The Columbus Institute of Contemporary Journalism (CICJ) has operated Freepress.org since 2000 and ColumbusFreepress.com was started initially as a separate project to highlight the print newspaper and local content.
ColumbusFreepress.com has been operating as a project of the CICJ for many years and so the sites are now being merged so all content on ColumbusFreepress.com now lives on Freepress.org
The Columbus Freepress is a non-profit funded by donations we need your support to help keep local journalism that isn't afraid to speak truth to power alive.
For 30 months, 9/11 was a huge political blessing for George W. Bush.
This week, the media halo fell off.
Within the space of a few days, culminating with his testimony to the
Sept. 11 commission Wednesday afternoon, former counterterrorism chief
Richard Clarke did serious damage to a public-relations scam that the White
House has been running for two and a half years.
We may forget just how badly President Bush was doing until Sept. 11,
2001. That morning, a front-page Philadelphia Inquirer story told of dire
political straits; his negative rating among the nation’s crucial
independent swing voters stood at 53 percent, according to the latest
survey by nonpartisan pollster John Zogby.
On Sept. 12, Bush’s media stature and poll numbers were soaring.
Suddenly, news outlets all over the country boosted the president as a
great leader, sometimes likening him to FDR. For many months, the overall
media coverage of President Bush was reverential.
With intimidation in the air, all but a few mainstream journalists
tamped down criticisms and lacquered on adulation. A kind of war-mentality
sheen covered public surfaces. Guided by Bush’s top strategist Karl Rove,
the administration strived to exploit the tragedy of 9/11 at every turn.
In the aftermath of the Iraq invasion, as the extent of prewar lies
forced the Bush administration into a defensive crouch, reliance on images
and rhetoric about Sept. 11 was more important than ever. For the Bush
team, frequent invocation of 9/11 seemed dependable as a fortified version
of patriotism -- the last, and most promising, refuge of scoundrels.
The anger that we’re now hearing from the White House is the sound of
an administration being hoisted by its own 9/11 petard.
The Bush estate has bet the political farm on 9/11. True, the focus of
initial TV commercials on Sept. 11 imagery can always be adjusted later.
But the Bush-Cheney campaign must remain inseparably tied to 9/11. The
Republican Party’s national convention was scheduled unusually late on the
calendar in Manhattan -- until early September -- to indelibly link the
Bush-Cheney ticket to Sept. 11.
Hitting the USS Bush at the time of the spring equinox, the current
media gale has not been all that harsh. But the media upheaval is striking
because of its contrast with the very favorable political climate that the
Bush political vessel has been able to create and navigate in relation to
9/11 until this spring.
Bush’s prior media problems with Iraq war policy are helping to
compound his 9/11 media debacle of recent days. Now, with Clarke recounting
the administration’s fixation on Iraq in the immediate aftermath of Sept.
11, there’s extra public outrage about the new firsthand evidence that Bush
was eager to pursue his discredited Iraq obsession even while the World
Trade Center was on fire.
For the Bush-Cheney-Rove administration, the parallels and negative
synergies between Iraq and 9/11 issues include the common thread of extreme
dishonesty. On Monday -- while a typical Wall Street Journal editorial
sputtered that the Sept. 11 commission had been hijacked “to provide a
vehicle to embarrass the Bush administration” -- the same newspaper’s front
page was featuring a lead article about Sept. 11 events politely headlined
“Government Accounts of 9/11 Reveal Gaps, Inconsistencies.” Based on the
article’s meticulous reporting, a less circumspect headline could have
been: “Bush, Cheney and Top Aides Now Tangled Up in 9/11 Deceptions.”
This week, news departments that were slow on the uptake quickly found
themselves out of step. Monday, while the Washington Post front-paged a
major substantive article about Clarke’s charges, the New York Times buried
its coverage of the subject on a back page. (The anemic Times article
carried the byline of Judith Miller, who rendered invaluable prewar service
to the Bush administration by reporting the existence of weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq -- based on anonymous sourcing. Miller’s source turned
out to be the Pentagon’s favorite handpicked Iraqi exile “leader,” Ahmed
Chalabi.) After badly lagging behind the Post, on Tuesday the Times played
catch-up on the Clarke story.
Whether the Bush campaign can regain control of 9/11 as a political
football remains to be seen. We should never forget that real people died
on that day, and real people are still dying in Iraq because of depraved
political games in Washington.
People in positions of enormous power are never more dangerous than
when they see their power seriously threatened. The counterattacks on
Clarke have only just begun. And during the next several months, the
Bush-Cheney-Rove administration is sure to reach into its very large bag of
media tricks.
__________________________________
Norman Solomon is co-author, with Reese Erlich, of “Target Iraq: What the
News Media Didn’t Tell You.”
