U.S. pays to have phony stories printed in Iraq

[Zuck]

U.S. Is Said to Pay to Plant Articles in Iraq Papers

Sign In to E-Mail This

Printer-Friendly

Single-Page

Reprints

Save Article

By JEFF GERTH and SCOTT SHANE

Published: December 1, 2005

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 - Titled "The Sands Are Blowing Toward a Democratic Iraq," an article written this week for publication in the Iraqi press was scornful of outsiders' pessimism about the country's future.

"Western press and frequently those self-styled 'objective' observers of Iraq are often critics of how we, the people of Iraq, are proceeding down the path in determining what is best for our nation," the article began. Quoting the Prophet Muhammad, it pleaded for unity and nonviolence.

But far from being the heartfelt opinion of an Iraqi writer, as its language implied, the article was prepared by the United States military as part of a multimillion-dollar covert campaign to plant paid propaganda in the Iraqi news media and pay friendly Iraqi journalists monthly stipends, military contractors and officials said.

The article was one of several in a storyboard, the military's term for a list of articles, that was delivered Tuesday to the Lincoln Group, a Washington-based public relations firm paid by the Pentagon, documents from the Pentagon show. The contractor's job is to translate the articles into Arabic and submit them to Iraqi newspapers or advertising agencies without revealing the Pentagon's role. Documents show that the intended target of the article on a democratic Iraq was Azzaman, a leading independent newspaper, but it is not known whether it was published there or anywhere else.

Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism.

In addition to paying newspapers to print government propaganda, Lincoln has paid about a dozen Iraqi journalists each several hundred dollars a month, a person who had been told of the transactions said. Those journalists were chosen because their past coverage had not been antagonistic to the United States, said the person, who is being granted anonymity because of fears for the safety of those involved. In addition, the military storyboards have in some cases copied verbatim text from copyrighted publications and passed it on to be printed in the Iraqi press without attribution, documents and interviews indicated.

In many cases, the material prepared by the military was given to advertising agencies for placement, and at least some of the material ran with an advertising label. But the American authorship and financing were not revealed.

Military spokesmen in Washington and Baghdad said Wednesday that they had no information on the contract. In an interview from Baghdad on Nov. 18, Lt. Col. Steven A. Boylan, a military spokesman, said the Pentagon's contract with the Lincoln Group was an attempt to "try to get stories out to publications that normally don't have access to those kind of stories." The military's top commanders, including Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, did not know about the Lincoln Group contract until Wednesday, when it was first described by The Los Angeles Times, said a senior military official who was not authorized to speak publicly.

President Bush's chief spokesman, Scott McClellan, was besieged with questions about the propaganda campaign at this afternoon's White House news briefing. "We're very concerned about the reports," he said. "We have asked the Department of Defense for more information. General Pace has asked people to look into the matter and get the facts."

Asked whether the president would approve of such propaganda in the guise of journalism, Mr. McClellan said, "I'm not going to engage in a hypothetical. Let's find out what those facts are."

The State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, had a similar reaction to similar questions. "Let's let the Department of Defense look into the facts," he said.

Pentagon officials said General Pace and other top officials were disturbed by the reported details of the propaganda campaign and demanded explanations from senior officers in Iraq, the official said.

When asked about the article Wednesday night on the ABC News program "Nightline," General Pace said, "I would be concerned about anything that would be detrimental to the proper growth of democracy."

Others seemed to share the sentiment. "I think it's absolutely wrong for the government to do this," said Patrick Butler, vice president of the International Center for Journalists in Washington, which conducts ethics training for journalists from countries without a history of independent news media. "Ethically, it's indefensible."

Mr. Butler, who spoke from a conference in Wisconsin with Arab journalists, said the American government paid for many programs that taught foreign journalists not to accept payments from interested parties to write articles and not to print government propaganda disguised as news.

"You show the world you're not living by the principles you profess to believe in, and you lose all credibility," he said.

