Blogoland

The U.S. is covertly printing pro-US propaganda in Iraqi newspapers by unidentified military people. Hooray for democrcacy and cue the mouth-breathers!

Idiot # 1

Except, of course, the news isn't "fake." Biased? Yes, but it's supposed to be - it's part of the propaganda campaign. Propaganda is important in any war, but it's vital in a media war.That's not fascism; that's fighting a battle where no one gets shot at and no one gets killed.

Idiot # 2

The truth of the matter is, we need to win the war before we can worry about leaving behind a pristine democracy, and what is happening here, it seems to me, is no different than, say, the LA Times or the New York Times reprinting press-releases from the anti-gun lobby—the difference being that while there is clearly a problem with such “journalism” in a free and long-established democratic republic (with an established “free” press), I’m not so sure I see “largely factual” pro-American “propaganda” as too much of a problem if it helps to burnish the image of Americans in the eyes of skeptical Iraqis long under the boot heel of a tyranical dictator—and in doing so, helps save soldiers lives and expedites the victory on the ground and the establishment of a strong and viable Iraqi government.

Idiot # 3

See the forest, not the trees. This is not the LA Times against the US government. This is the LA Times lashing out at newspapers that are actually making money.

Hey, what's a little fake news, eh? It's good enough for this country, after all.

And by the way, doofuses, it's not clear at all whether these stories are or are not fake. From the LA Times article:

The storyboards, several of which were obtained by The Times, read more like press releases than news stories. They often contain anonymous quotes from U.S. military officials; it is unclear whether the quotes are authentic.

"Absolute truth was not an essential element of these stories," said the senior military official who spent this year in Iraq.

Not "fake" but "not absolutely truthful."