling us all how wonderful Muslims are, and that any concerns about them are misplaced. I do have concerns, and I don't need some left wing crusading newspaper to give me pap to try to allay them. Address the issues in a realistic way and I might pay attention. Give me crap like this and it just irritates me.

Globe and Mail

As an example, the initial features a 20 year old Pakistani college student who complains about people who treat her rudely because she's wearing a Hijab. Now as the article states she is the daughter of Pakistani immigrants, we can assume she ws raised her. Yet she wears the Hijab, the thought occurred to me to wonder why she was wearing it. That would seem to be a pretty straightforward and obvious question, but of course, it's not asked or answered. So to me, you have a girl who decides to wear something which her religion doesn't require, but which will ostentatiously mark her to everyone who sees her not only as Muslim but as a traditionalist Muslim. She chose to set herself apart from everyone else in a secular society. Why? Not answered. And then the piece says, sadly Her experiences indicate that, for some young Canadian Muslims, an “us and them” mentality persists in their home country. Yet isn't that exactly what she's creating, what she's insisting on? When you set yourself apart you are TRYING to make it an "Us and them" thing. So why complain, then?

[Oleg Bach]

The average semi-intelligent person can tell what is propaganda and what is not. Those that are not smart enough to see the difference between real news and an attempt to manipulate the mind - simply do not count anyway...Those that accept all propaganda as real and vital news need to be managed so mobs don't form...That can be mobilized later to bring harm and oppression against the nations more aware citizens...Propoganda always targets the stupid and common. It is usually used and launched against smart people who are in conflict with other smart people for domain...In other words the deployment of the crazed and stupifed mob is and aways was a tool that is used by one group to oust a competator.

[M.Dancer]

I start from an old-fashioned notion, that news should be news, and as unbiased as possible.

Actually you start from a modern notion. Newspapers of 100 years ago were incredibly biased..which explians why a city like Paris would have 40 or 50 different papers.

I disdain the media which slant news, one way or another, or give only one side of a story. I enjoy opinion pieces, but they must be clearly labelled as such.

Fair enough but the piece you cite is labelled as such, in more than one way.

1) it is in the "Time to Lead" section

2) the section identifies its purpose

THE SERIES

Time to Lead is journalism driven by our readers – the ideas come from you. This week’s series focuses on young Muslims in Canada, as they find their way between tradition and modernity.

Monday: Young Muslims tell their stories

Tuesday: How Canadian artists of Muslim origin draw on their religion

Wednesday: Commentary and reader response

Join us in the comments to discuss the issue: tgam.ca/time-to-lead.

And I don't like "News" coverage of nonsense which is not actually news. I don't care what Charlie Sheen or the Kardashians are doing, and don't hold much respect for news media which focuses so zealously on their exploits.

Feel free to turn the page. Also feel free not to prohibit others who do enjoy the Charlie Sheen spectacle from doing so.

I also don't like propaganda. Give me the facts, and let me decide. Give me one side, and push an agenda, and I get my back up.

There are facts in the article you cite. WHat you seem to really not want is context, something facts alone do not provide.

http://www.pasta-unafpa.org/ingstatistics4.htm

What inspired this is the current propaganda series the Globe and Mail has decided to run telling us all how wonderful Muslims are, and that any concerns about them are misplaced. I do have concerns, and I don't need some left wing crusading newspaper to give me pap to try to allay them. Address the issues in a realistic way and I might pay attention. Give me crap like this and it just irritates me.

Globe and Mail

As an example, the initial features a 20 year old Pakistani college student who complains about people who treat her rudely because she's wearing a Hijab. Now as the article states she is the daughter of Pakistani immigrants, we can assume she ws raised her. Yet she wears the Hijab, the thought occurred to me to wonder why she was wearing it. That would seem to be a pretty straightforward and obvious question, but of course, it's not asked or answered. So to me, you have a girl who decides to wear something which her religion doesn't require, but which will ostentatiously mark her to everyone who sees her not only as Muslim but as a traditionalist Muslim. She chose to set herself apart from everyone else in a secular society. Why? Not answered. And then the piece says, sadly Her experiences indicate that, for some young Canadian Muslims, an “us and them” mentality persists in their home country. Yet isn't that exactly what she's creating, what she's insisting on? When you set yourself apart you are TRYING to make it an "Us and them" thing. So why complain, then?