The Government Accountability Office found this year that the Bush administration had violated the law by producing pseudo news reports that were later used on American television stations with no indication that they had been prepared by the government. But no law prohibits the use of such covert propaganda abroad.

The Lincoln contract with the American-led coalition forces in Iraq has rankled some military and civilian officials and contractors. Some of them described the program to The New York Times in recent months and provided examples of the military's storyboards.

The Lincoln Group, whose principals include some businessmen and former military officials, was hired last year after military officials concluded that the United States was failing to win over Muslim public opinion. In Iraq, the effort is seen by some American military commanders as a crucial step toward defeating the Sunni-led insurgency.

Citing a "fundamental problem of credibility" and foreign opposition to American policies, a Pentagon advisory panel last year called for the government to reinvent and expand its information programs.

"Government alone cannot today communicate effectively and credibly," said the report by the task force on strategic communication of the Defense Science Board. The group recommended turning more often for help to the private sector, which it said had "a built-in agility, credibility and even deniability."

The Pentagon's first public relations contract with Lincoln was awarded in 2004 for about $5 million with the stated purpose of accurately informing the Iraqi people of American goals and gaining their support. But while meant to provide reliable information, the effort was also intended to use deceptive techniques, like payments to sympathetic "temporary spokespersons" who would not necessarily be identified as working for the coalition, according to a contract document and a military official.

In addition, the document called for the development of "alternate or diverting messages which divert media and public attention" to "deal instantly with the bad news of the day."

Laurie Adler, a spokeswoman for the Lincoln Group, said the terms of the contract did not permit her to discuss it and referred a reporter to the Pentagon. But others defended the practice.

"I'm not surprised this goes on," said Michael Rubin, who worked in Iraq for the Coalition Provisional Authority in 2003 and 2004. "Informational operations are a part of any military campaign," he added. "Especially in an atmosphere where terrorists and insurgents - replete with oil boom cash - do the same. We need an even playing field, but cannot fight with both hands tied behind our backs."

Two dozen recent storyboards prepared by the military for Lincoln and reviewed by The New York Times had a variety of good-news themes addressing the economy, security, the insurgency and Iraq's political future. Some were written to resemble news articles. Others took the form of opinion pieces or public service announcements.

One article about Iraq's oil industry opened with three paragraphs taken verbatim, and without attribution, from a recent report in Al Hayat, a London-based Arabic newspaper. But the military version took out a quotation from an oil ministry spokesman that was critical of American reconstruction efforts. It substituted a more positive message, also attributed to the spokesman, though not as a direct quotation.

The editor of Al Sabah, a major Iraqi newspaper that has been the target of many of the military's articles, said Wednesday in an interview that he had no idea that the American military was supplying such material and did not know if his newspaper had printed any of it, whether labeled as advertising or not.

The editor, Muhammad Abdul Jabbar, 57, said Al Sabah, which he said received financial support from the Iraqi government but was editorially independent, accepted advertisements from virtually any source if they were not inflammatory. He said any such material would be labeled as advertising but would not necessarily identify the sponsor. Sometimes, he said, the paper got the text from an advertising agency and did not know its origins.

Asked what he thought of the Pentagon program's effectiveness in influencing Iraqi public opinion, Mr. Jabbar said, "I would spend the money a better way."

The Lincoln Group, which was incorporated in 2004, has won another government information contract. Last June, the Special Operations Command in Tampa awarded Lincoln and two other companies a multimillion-dollar contract to support psychological operations. The planned products, contract documents show, include three- to five- minute news programs.

Asked whether the information and news products would identify the American sponsorship, a media relations officer with the special operations command replied, in an e-mail message last summer, that "the product may or may not carry 'made in the U.S.' signature" but they would be identified as American in origin, "if asked."

[NavyDave]

They aren't phony stories they are stories that put us in a positive light and as I told other liberal mental midgets the freedom of the press isnt endangered because we aren't forcing them to print them.

