Worthy and Unworthy Victims

Using a propaganda model, we would not only anticipate definitions of #worth based on #utility, and dichotomous attention based on the same criterion, we would also expect the #news stories about worthy and unworthy #victims (or enemy and friendly states) to differ in quality. That is, we would expect official #sources of the United States and its client regimes to be used heavily – and uncritically – in connection with one’s own #abuses and those of friendly governments, while refugees and other dissident sources will be used in dealing with enemies. We would anticipate the #uncritical acceptance of certain premises in dealing with self and friends – such as that one’s own state and leaders seek peace and democracy, oppose terrorism, and tell the truth – premises which will not be applied in treating enemy states. We would expect different criteria of evaluation to be employed, so that what is villainy in enemy states will be presented as an #incidental background fact in the case of oneself and friends. What is on the agenda in treating one case will be off the agenda in discussing the other. We would also expect great investigatory #zeal in the search for enemy villainy and the responsibility of high officials for abuses in enemy states, but diminished enterprise in examining such matters in connection with one’s own and friendly states.

— Edward Herman & Noam Chomsky, in their book Manufacturing Consent

#UnworthyVictims #WorthyVictims #media #propaganda #PropagandaModel #ManufacturingConsent #NoamChomsky #Chomsky #EdwardHerman

#EdwardHerman #media #propaganda #framing

https://twitter.com/gumby4christ/status/1712214986179702912

Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman about “worthy” and “unworthy” victims

Reports of the abuses of worthy victims […] also become the basis of sustained propaganda campaigns. If the government or corporate community and the media feel that a story is useful as well as dramatic, they focus on it intensively and use it to enlighten the public. This was true, for example, of the shooting down by the Soviets of the Korean airliner KAL 007 in early September 1983, which permitted an extended campaign of denigration of an official enemy and greatly advanced Reagan administration arms plans. As Bernard Gwertzman noted complacently in the New York Times of August 3I, 1984, U.S. officials “assert that worldwide criticism of the Soviet handling of the crisis has strengthened the United States in its relations with Moscow.” In sharp contrast, the shooting down by Israel of a Libyan civilian airliner in February I973 led to no outcry in the West, no denunciations for "cold-blooded murder,” and no boycott. This difference in treatment was explained by the New York Times precisely on the grounds of utility: "No useful purpose is served by an acrimonious debate over the assignment of blame for the downing of a Libyan airliner in the Sinai peninsula last week.” There was a very “useful purpose” served by focusing on the Soviet act, and a massive propaganda campaign ensued.

— From the book Manufacturing Consent, by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky

#propaganda #PropagandaCampaigns #NoamChomsky #EdwardHerman