Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media | Edward S. Herman, Noam Chomsky | Read the Footnotes!

books:

Manufacturing Cons...

	Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media Edward S. Herman, Noam Chomsky Pantheon, 2002 - 480 pages average customer review:based on 85 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

highly recommended

A Valuable Tool for Framing the Behavior of the Mass Media

As one can see by the quantity and voracity of the commentary on this book, it is an important and controversial work that deserves a read (though from misstatements in their commentary, I question whether some of the critics actually read it, however).

Nearly two decades after its first publication, Chomsky and Herman's "Manufacturing Consent" stands the test of time surprisingly well in spite of the myriad far-reaching geopolitical shifts that have taken place. This is largely due to the open-ended nature of "Consent's" market analysis which rejects the notion of a large, unwieldy body of conspirators or the notion that the media is monolithic. Chomsky and Herman readily concede that exceptions to their theory can and do occur.

"Manufacturing Consent" is an academic exercise, so it lacks much of the flair and pacing of popular current affairs literature. It is, at times, droll and tedious. What it lacks in style, however, it more than makes up for in substance as a critical lens with which to frame the behavior of the mass media. As an academic exercise, its assertions are well-sourced and it adheres closely to the standards of intellectual honesty.

Chomsky and Herman begin with a thesis; that the behavior of the media can be understood (and even predicted) within the context of a "market analysis" of five "filters";

"(1) the size, concentrated ownership, owner wealth, and profit orientation of the dominant mass-media firms; (2) advertising as the primary income source of the mass media; (3) the reliance of the media on information provided by government, business and "experts" funded and approved by these primary sources and agents of power; (4) `flak' as a means of disciplining the media; and (5) `anticommunism' as a national religion and control mechanism."

The latter, "anticommunism", has since been revised slightly (noted in this edition of the book) given the fall of the Soviet Union, as Herman has elsewhere noted;

"the fifth filter - anticommunist ideology - is possibly weakened by the collapse of the Soviet Union and global socialism, but this is easily offset by the greater ideological force of the belief in the `miracle of the market.' There is now an almost religious faith in the market, at least among the elite, so that regardless of evidence, markets are assumed benevolent and non-market mechanisms are suspect."

The rest of the book serves to provide examples that bolster this thesis as Chomsky and Herman illustrate the various ways in which the "Propaganda Model" plays out in the "agenda-setting media." They cover well-established paradigms in the social sciences like "worthy and unworthy victims."

Some have criticized "Consent" as being "selective". This is certainly true; however it is not selective in any sort of deliberately manipulative way. "Consent" could easily be a 60-volume set - but the demands of concision require that the authors be selective about what examples they cite lest their work turn into the phone book. Anyone who has read Chomsky's other works knows how voluminous his body of work is and how many additional writings he's penned since 1988 that serve as still more evidence for the basic thesis of the Propaganda Model.

Ever the skeptic, I used Manufacturing Consent as the basis for my Master's Thesis to test its application in the modern era; a content analysis of US media coverage of the simultaneous conflicts in Kosovo and East Timor. After pouring over 6,000 articles in print - my research provided me with another compelling example that corroborated the Propaganda Model.

Those interested in broadening their understanding of the concepts Chomsky and Herman present would do well to also read "Propaganda" by Edward Bernays and "Public Opinion" by Walter Lippmann (from whose writings the title of "Manufacturing Consent" was derived).

for more information click here

Read the Footnotes!

Written in 1988, Manufacturing Consent is the classic left-wing analysis of US mass media as a "propaganda model". Chomsky and Herman challenged accepted notions of press objectivity (and this was way before Fox News!).

An excerpt: "The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda."

Read it critically, but read it and especially read the footnotes, which provide the sources to back up their claims. The authors provide specific examples of how major media, especially the New York Times' foreign policy coverage to demonstrate how the propaganda model works. It will change the way you read the newspaper or watch TV news. Brilliant stuff.

for more information click here

It's easy to understand, just ask questions that frighten you.

Ask yourself:

Who killed ArchBishop Oscar Romero?

How many US mercinaries are there in Saudi Arabia (or the Middle East in general)?

Why are US millitary bases spread through out the world when the Soviet Union is dead?

If you answer questions like these, then you can begin to read this book.

(If your of poor class in American, then you do not need to ask these questions because we already understand the nature of this system)

A classic about U.S. media, government and foreign policy

This is a must read if you want to understand how mainstream media in the U.S. fall prey to government propaganda and politicians' never seizing attempts to control and influence them. It reveals the limits and illusions of our freedom of the press and gives stunning examples of how the news was framed and directed by powerful political, business and military institutions in America. You do not have to agree with Chomsky's political and social concepts to appreciate this amazing book.

for more information click here

Interesting perspective

Do our Western democracies use their free press to get away with censorship and propaganda? Regardless of your opinion of Chomsky this is an interesting read.

The two main items being contrasted here are the media coverage of Central American dirty wars around 1980 and Polish repression of its dissidents. The thesis being defended is that Latin American victims of right wing death squads got limited and not very sympathetic Western coverage while the misbehavior of the Polish government was highly publicized. True, Chomsky isn't very objective and hardly criticizes the Soviets, beyond a very quick pro forma recount of the Afghanistan invasion. Then again, nobody ever accused Communist countries of having a free press or lacking propaganda either.

I started following international affairs around 1985 and I generally agree with the analysis. If you were interested in Honduras and El Salvador you knew that ugly things were happening. It was by no means secret. But it wasn't exactly being trumpeted by Western governments or headlined in the mainstream media. On the other hand, any Soviet misbehavior was kept in the spotlight.

You may very well not agree with all the particulars, but Chomsky's account of the "spin" may make you look at contemporary news in a new light. Regardless if, like me, you believe that defeating Soviet Communist ideology was the greatest achievement of the US in the 20th century. In the case of Central and South America at least, that rollback was achieved at great, and probably unnecessary, cost. If the press had done a better job of holding the US foreign policy there accountable, that might have very well avoided some of those abuses, as well of the lasting distrust of the US in that region.

In short, this book is by no means perfect and some of its analysis is farfetched. I think that, naturally, people want to hear that "their side is better" and that requires little in the way of conspiracy theories to explain. But there is nevertheless value in challenging your everyday worldview about free press behavior, even if you take Chomsky with a large grain of salt.

for more information click here