• Official Washington’s ‘Info-Wars’
    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/01/official-washingtons-info-wars

    Le porte-parole du Département d’Etat étasunien ne veut pas donner d’explications à une journaliste de « Russia Times » (quelle que soit la pertinence de ses questions) sous prétexte que RT appartient à l’Etat russe, mais n’est nullement dérangé que la BBC ou l’Australian Broadcasting Corporation soient également étatiques et ce même porte-parole crierait très certainement au scandale si quelqu’un s’avisait à traiter de la même façon les radios-propagande étasuniens comme Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia, Radio Liberty (Central/Eastern Europe), et Radio Marti (Cuba), sans compter localement le NPR (National Public Radio), alias « National Pentagon Radio ».

    De plus,

    As to the non-state American media … There are about 1,400 daily newspapers in the United States. Can you name a single paper, or a single TV network, that was unequivocally opposed to the American wars carried out against Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Panama, Grenada, and Vietnam while they were happening, or shortly thereafter? Or even opposed to any two of these seven wars? How about one?

    In 1968, six years into the Vietnam War, the Boston Globe (Feb. 18, 1968) surveyed the editorial positions of 39 leading U.S. papers concerning the war and found that “none advocated a pull-out.” Has the phrase “invasion of Vietnam” ever appeared in the U.S. mainstream media?

    In 2003, leading cable station MSNBC took the much-admired Phil Donahue off the air because of his opposition to the calls for war in Iraq. Mr. Kirby would undoubtedly call MSNBC “independent.”

    If the American mainstream media were officially state-controlled, would they look or sound significantly different when it comes to U.S. foreign policy?

    #propagande #Etats-Unis