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.
NEWSPEAK in the 21st Century Paperback – September 29, 2009
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Viewed This Item Also Viewed
About the Author
Top Customer Reviews
Great book, many fine articles by *real* journalists.
This mighty book looks at well known US and British journalists, and at their newspapers, at their TV news networks, and news stations, peeling back the layers to find their control-sources, the 'news' filtering cartels, parts of multinationals that indirectly influence and filter the news their journalists speak or write about; to distort truth in favor of a version of the truth that serves neither you nor I; that serves only the political or business ends of their private interests.
The book uses well-known US and GB television news personalities' dismissals - key anchor-men and -women, like former MSNBC star Phil Donahue, dismissed for asking awkward questions about Bush's war on Iraq (much like CNN's own star, Dan Rather!) and Katie Couric and Jessica Yellin, both pressured by NBC bosses to drop stories and shut-up; and newspaper journalists' firings or gaggings, like that of Martin Tierney of Saturday Herald, for simply reviewing a book, "Going to Extremes" by the author of This Land Is Their Land: Reports from a Divided Nation, Barbara Ehrenreich ... to name but a few!
The authors also pursue TV journalists who follow the corporate line, and relentlessly pursue their reasons for spouting risible propaganda on behalf of Downing Street or The Whitehouse, notably The BBC's Andrew Marr and Channel 4 TV's news anchor Jon Snow, men who came to the top of their field presenting themselves as balanced and fair journalists. This book shows they are anything but ... and its pages are crammed full of evidence!Read more ›
While "Newspeak" contains a wealth of examples cited in detail, its main thesis is that the picture of the world most of us get from the standard corporate media - newspapers, radio, TV, etc. - is filtered, prejudiced, and to a considerable extent untruthful. The authors quote former Guardian editor C. P. Scott's famous dictum, "Comment is free, but facts are sacred", and explain why it is "as naive as it is misleading". Facts, after all, have to be selected before they are offered up as news. "To choose 'this' fact over 'that' fact is already to express an opinion. To highlight 'this' fact over 'that' fact is to comment". (Compare, for example, the lengthy and emotional reporting of a single US or British soldier's death in Iraq or Afghanistan to the way the killing of dozens of civilians is routinely ignored). This crucial insight is quite similar to that which lies at the core of Steven Poole's equally good book, "Unspeak".Read more ›
Buy this book and subscribe and contribute to "Media Lens" online to stay current on manipulation by media. The other great website is Alison Weir's "If Americans Knew.....".
Chapters cover the fiction of BBC balance; the climate change debate; the Downing Street memo on Iraq's (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction; the media rubbishing of the 2004 and 2006 Lancet reports into the numbers of Iraqi deaths; the bombings in Britain, Spain and Iraq; Israel and Palestine; targeting Iran; the allegations of Iranian interference in Iraq; Venezuela and the media lies about Hugo Chavez; behind the scenes at the Independent and the Guardian; the practices of snarls and smears; and the need for honest journalism.
Edwards and Cromwell note the article by Gilbert Burnham, Riyadh Lafta, Shannon Doocy and Les Roberts, Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample survey, Lancet, 2006, 368, 9545, pages 1421-8. They describe the media's treatment of this peer-reviewed article as `the most shocking and outrageous example of media servility to power we have yet seen'.
They note that the US war of aggression against Vietnam killed 3.8 million people [...], wounded 4.4 million and harmed 2 million with toxic chemicals.
They note that the question, `What can we do about it all?' all too often means, `Tell me something that's quick and easy, or I won't bother.'