The "free press" : $b portrait of a monopoly — John Shaqi
The "free press" : $b portrait of a monopolyMarion, George
History
The "free press" : $b portrait of a monopoly
Marion, George
Press -- United States
A dispatch to the _New York Times_ from Athens helps illustrate the new
method. After noting that the United States is far from withdrawing
from Greece, the dispatch says: “The State Department’s comments ...
sounded much like what the British had been telling the Greeks for some
time.... It is believed that the only substantial difference between
British and American views relates to the extent to which Allied
officials should be injected into the Greek civil administration. The
British originally intended to ask for a practical veto over acts of
the Central Bank and Ministries dealing with economic affairs. It is
now suggested that the British will suggest something much closer to
the concept enunciated by the State Department yesterday: technical
assistance to Greece ‘upon the request of the Greek Government.’”
In effect, as in Kent Cooper’s 1927 contract, the word “exploitation”
has been removed, but the imperialism is still there. And among the
industries making great headway in all “assisted” countries is the
American news industry. It is favored by the change in the ownership
of communications. Britannia no longer rules the waves--either of the
air or the sea. Telephone, telegraph, cable dominance is no longer
hers. Aviation, radio, multiple-address newscasting and facsimile
broadcasting, are off to a good start under the control of American
interests. And whatever advantages British imperialism still has,
she is forced by the State Department to relinquish in return for a
loan. Cable communications with British Empire points, for instance,
are still in British hands. Yet not long ago conferences were held in
Bermuda and Rio de Janeiro at which American government representatives
compelled the British to cut press cable rates from New York to Empire
points. This admitted American opinion-forming “news” to at least equal
status with similar British propaganda in the Empire itself.
Now the government is also going into the business of distributing
“news about America, by Americans.” The news agencies contend that
a government information service is “propaganda,” whereas they
“distribute the news as such, wholly unbiased and without intent to
influence.” This is an empty boast. Riegel, in _Mobilizing for Chaos_,
says: “The press associations differ in the amount of direct government
control affecting them, but all are obviously governed by the
newspapers they serve, and the destinies of all of them are inseparably
united with the destinies of the nations with which they are
identified. An impartial international news-gathering organization does
not exist.” The _Report on Freedom of the Press_ calls news-export an
“adjunct of diplomacy and national policy. This inevitable relationship
is no less real in the U.S. for having been avoided by the government,
resisted by industry, and needlessly confused by imaginary threats of
encroachment upon the First Amendment.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account