Real Journalism v. Big Brother

In theory, pretty much everyone claims to like investigative journalism, even government officials. But the reaction is different when reporters expose troubling facts, especially if they make a favored country or politician look bad. Yet, that is what’s needed, says Norman Solomon.

By Norman Solomon

Every new revelation about the global reach of the National Security Agency underscores that the extremism of the surveillance state has reached gargantuan proportions. The Washington Post just reported that the NSA “is gathering nearly 5 billion records a day on the whereabouts of cellphones around the world.”

Documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden have forced top officials in Washington to admit the indefensible while defending it. One of the main obstacles to further expansion of their Orwellian empire is real journalism.

U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron trade bottles of beer to settle a bet they made on the U.S. vs. England World Cup Soccer game (which ended in a tie), during a bilateral meeting at the G20 Summit in Toronto, Canada, June 26, 2010. (White House photo by Pete Souza)

U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron trade bottles of beer to settle a bet they made on the U.S. vs. England World Cup Soccer game (which ended in a tie), during a bilateral meeting at the G20 Summit in Toronto, Canada, June 26, 2010. (White House photo by Pete Souza)

Real journalism is “subversive” of deception that can’t stand the light of day. This is a huge problem for the Obama administration and the many surveillance-state flunkies of both parties in Congress. What they want is fake journalism, deferring to government storylines and respectful of authority even when it is illegitimate.

In motion now, on both sides of the Atlantic, are top-down efforts to quash real journalism when and how it matters most. In the two English-speaking countries that have done the most preaching to the world about “Western values” like freedom of the press, the governments led by U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron are overseeing assaults on real journalism.

They’re striving to further normalize fake journalism — largely confined to stenographic services for corporate power, war industries and surveillance agencies. A parallel goal is to harass, intimidate and destroy real journalism. The quest is to maximize the uninformed consent of the governed.

In direct contrast, those willing to fight for truly independent journalism — including whistleblowers, political activists and journalists themselves — are struggling to provide our world with vital light, fueled by comprehension that real journalism must be willing to challenge entrenched power.

From incessant war and arming the world, to climate change and coddling fossil fuel industries, to anti-democratic governance and enabling vast NSA surveillance, the U.S. power structure — with epicenters along Wall Street and Pennsylvania Avenue — continues to dominate. That power structure is a clear, present and horrendous threat to human survival, the natural world of this planet and the possibilities for authentic democracy.

Against such dire, highly institutionalized assaults on the present and the future, we desperately need a wide range of nonviolent, principled and unrelenting insurgencies. In that context, government efforts to crush real journalism can be understood as methodical counterinsurgency.

Smashing Guardian hard drives and hauling the newspaper’s editor in front of an inquisitional parliamentary committee are aspects of the British government’s counterinsurgency program against real journalism. In the United States, the counterinsurgency includes numerous prosecutions of whistleblowers and wide-ranging surveillance of journalists’ workaday communications. These assaults aren’t episodic. They’ve become routine.

Journalism is at a momentous crossroads. The alternative to unrelenting independence is sheepism, and that’s not journalism; it’s a professionalized baseline of bowing to government and corporate pressure even before it has been overtly exerted.

For journalists, and for the rest of us, silence is not neutrality; it ends up as acceptance of autocratic rule, a present festooned with pretty-sounding names like “anti-terrorism” and “national security.”

As the most powerful institutions run amuck, their main functionaries are “leaders” who keep leading us farther and farther away from a world we could possibly be proud of leaving for the next generations.

Pushing back against the ominous momentum will require fighting for real journalism. No one can plausibly say that reversing course will be easy or probable — only imperative.

Norman Solomon is co-founder of RootsAction.org and founding director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. His books include War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death. Information about the documentary based on the book is at www.WarMadeEasyTheMovie.org.

Share this Article:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Technorati
  • email

5 comments on “Real Journalism v. Big Brother

  1. F. G. Sanford on said:

    The Constitution provides no mandate to to transfer “authority” to the government. That we should be “respectful” of authority makes a mockery of its foundation: “the consent of the governed”. That telling the truth has become a criminal offense obviates any pretense that we have a functioning democracy. There is no provision in The Constitution protecting the government’s right to secrecy. Only the people have that right as outlined in the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments. “We the People” have, through our cell phones, computers, automated financial system and mass media, become a colonial organism. There is functionally little difference between us and an ant colony. Millions of unthinking drones who do the bidding of a bloated, pampered and promiscuous oligarchy which gorges itself on “royal jelly” while sacrificing its minions carelessly in the pursuit of competition with other colonies is what we have become. Unfortunately, most of us are proud of that role. We call it loyalty, duty, patriotism, faith, industry, responsibility, obligation, respect, etc. We have been programmed to grovel, obey, tremble, submit, believe and conform while flattering ourselves with those other words that make mindless obedience sound like a virtue. This has all happened in the last fifty to a hundred years, a mere microsecond on the timeline of human development.

    The “information age” creates the illusion of global awareness, but like the ant colony or the coral reef or the jellyfish, colonial organisms lack any coordinated ability to react to and change the environment to which they have adapted. We are witnessing the collapse of humanity as an organ of enlightened free will. As long as it functions, there will be no shortage of human beings committed to preserving the status quo. For the most part, we are proud, loyal and patriotic servants to the human larvae who exploit us. Don’t expect anything to change. This is a terminal adaptation.

  2. ben chifley on said:

    U.S. B-52s flew over China’s newly declared air zone, official says
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv0Gbp7Y5LY

  3. ben chifley on said:

    China says it monitored U.S. B-52s that flew through its new air zone
    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/27/world/asia/china-japan-us-tensions/

  4. ben chifley on said:

    Glenn Greenwald: Groups who question his ties to CAIR are helping government erode freedom‏ (raw story)

  5. Masud Awan on said:

    “That power structure is a clear, present and horrendous threat to human survival, the natural world of this planet and the possibilities for authentic democracy.”

    This power structure has the highest stake in maintaining the systems of the natural world. Why would they destroy them unless they are totally dumb or they have found other planet to transfer their world?