What are you really complaining about?

[Oleg Bach]

People come to Canada cos we have food and shelter for all - anyone that has a complaint about not eating or having a home has a valid beef. Those worried about someone treating them rudely because they were wearing some tradtional clothing from their nation of origin really do not have a valid complaint -complian if it is important - other than that grow a thicker skin - The whole planet has rude people and no tribunal or legislation is going to get rid of them.

[bloodyminded]

I start from an old-fashioned notion, that news should be news, and as unbiased as possible. I disdain the media which slant news, one way or another, or give only one side of a story. I enjoy opinion pieces, but they must be clearly labelled as such. And I don't like "News" coverage of nonsense which is not actually news. I don't care what Charlie Sheen or the Kardashians are doing, and don't hold much respect for news media which focuses so zealously on their exploits.

I also don't like propaganda. Give me the facts, and let me decide. Give me one side, and push an agenda, and I get my back up.

What inspired this is the current propaganda series the Globe and Mail has decided to run telling us all how wonderful Muslims are, and that any concerns about them are misplaced. I do have concerns, and I don't need some left wing crusading newspaper to give me pap to try to allay them. Address the issues in a realistic way and I might pay attention. Give me crap like this and it just irritates me.

Globe and Mail

As an example, the initial features a 20 year old Pakistani college student who complains about people who treat her rudely because she's wearing a Hijab. Now as the article states she is the daughter of Pakistani immigrants, we can assume she ws raised her. Yet she wears the Hijab, the thought occurred to me to wonder why she was wearing it. That would seem to be a pretty straightforward and obvious question, but of course, it's not asked or answered. So to me, you have a girl who decides to wear something which her religion doesn't require, but which will ostentatiously mark her to everyone who sees her not only as Muslim but as a traditionalist Muslim. She chose to set herself apart from everyone else in a secular society. Why? Not answered. And then the piece says, sadly Her experiences indicate that, for some young Canadian Muslims, an “us and them” mentality persists in their home country. Yet isn't that exactly what she's creating, what she's insisting on? When you set yourself apart you are TRYING to make it an "Us and them" thing. So why complain, then?

This is not a good view on propaganda, because it is selected specifically for "left wing crusaders"--in this case, the Globe and Mail!

If you want a superior, more nuanced, effective and scholarly view of the use of propaganda in the news media, you should check these out:

Because the propaganda model challenges basic premises and suggests that the media serve antidemocratic ends, it is commonly excluded from mainstream debates on media bias. Such debates typically include conservatives, who criticize the media for excessive liberalism and an adversarial stance toward government and business, and centrists and liberals, who deny the charge of adversarialism and contend that the media behave fairly and responsibly.

These factors are linked together, reflecting the multileveled capability of government and powerful business entities and collectives (e.g., the Business Roundtable; the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; the vast number of well-heeled industry lobbies and front groups) to exert power over the flow of information. We noted that the five factors involved--ownership, advertising, sourcing, flak, and anticommunist ideology--work as 'filters' through which information must pass, and that individually and often in additive fashion they greatly influence media choices. We stressed that the filters work mainly by the independent action of many individuals and organizations; and these frequently, but not always, have a common view of issues and similar interests. In short, the propaganda model describes a decentralized and nonconspiratorial market system of control and processing, although at times the government or one or more private actors may take initiatives and mobilize coordinated elite handling of an issue.

[note: "anticommunism" is no longer such a central concern, obviously; but an adversarial stance agaisnt lurking forces threatening our "freedoms" remains, I think, as potent as ever.]

http://human-nature.com/reason/01/herman.html

Here are some overviews:

http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20031209.htm

http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/2002----.htm

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Propaganda_Model

[jacee]

Give me the facts, and let me decide.

Seems to me you've already decided and you don't want the facts getting in your way.

It's just a headscarf, she's just a girl, and Islam is just a religion that some fanatics distort to justify their criminal acts.