Why not show out rage like how our newspapers (NY and LA Times) print phony stories for free or go out of their way to undermine us to borderline sedition by giving the Enemy pinpoint locations of where cIA planes land

[PleaseBlitz]

What is the difference b/t that and CNN/FoxNews? They both do the same thing from opposite sides. There is no objectivity in media anymore.

If you are outraged by this, turn off your tv, cancel your newpaper, pull the plug on your computer, stick your head in the sand and never come up for air.

[BlueTalon]

Link? Please?

[Larry]

One possible perspective:

Wanted: Iraqi gay male porn star. For press pass.

[Larry]

Another possible perspective:

After 20 years of Baghdad Bob, does anybody really think Joe Iraqi doesn't take the things he reads in the newspaper with a whole lot of salt?

[NavyDave]

Hey if it balances out the liberal media mudslinging, undermining and outright leftwing propoganda on major newspapers so be it.

[iheartskins]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/politics/01propaganda.html?ei=5094&en=9f62482797121962&hp=&ex=1133413200&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1133490972-RfDCUVUBsUfePyc2F3td+g

[Larry]

They aren't phony stories they are stories that put us in a positive light and as I told other liberal mental midgets the freedom of the press isnt endangered because we aren't forcing them to print them.

Why not show out rage like how our newspapers (NY and LA Times) print phony stories for free or go out of their way to undermine us to borderline sedition by giving the Enemy pinpoint locations of where cIA planes land

1) They're stories written by the US Army, that've been handed through a middle man for the specific purpose of hiding their origin. The story is, therefore, "phony" before you even start reading the first sentance.

2) Last time I checked, there weren't any troops surrounding the NYT building. (Although I get the impression you have a problem with that.)

3) They're not engaging in "borderline sedition by giving the Enemy pinpoint locations of where cIA planes land". They're telling the american people that the Thug In Chief is lieing to them.

And they're not CIA planes. They're a private corporation that has no ties whatsoever with the US government. (A private corporation that has clearance to use the facilities of US military bases.)

In fact, they're not even real planes. Haven't you heard? We don't do that kind of stuff. George Bush has said so. (While simultaneously claiming, to the Republican members of Congress, that we absolutely, positively can't prohibit it, even though we're not doing it.)

[Zuck]

They aren't phony stories they are stories that put us in a positive light and as I told other liberal mental midgets the freedom of the press isnt endangered because we aren't forcing them to print them.

Why not show out rage like how our newspapers (NY and LA Times) print phony stories for free or go out of their way to undermine us to borderline sedition by giving the Enemy pinpoint locations of where cIA planes land

It's what's called propaganda. Putting in stories that are made to look like unbiased stories from an objective news source. It's meant to appeal to the general population which we are not at war with.

It's called lying and it makes everything we say less credible because of it.

[Zuck]

Link? Please?

Here it is. It's a New York Times article. You have to be registered to view it but it's free.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/international/middleeast/01cnd-prop.html?hp&ex=1133499600&en=495f0aa6dcecc29e&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[Larry]

Zuck, that was (one of) my point(s), above.

I would expect the average american to be a whole lot more ticked about this than the average Iraqi.

I'd be willing to bet, on a list of "biggest worries in Joe Iraqi's mind", that "US Army planting slanted, feel-good stories in newspapers." isn't in the top thousand.

[Zuck]

Zuck, that was (one of) my point(s), above.

I would expect the average american to be a whole lot more ticked about this than the average Iraqi.

I'd be willing to bet, on a list of "biggest worries in Joe Iraqi's mind", that "US Army planting slanted, feel-good stories in newspapers." isn't in the top thousand.

I'd probably agree with you on that but it doesn't help to instill any sense of trust in the U.S..

It probably doesn't make them very ticked because they are used to getting phony stories told to them. But it makes the U.S. lose what little credibility we have over there.

We're trying to sell them freedom and we're feeding them propaganda disguised as unbiased news. Pretty sad.

