First it was Reagan, now it is Clinton. The homage continues. When
Reagan died, Gavin Esler, one of the BBC's star reporters, described
the American president responsible for a secret, lawless campaign of
terror in central America and for the deaths of untold thousands
elsewhere as "a man who was loved even by his political opponents". In
the
Daily Mail, Esler wrote that Reagan "embodied the best of the American spirit".
In the
Guardian on 21 June, Bill Clinton was given page after page to promote his self-serving book and relish his
mea culpa.
He "revealed" that Nelson Mandela had helped him through the Monica
Lewinsky affair. How touching. In an "exclusive interview" he was asked
nothing about his execution of a subnormal man in order to appease the
capital punishment lobby. There was nothing about his violent
presidency: the attack on Sudan at the time of Monicagate; the longest
aerial bombing of a country (Iraq) since the Second World War and the
sanctions that saw off half a million Iraqi infants.
In the United States, media censorship by omission is fast becoming a
public issue, commanding meetings that draw several thousand people,
such as one recently addressed by Studs Terkel in Wisconsin. The
Federal Communications Commission, which under George W Bush has handed
most of profitable US broadcasting to Rupert Murdoch and his fellow
media godfathers, has received some two million letters and e-mails
from Americans protesting at the relegation of journalism to a form of
corporate public relations. Although veiled, the trend is similar in
Britain.
What is the answer for those fed up with official truths? There is the
internet, certainly, and there are those venerable things called books.
None of the following titles is likely to appear on the summer reading
lists, yet each offers an antidote to the daily hagiographies of power.
The first is
Bad News From Israel by Greg Philo and Mike
Berry of the Glasgow University Media Group. (Pluto). In this admirable
study, the authors, who are pioneers in their field, demonstrate the
distortion of the UK television coverage of occupied Palestine. Using a
series of focus groups drawn from across British society, they reveal
how viewers have fallen victim to a dominant bias in favour of Israel.
They conclude that Israeli officials are given twice as much airtime as
Palestinians get; that news and current affairs on BBC1 are in thrall
to (or intimidated by) "Israeli perspectives"; and that the views of
Israel-supporting American politicians appear twice as often on the BBC
as politicians from any other country, including Britain. TV news says
almost nothing about the origins of the conflict, so most viewers have
no idea that the Israelis forced Palestinians from their homes in 1948 - or, indeed,
who is occupying the Occupied Territories.
Viewers are left with the impression that the illegal Jewish
settlements are merely vulnerable communities, rather than fortresses
that control more than 40 per cent of the West Bank. "I had no idea it
was that percentage," said one viewer. "I saw them as small, embattled
and surrounded by hostile Palestinians - that's entirely thanks to
watching the television news."
Where Israeli forces are described as "soldiers", "troops" or simply
"the Israelis", the Palestinians are reported as "terrorists",
"killers", "assassins", "self-styled Palestinian martyrs" and
"fanatics" regardless of the fact that they are the victims of an
illegal occupation. Threaded through the "coverage" is the phoney
notion of "balance" between occupier and occupied; Tim Llewellyn, a
former Middle East correspondent for the BBC, calls this "the tyranny
of spurious equivalence". Every journalist should read this book; every
student of journalism ought to be assigned it.
A companion to
Bad News From Israel is a superb book called
Peace Under Fire
(Verso). With a foreword by Edward Said, who died last year, this is
the story of the "internationals": the outstanding, mostly young people
who go to the Occupied Territories and Gaza to bear witness and defend
Palestinian families from the might of the Israeli military, especially
the bulldozers that demolish their homes. The story of the heroism of
Rachel Corrie and Tom Hurndall and their murder by the Israelis, in
acts of terrorism as explicit as any suicide bombing, is painful to
read, but necessary.
I have mentioned
The Sorrows of Empire by Chalmers Johnson
(Verso) in these pages; for me, it is the finest primer of the
rapacious policies that intimidate the world from Washington, DC.
Johnson is one of those American establishment figures who "turned": in
his case, from being a pro-Vietnam-war Berkeley historian advising the
CIA to a truth-teller. His last book,
Blowback, predicted the
vengeful events of 11 September 2001 a year before they happened and
described how the Pentagon (under Clinton, not Bush) had taken over US
foreign policy - in effect carrying out a military coup. In
The Sorrows of Empire,
he continues to chart the danger of a rampant America with 725 military
bases outside the US and the deployment of the CIA as "the president's
private army". He predicts that the fate of the Soviet Union -
"internal economic contradictions driven by ideological rigidity,
imperial overstretch and an inability to reform" - awaits imperial
America.
Read next Howard Zinn's wonderful
A People's History of the United States
(HarperCollins). From Columbus to almost the present day, Zinn is
always concerned not with historical propriety, but the struggles of
ordinary people to overcome the impositions of great power. In
A People's History, he unveils a
people's America almost hidden behind the flags and flatulence of its plutocrats and of Hollywood.
Michael Albert is the founder of the ZNet website ( [
http://www.zmag.org]), one of the world's great online newspapers. His new book,
Parecon
(Verso), is a finely argued, thoroughly original manual on
"participatory economics" which offers, as he puts it, "a life after
capitalism". It is also brave, because it dares to describe not merely
what is wrong, but the vision perhaps to fix it.
Then there is
Good Muslim, Bad Muslim by Mahmood Mamdani
(Pantheon), a distinguished voice whose superb analysis of the rise of
political Islam leads us back to the enduring battleground not of
terrorism, but nationalism.
What Howard Zinn has achieved for American historiography, Ken Loach has done for British cinema.
Which Side Are You On?,
Anthony Hayward's film biography (Bloomsbury), is an eloquent insight
into the work of Britain's finest and most courageous film director.
Seumas Milne's
The Enemy Within (Verso) was first published in
1994 on the tenth anniversary of the great miners' strike. It is the
most important expose of contemporary political Britain I have read; it
is about the power of the state to character-assassinate and the vassal
role of much of the media. Like
Bad News From Israel, it demands to be read by all journalists who care about their craft and by those who aspire to be journalists.
However, if you read only one book this summer, I recommend my all-time favourite,
Catch-22 by Joseph Heller (Vintage). Just as Graham Greene's
The Quiet American
foretold the war in Vietnam and its consequences, so Heller's satirical
masterpiece tells us something about the madness of America in Iraq.
Whenever I see on the news that brigadier general, the "coalition"
spokesman with the eyes of a psychopath, I think warmly of Heller's
incorrigibly insane character Major Major, for whom official truth has
no bearing in reality.