[Moonlight Graham]

So to me, you have a girl who decides to wear something which her religion doesn't require, but which will ostentatiously mark her to everyone who sees her not only as Muslim but as a traditionalist Muslim. She chose to set herself apart from everyone else in a secular society. Why? Not answered. And then the piece says, sadly Her experiences indicate that, for some young Canadian Muslims, an “us and them” mentality persists in their home country. Yet isn't that exactly what she's creating, what she's insisting on? When you set yourself apart you are TRYING to make it an "Us and them" thing. So why complain, then?

First, Canada is NOT a secular society. Our government is secular (in theory anyways), but our society is filled with millions of people openly practicing many different religions. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms constitutionally guarantees every Canadian the right to freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, and freedom of association (among others).

What this girl is pointing out is that she should have the freedom to wear her hijab and to practice Islam and to not be harassed for it by ignorant people who are unfairly stereotyping her. Stereotyping someone according to their religion based on what a minority of other people of that same (or similar) religion have done/said is wrong. It is no different than judging and stereotyping someone based on their skin colour, sex or gender, sexual orientation, age, socio-economic class etc. To think any of these ways is to be bigoted and logically fallacious.

[Moonlight Graham]

Seems to me you've already decided and you don't want the facts getting in your way.

It's just a headscarf, she's just a girl, and Islam is just a religion that some fanatics distort to justify their criminal acts.

I agree totally.

[Bonam]

First, Canada is NOT a secular society. Our government is secular (in theory anyways), but our society is filled with millions of people openly practicing many different religions. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms constitutionally guarantees every Canadian the right to freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, and freedom of association (among others).

What this girl is pointing out is that she should have the freedom to wear her hijab and to practice Islam and to not be harassed for it by ignorant people who are unfairly stereotyping her. Stereotyping someone according to their religion based on what a minority of other people of that same (or similar) religion have done/said is wrong. It is no different than judging and stereotyping someone based on their skin colour, sex or gender, sexual orientation, age, socio-economic class etc. To think any of these ways is to be bigoted and logically fallacious.

If you can't even see someone's face, of course they are gonna fit into the "other" category. Would you be friends with someone whose face you've never seen? It's not a matter of practicing Islam, there are hundreds of millions of practicing Muslim women who do not wear a hijab. It's a matter of willfully setting herself apart from others, above and beyond the requirements of her religion.

[jacee]

If you can't even see someone's face, of course they are gonna fit into the "other" category. Would you be friends with someone whose face you've never seen? It's not a matter of practicing Islam, there are hundreds of millions of practicing Muslim women who do not wear a hijab.

A hijab is a headscarf not a face covering.

It's a matter of willfully setting herself apart from others, above and beyond the requirements of her religion.

Setting yourself apart is not illegal. Hate crimes are. I don't have an issue with religious or cultural clothing. I do have an issue with idiots who yell insults at people because of their religion/culture/race etc.

[Oleg Bach]

Emotionalizm is the prime fuel for the use and abuse of propaganda. Take our HIGHWAY OF HEROS scam....Most of the dead soldiers were similar (no disrespect) to road kill. Road side bombs killed or maimed our dumb founded fighting men -who simply did not see it coming. It is not a hero that is blown up in his bed. A hero is a person who faces the enemy in full awareness and does not back down in cowardice...even if it means the lost of their own life-- To have people emotionalized and standing on a bridge over the 401 saluting every passing corpse is the height of the abuse of propoganda.

No disrespect to our troops..but I do disrespect the people who come up with the idea that some how the useless "sacrafice" of men and woman in the flower of their youth....some how is heroic and a benefit to their nation of origin...This simply is bull crap. It shows a tacit contempt for human life in general. Because we have never had the mayhem of war on our soil - and the only people that actually waged a real war were our fathers and grand fathers - It seems that the insecure and bored elite - attempt to get in on the action so they can feel like relevant men - They are boardroom soldiers who will never achieve the heroics that their fathers and grandfathers did! Sometime there is a thing called self propoganda where you dellude yourself into thinking that things are what they are when they are not.

[Oleg Bach]

To end my rant I must say that if something is taking place there will be evidence of that occurance. When a politican proclaims for politcal reasons "we are at war" - when the average Canadian does not see any evidence or effect of war - then we are not at war. The only evidence of war lays dead in Afghanistan...and that evidence must be shipped back to Canada in the form of singular corpses that get private and curious examination from the comfort of an modern urban Coroners Office...That is not a war that is an endulgence.

