Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.99 shipping
+ $3.99 shipping
+ $3.99 shipping
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media Paperback – January 15, 2002
|New from||Used from|
"Rebound" by Kwame Alexander
Don't miss best-selling author Kwame Alexander's "Rebound," a new companion novel to his Newbery Award-winner, "The Crossover,"" illustrated with striking graphic novel panels. Pre-order today
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
In this pathbreaking work, now with a new introduction, Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky show that, contrary to the usual image of the news media as cantankerous, obstinate, and ubiquitous in their search for truth and defense of justice, in their actual practice they defend the economic, social, and political agendas of the privileged groups that dominate domestic society, the state, and the global order.
Based on a series of case studiesâincluding the mediaâs dichotomous treatment of âworthyâ versus âunworthyâ victims, âlegitimizingâ and âmeaninglessâ Third World elections, and devastating critiques of media coverage of the U.S. wars against IndochinaâHerman and Chomsky draw on decades of criticism and research to propose a Propaganda Model to explain the mediaâs behavior and performance. Their new introduction updates the Propaganda Model and the earlier case studies, and it discusses several other applications. These include the manner in which the media covered the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement and subsequent Mexican financial meltdown of 1994-1995, the mediaâs handling of the protests against the World Trade Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund in 1999 and 2000, and the mediaâs treatment of the chemical industry and its regulation. What emerges from this work is a powerful assessment of how propagandistic the U.S. mass media are, how they systematically fail to live up to their self-image as providers of the kind of information that people need to make sense of the world, and how we can understand their function in a radically new way.
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
There is no more spectacular example of the the media attempting to "manufacture consent," working hand in glove with the US government than in the cover up of the JFK assassination.
And radical left Noam Chomsky leaves that out?? Are you kidding me???
Not to mention CIA assets in the major media and the role of the Council on Foreign Relations in pushing the official line.
Maybe this is why Noam Chomsky said (in 2007 no less!) on who killed John Kennedy:
"Who knows? And who cares? I mean plenty of people get killed all of the time, why does it matter that one of them happened to be John Kennedy? If there was some reason to believe that there was a high level conspiracy it might be interesting, but the evidence against that is just overwhelming. And after that it's just a matter, if it happened to be a jealous husband or the mafia or someone else, what difference does it make?"
Wow! Mr. super genious leftwing radical critic has not figured out that the JFK assassination was a coup d'etat. Or that it matters! Dayuuuuum! Google "LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK."
Houston, we have a problem! Google and read Carl Bernstein's classic "CIA and the Media."
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
--William Colby, former CIA Director, quoted by Dave Mcgowan, Derailing Democracy
"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month."
--CIA operative, discussing the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. Katherine the Great, by Deborah Davis
"There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don't need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level."
--William B. Bader, former CIA intelligence officer, briefing members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, The CIA and the Media, by Carl Bernstein
"The Agency's relationship with [The New York] Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy ... to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible."
--The CIA and the Media, by Carl Bernstein
"Senator William Proxmire has pegged the number of employees of the federal intelligence community at 148,000 ... though Proxmire's number is itself a conservative one. The "intelligence community" is officially defined as including only those organizations that are members of the U.S. Intelligence Board (USIB); a dozen other agencies, charged with both foreign and domestic intelligence chores, are not encompassed by the term.... The number of intelligence workers employed by the federal government is not 148,000, but some undetermined multiple of that number."
--Jim Hougan, Spooks
"For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government.... I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations."
--former President Harry Truman, 22 December 1963, one month after the JFK assassination, op-ed section of the Washington Post, early edition
"The CIA is made up of boys whose families sent them to Princeton but wouldn't let them into the family brokerage business." - Lyndon Johnson
"We used to say, 'Well, Allen Dulles, he's not a good administrator or a bad administrator, he's innocent of administration'"
--Karl G. Harr
If you want to get quickly "up to speed" on the JFK assassination, here is what to read:
1) LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination by Phillip Nelson
2) JFK and the Unspeakable:Why He Died and Why it Matters by James Douglass
3) Brothers: the Hidden History of the Kennedy Years by David Talbot
4) The Dark Side of Camelot by Seymour Hersh
5) Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty by Russ Baker.
6) Google the essay "LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK" by Robert Morrow.
7) Google "National Security State and the Assassination of JFK by Andrew Gavin Marshall."
8) Google "Chip Tatum Pegasus."
9) Google "Vincent Salandria False Mystery Speech."
10) Google "Murray Rothbard the JFK Flap"
11) Google "Bertrand Russell 16 Questions on the Assassination"
12) Watch on You Tube the extremely important videos The Men Who Killed Kennedy, episodes 7, 8, and 9 which focus on the role of Lyndon Johnson.
