In addition to crackdowns on news media (including surveillance operations against journalistic outfits to dissolve their ability to work with confidential informants [1]) and both persecution and prosecution of journalists (e.g. Ibrahim Jassam [2], Laura Poitras [3], Glenn Greenwald [4], James Risen [5], many others), media partnership with the state (e.g. Ken Dilanian [6], Judith Miller and Michael Gordon [7]), the manipulation of US news media to achieve geopolitical goals (Zarqawi Psyop [8], Fallujah Psyop [9]) [note here that it has been recently anonymously removed from Wikipedia [10] that this happened - see this old version of the article where it was still present! [11]], the use of state pressure to prevent stories from circulating (Risen's NSA story 2004-05 [12]), the nonchalant sale of journalism to hide things as large as genocide by major media outlets (look up the CNN-Bahrain scandal), the pulling of journalists with unfriendly coverage on key international issues (e.g. Ayman Mohyeldin [13]), the use of journalism exclusion zones (foreign and also domestic [14]), death threats by the state against whistle blowers and their families (US held Binney's family hostage [15]; Binney by the way is a cripple), the capability to manipulate online discussions for geopolitical purposes [16], the use of false international cables to manipulate the press (both historical [17] and recent [18]), use of fake journalists during US press releases to direct conversation and ask softball questions ("Jeff Gannon"/Gannongate [19]) [a note here that this scandal has been covered up by a 'controversy over Gannon's sexual preferences' as though that's the scandal - the real issue is that he was a plant - looking to see coverage on Gannon is a good litmus test of journalists and media outlets to see whether they are covering real issues or just gossip] and similarly the blocking of journalists that don't "play ball", the payment for positive media coverage by the government (e.g. Armstrong Williams [20], Gallagher and McManus [21]), WCIA's injection of (hundreds of) unattributed fake news stories into local news channels by the US through the Office of Broadcasting Services [22], presumed ability to impersonate private citizens to influence other Americans [23], fake letters sent to media outlets from the US Army [24] [the article has been removed from the web but I was able to find a cached copy on the Internet Archive probject], invention of hero stories (e.g.fabricated Jessica Lynch fall and rescue story [25]; propagandized story enshrined by Hollywood Director Ridley Scott's 'infotainment' version ironically named "Body of Lies"), that the Smith-Mundt Act anti-propaganda law was eviscerated this year [26] (like many other important legislative changes and additions) with hardly any press coverage, use of coerced testimony to justify policy goals [27] when it is known to have been fabricated [28], that foreign aimed propaganda accidentally makes it in American media [29], and also that this is done on purpose to circumvent anti-propaganda law [30], that the government has a history of manipulating media and through the Cold War had over 800 American news networks and personel [31] (names you may know such as Austin Goodrich [32] and Frank Kearns [33]), that the United States hires [34] contractors [35] and has software [36] to manipulate social media[37] [note here that the last link shows formerly linked references to CENTCOM claims that Facebook and Twitter cannot be targeted are false], that research on vote manipulation have been done on both Google [38] and on Facebook (in the case of Facebook, 61 million American people were experimented on during the 2010 US congressional elections [39), that experiments have been done (successfully) on controlling emotions by manipulating Facebook feeds [40] (on a grant from the State Department), that beyond blocking third parties [41] from the presidential "debates" [42] (which American citizens consider extremely important to their vote) that the rehearsed questions, topics and terms are prenegotiated [43] by the joint Republican and Democrat owned organization [44], that agencies publish documents compelled of them by law at inconvenient times to discourage large press coverage [45], it is also true that the the now president and CEO of the Public Broadcasting Service Patricia Harrison testified before Congress that President Bush considered Office of Broadcasting Services (1/4 billion dollar) state sponsored propaganda powerful strategic tools for swaying public opinion [46].
Bush said "see, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda" some see him as a bumbling, silly fool. I see a (perhaps overly) honest and transparent man.
It's probably true that the revisions to the Smith-Mundt Act will not open the flood gates of government sponsored media manipulation. Given that Kenneth Tomlinson [47] (a chairman to the foreign media propaganda arm of the United States) was put in charge of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (NPR and PBS) before handpicking State Department official Patricia Harrison to supersede him, and that Harrison has brought in Cheryl Halpern, Tim Isgitt, Mike Levy, Helen Mobley, and other State Department officials formerly in charge of US overseas propaganda efforts [48], and that Tomlinson left after an internal investigation charged him with Ethics Violations for breaking the anti-propaganda law Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 [49] (but no arrest...) these things are probably nothing to worry about.
Propaganda exists in many forms in the United States but it is still held at bay to many degrees (when compared to some other nation states; it is by no means the worst) by the sorts of laws that the Smith-Mundt Act used to be. In my opinion every anti-propaganda law we lose or weaken is a big deal for liberty.
Anyone who downvoted this care to explain why? It's extensively sourced and entirely on topic. As its content will find its way into future posts, if there are honest and well reasoned misgivings I would be interested in hearing them so that it may be improved.
Bush said "see, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda" some see him as a bumbling, silly fool. I see a (perhaps overly) honest and transparent man.
It's probably true that the revisions to the Smith-Mundt Act will not open the flood gates of government sponsored media manipulation. Given that Kenneth Tomlinson [47] (a chairman to the foreign media propaganda arm of the United States) was put in charge of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (NPR and PBS) before handpicking State Department official Patricia Harrison to supersede him, and that Harrison has brought in Cheryl Halpern, Tim Isgitt, Mike Levy, Helen Mobley, and other State Department officials formerly in charge of US overseas propaganda efforts [48], and that Tomlinson left after an internal investigation charged him with Ethics Violations for breaking the anti-propaganda law Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 [49] (but no arrest...) these things are probably nothing to worry about.
Propaganda exists in many forms in the United States but it is still held at bay to many degrees (when compared to some other nation states; it is by no means the worst) by the sorts of laws that the Smith-Mundt Act used to be. In my opinion every anti-propaganda law we lose or weaken is a big deal for liberty.