Iraqi Censorship
A Canadian advising the Iraqi Media Network is claiming U.S. attempts to censor the news, specifically that, as the Boston Globe reports, "the US-led administration's Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance had requested the station's news programs be reviewed by the wife of Jalal Talabani, a Kurdish leader and a major figure in the postwar politics of Iraq. ''Could you imagine a political leader being able to check the content of any Western media?'' [Canadian documentarian Dan] North said." U.S. officials had no comment to the Globe.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Is this regarding Iraqi State TV? The article is fuzzy about that. If so, what do you expect? When the US runs the station, that is what you get...
You'd figure they wouldn't select a Talabani censor...
Wasn't our government suppose to let them have their freedom? They won't learn to love it if they don't experience it. Of course, if what Washington really wants is empire then censorship is understandable.
i agree with Rick but I'm still not sure it's a good idea to have Baghad Bob the Third or a Baathist loyalist being the voice of this channel - it seems like it's a bit early, security wise, to have someone screaming 'death to the invaders' and something about pigs in an authoritative way, and truth be said, highly professional and effective way for this particular gig. So I agree with Rick but feel it is a bit complicated - look how long it took people to develop some skepticism about the NY Times.
Or Fox, or CNN, or ABC or AP or ...
RS wrote:
"but I'm still not sure it's a good idea to have Baghad Bob the Third or a Baathist loyalist being the voice of this channel"
Remember, free speech also includes the right to criticize and debate what they hear. This is a freedom those poor folks haven't had before when they listened to their rulers. I can imagine some Iraqis going for some nonsense (we succumbed to lies told by our own government to consent to the war) but not to many of them finding appeal in what the Baathists have to say now, after suffering years of their brutal regime. You're right about the NY Times and I know a lot of people on the right who have a lot less respect for Fox News after its very bias pro-war slant before the shooting started. Free speech is the capitalism of the mind. Trust it, when it's there "the truth will out".