13) Watch on You Tube Jesse Ventura's show on the JFK assassination.
14) Watch the movie JFK director's cut by Oliver Stone.
15) Watch on You Tube "Evidence of Revision." - 8 hours of fantastic and rare footage relating to the JFK assassination.
Another key point: Lee Harvey Oswald was U.S. intelligence and he shot NO ONE on 11/2263. Re: Oswald's intelligence connections read 1) "Oswald and the CIA" by John Newman 2) "Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and US Intelligence" by Philip Melanson 3) "History Will Not Absolve Us" by Martin Schotz (Chapter V Oswald and U.S. Intelligence by Christopher Sharrett) 4) "Me and Lee" by Judyth Vary Baker (Oswald's mistress in New Orleans, summer 1963) 5) Google "Lee Harvey Oswald's reading habits summer 1963"
Many credit Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" with being the premier study of government propaganda. In Leftist circles it is hailed as a Bible, a rite of passage for any true activist to understand the system. But again, Chomsky's work, while appearing radical, is actually gatekeeper disinfo.
Chomsky spends the entire book attempting to prove that newspapers diminish American war crimes while exaggerating those of foreign governments. Such a point is easy to prove, and he does so in his own droll and methodical method.
Yet he stops there. Chomsky does not discuss the real elephant in the room: direct CIA collaboration with media outlets and journalists beginning in the 1950's under Operation Mockingbird.
Chomsky avoids writing about Mockingbird, the CIA program which covertly put major publishing, newspaper, and media outlets, as well as thousands of individual reporters under direct agency control. Agents included Ben Bradlee at Newsweek, Henry Luce of Time and Life, and Arthur Sulzberger of The New York Times, Alfred Friendly of the Washington Post, and Joseph Harrison Christian Science Monitor.
Shouldn't this a significant development for a historian authoring an honest study of propaganda? After all who is to say that this program doesn't still continue? The Bush administration has admitted spending hundreds of millions on fake newscasts and paying individual reporters like Armstrong Williams to push talking points in newspapers. What about the times they haven't been caught? Exactly how many mainstream commentary and news outlets work with the CIA and White House?
Perhaps this is the reason why the scripts of the nightly news on ABC, CBS, and NBC are almost exactly the same, while Newsweek, Time, and the New York Times push the elitist agenda on cue (as seen most prominently in the run up to the war in Iraq).
Furthermore Chomsky does not discuss collaboration between the Bilderberg Committee and the major media outlets. Shouldn't this concern the so-called radical anarchist, when media editors attend secret meetings calling for eugenics, world government, and a cashless society control grid?
Owners, editors and writers from Time, Newsweek, Economist, Washington Post, New York Times, CBS, NBC, ABC and every news outlet in between have attended the world government meetings.
Furthermore, what about the influence of the CFR, which openly calls for a Panamerican Union and the end of American national sovereignty? The CFR counts amongst its members major editors, owners, and journalists in media outlets from PBS to CBS, CNN to News Corp., New Republic to U.S. News and World Report.
Aren't these the reasons that journalists push the propaganda Chomsky identifies? In "Manufacturing Consent," Chomsky takes limited aim at an easy target. But he fails to dig deeper and examine the actual reasons why the propaganda permeates the mainstream media opinion. Clearly the influence of the CIA, CFR, Bilderberg Committee, and White House have turned major media outlets into little more than docile commissars. Furthermore, the interlocking interests of media owners with the military industrial complex have served to sway content even further.
Chomsky's "classic" study is little more than a limited hangout project. He is merely shooting the messengers, blaming journalistic "bias" while failing to follow the trail of money, power, corruption, and black propaganda. Instead, he identifies some passive propaganda and is hailed as a brilliant analyst and purveyor of truth by the Leftist minions. But his true achievement is ignoring the reasons behind the lies, as he executes a masterful bait and switch tactic. Is it a coincidence that Chomsky's co-author for "Manufacturing Consent," Edward Herman, has also denied any government complicity in 9-11?
While claiming to expose propaganda, Chomsky has perfected the art.
The main reason I do not like this book is precisely the above. It leads serious people who want to reform society into circling their wagons, talking only to each other, and ignoring the importance of speaking to the people as a whole.
The second reason I do not like this book is that I think the major argument is false, and the authors have made a poor case of marshaling the evidence for their model's being superior to other models. Indeed, they present no other models.
Here is another model: the commercial media consist of firms in competition with one another for audience. The firms that best give people what they want will succeed and the others will fail. Capitalist owners are profit-oriented and hire managers, journalists, commentators and others who maximize their firm's profits by giving people what they want. Of course, some people just want to hear stuff that confirms the political prejudices. But others base their opinions on the facts, and this part of the clientele of the media are broad enough that the observed level of delivery of factual information obtains.