It is propogated that we are in danger....other than a few home grown kids with big ideas about choppoing off a PMs head which is fanceful - there is no domestic threat other than the constant harrassment of air travelers - who submit to searches even if they are 90 years old and in adult diapers....We are over loaded with the misuse of propogada...If you are going to propogate a way of thinking it is best to base it in reality to some degree to make it effective.

[Shakeyhands]

If you can't even see someone's face, of course they are gonna fit into the "other" category. Would you be friends with someone whose face you've never seen? It's not a matter of practicing Islam, there are hundreds of millions of practicing Muslim women who do not wear a hijab. It's a matter of willfully setting herself apart from others, above and beyond the requirements of her religion.

What should any of that matter to anyone else? Not quite sure how any of it would affect anyone else.

[Oleg Bach]

What should any of that matter to anyone else? Not quite sure how any of it would affect anyone else.

Can't see your face from here either. It does not matter much because even if I could it is rare to read someone with accuracy these days because most people walk about with distrust and a closed down persona. The setting apart that some Muslims do in the wearing of covering garb is not unusual - we all do it.

[Pliny]

Setting yourself apart is not illegal.

True, at least in most societies but even in those where you can socially do so you still have to meet the requirements of government to include yourself as a citizen. If you do wish to set yourself apart socially prepare to have insults hurled at you when you attempt to interact with it. I'm sure Lady Gaga gets her share of insults, as do Nazis and Communists.

Hate crimes are.

True.

I don't have an issue with religious or cultural clothing.

Ok.

I do have an issue with idiots who yell insults at people because of their religion/culture/race etc.

How about their politics?

Yelling insults may be idiotic and often simply rude but not a crime unless it's intent is to incite violence against a person or group of a recognized/identifiable minority.

You are obviously not totally against hurling insults. It is a convenient mechanism after all. How else could you effectively, without violence or the commission of a crime, let idiots know that it is not okay to yell insults at people unless you yell insults at them?

Edited July 5, 2011 by Pliny

[eyeball]

What inspired this is the current propaganda series the Globe and Mail has decided to run telling us all how wonderful Muslims are, and that any concerns about them are misplaced.

I pretty much feel the same way about all the crap the NP has been filling it's pages with about our accomplishments in Afghanistan. And don't get me started on the goddamn news about the royal couple.

[bloodyminded]

I pretty much feel the same way about all the crap the NP has been filling it's pages with about our accomplishments in Afghanistan. And don't get me started on the goddamn news about the royal couple.

And in fact, the Globe and Mail is just as propagandistic in favour of established power interests as is the NP, making the original "leftwing" claim ludicrous on tis face. It's just that the NP makes less of a pretence to sober objectivity.

[jacee]

True, at least in most societies but even in those where you can socially do so you still have to meet the requirements of government to include yourself as a citizen.

There are no government requirements regarding hijabs - headscarves. In fact they are also often worn by elderly European women. Is anybody yelling insults at them?

How about their politics?

Not really relevant to this context, but when it occurs it's usually a two way street. :-]

Yelling insults may be idiotic and often simply rude but not a crime unless it's intent is to incite violence against a person or group of a recognized/identifiable minority.

True. I was just expressing my own opinion.

You are obviously not totally against hurling insults. It is a convenient mechanism after all. How else could you effectively, without violence or the commission of a crime, let idiots know that it is not okay to yell insults at people unless you yell insults at them?

It may be an effective strategy in some situations, and in others the high road - a thicker skin - might be a better option.

[Oleg Bach]

If a person who has ownership of a media out let...has a way of thinking - That person is going to make a phone call to make sure that the talking head talks as he does. The people you have to worry about are not the ones you see on the screen but the onhes that you do not see. AND it is more wise to worry about what they do NOT say than what is said.

[Oleg Bach]

News becomes propoganda when bias sets in as policy.

[Bonam]

Setting yourself apart is not illegal. Hate crimes are.