[Sarge]

Lets organize an ES trip to Tailand, where we can go protest.

We can snort heroin right off a hooker's body on the beach across from Singapore.

Too bad we have to go to such lengths to get positive stories about what is going on in Iraq.

Too bad the American media won't do it

[Zuck]

Too bad we have to go to such lengths to get positive stories about what is going on in Iraq.

Too bad the American media won't do it

You mean act like a totalitarian government?

You're right. It is very sad.

[Sarge]

You mean act like a totalitarian government?

You're right. It is very sad.

No, I mean furthering their leftist agenda by printing only negative stories abot what's going on

Kinda like AL Jizz

[@DCGoldPants]

hahaha, the big bad American Media.

and how typical. The Liberal Iraqi media needs to be PAID to print stories the American Gov't wants out there. So much for freedom of the press.

Perhaps those who are nearly to tears over the Main Stream Media should realize that papers print what people want to read. People don't care how a handful of trained military folks went a fixed an oil pipeline, or painted a school. Why? Because as much as some people want to say that caries equal weight to 80+ American's killed over there last month. It doesn't, and never will.

People want to watch a trainwreck.

and if there was enough good news.....legit good news that wouldn't appear to be sunshine being blow up arses. Then guys like O'Reilly and Hannity would spend their hours and hours talking about it. Instead of complaing how nobody else will show it (when they really aren't either). You'd think based on that crap, there was enough to fill up hours every day. 365.

[chomerics]

It's what's called propaganda. Putting in stories that are made to look like unbiased stories from an objective news source. It's meant to appeal to the general population which we are not at war with.

It's called lying and it makes everything we say less credible because of it.

It's kind of hard to explain what propaganda is to some one that thinks liberals are "mental midgets" and that Fox News is "Fair and Balanced"

BTW ND, since I am the notorious liberal here, you are saying that I am a mental midget. Do you want to compare IQ scores, or take some sort of test to prove how much of a mental midget I am, or do you want to withdraw your ludicrous statement. . . especially after looking at these statistics. . .

[nelms]

It's kind of hard to explain what propaganda is to some one that thinks liberals are "mental midgets" and that Fox News is "Fair and Balanced"

BTW ND, since I am the notorious liberal here, you are saying that I am a mental midget. Do you want to compare IQ scores, or take some sort of test to prove how much of a mental midget I am, or do you want to withdraw your ludicrous statement. . . especially after looking at these statistics. . .

Compare IQ scores? You're arrogance knows no bounds.

[autographcollector]

Compare IQ scores? You're arrogance knows no bounds.

Chom that is a sad sad post :doh:

[Sarge]

Do you want to compare IQ scores, or take some sort of test to prove how much of a mental midget I am, or do you want to withdraw your ludicrous statement. . . especially after looking at .

:rotflmao:

[Zuck]

It is kind of ironic how anyone could argue that this is a good thing and still pretend that they are pro freedom.

I'm sure there are a lot of gung ho war types who love to talk about how the United States is advancing freedom but don't bat an eye at something like this.

[autographcollector]

It is kind of ironic how anyone could argue that this is a good thing and still pretend that they are pro freedom.

I'm sure there are a lot of gung ho war types who love to talk about how the United States is advancing freedom but don't bat an eye at something like this.

Do you have an understanding of why this is done?

[iheartskins]

Does understanding why make it right?

[Zuck]

Do you have an understanding of why this is done?

Of course I do. It's done to try and sway public opinion in Iraq. The only thing is that it's a phony article trying to trick the public into believing it's an article written by the free press in Iraq.

The free press that we are trying to sell as a perk of democracy.

It's what totalitarian regimes do. It also has the reverse effect of making the U.S. and uncredible source of information. Tricking the population isn't a good way of furthering your cause.

If there's security in Iraq and people have jobs than phony stories aren't needed. But creating them isn't something I want to pay my country to do.

Remember it's our taxes that paid reporters to post bogus stories.