Which hate crimes? I didn't see anything about crimes mentioned in the article. Did you read it? It sounds mostly like she is frustrated by some people not knowing much about her culture or not being that comfortable around her. So she doesn't fit in as well as the popular girls. Because she purposefully sets herself apart. And that's news? Boo hoo, cry me a river.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Bonam

[Molly]

Ths shifts the topic, but I did find it interesting: \

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-06/news/bs-ed-chantix-letter-20110705_1_chantix-cardiovascular-event-heart-patients

Sound-bite reporting catering to short attention spans, and reporters underpaid, underappreciated and overworked leads to crap reporting. We have a lot of that now, and precious little of 'the best and brightest' journalism.

(Truth be told, many are no more than semi-literate. That's sooooo disappointing....)

[Pliny]

Ths shifts the topic, but I did find it interesting: \

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-06/news/bs-ed-chantix-letter-20110705_1_chantix-cardiovascular-event-heart-patients

Sound-bite reporting catering to short attention spans, and reporters underpaid, underappreciated and overworked leads to crap reporting. We have a lot of that now, and precious little of 'the best and brightest' journalism.

(Truth be told, many are no more than semi-literate. That's sooooo disappointing....)

The statistics presented are how they are portrayed by the company doing the study. Statistics are more often than not presented in medical studies this way. It sounds way more dramatic. Many of these press releases are just copied to fill space. If the source of statistics is a trusted scientific organ are the facts verified? If they prove false it will go back to the source not the newspaper. If they are propaganda from the scientific organ, and I think in this case it is, is that considered or is the math even verified?

There are deadlines to meet!

[dre]

First, Canada is NOT a secular society. Our government is secular (in theory anyways), but our society is filled with millions of people openly practicing many different religions. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms constitutionally guarantees every Canadian the right to freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, and freedom of association (among others).

Secular society has NEVER meant a society without religious people. Its about stripping religion and church of institutional authority, and thats exactly what we have done.

We are most certainly a secular nation.

For some context on this you need to look at the role of the church a couple of centuries ago, compared to now.

[dre]

I start from an old-fashioned notion, that news should be news, and as unbiased as possible. I disdain the media which slant news, one way or another, or give only one side of a story. I enjoy opinion pieces, but they must be clearly labelled as such. And I don't like "News" coverage of nonsense which is not actually news. I don't care what Charlie Sheen or the Kardashians are doing, and don't hold much respect for news media which focuses so zealously on their exploits.

I also don't like propaganda. Give me the facts, and let me decide. Give me one side, and push an agenda, and I get my back up.

What inspired this is the current propaganda series the Globe and Mail has decided to run telling us all how wonderful Muslims are, and that any concerns about them are misplaced. I do have concerns, and I don't need some left wing crusading newspaper to give me pap to try to allay them. Address the issues in a realistic way and I might pay attention. Give me crap like this and it just irritates me.

Globe and Mail

As an example, the initial features a 20 year old Pakistani college student who complains about people who treat her rudely because she's wearing a Hijab. Now as the article states she is the daughter of Pakistani immigrants, we can assume she ws raised her. Yet she wears the Hijab, the thought occurred to me to wonder why she was wearing it. That would seem to be a pretty straightforward and obvious question, but of course, it's not asked or answered. So to me, you have a girl who decides to wear something which her religion doesn't require, but which will ostentatiously mark her to everyone who sees her not only as Muslim but as a traditionalist Muslim. She chose to set herself apart from everyone else in a secular society. Why? Not answered. And then the piece says, sadly Her experiences indicate that, for some young Canadian Muslims, an “us and them” mentality persists in their home country. Yet isn't that exactly what she's creating, what she's insisting on? When you set yourself apart you are TRYING to make it an "Us and them" thing. So why complain, then?

Yet she wears the Hijab, the thought occurred to me to wonder why she was wearing it. That would seem to be a pretty straightforward and obvious question, but of course, it's not asked or answered.

It actually seems like a pretty pointless question, with a very obvious answer. Religious people like to wear some clothing and symbols that seem a little goofy to me! Even secular groups often wear goofy uniforms etc.

The fact that you see that as an important question, tells us a lot more about YOU than it does about them, or religious people and their goofy clothes and symbols.