Earlier I wrote about the way in which groupthink has affected the media, and now we’re getting some concrete proof that the media has a set of ideological blinders that prevents them from accurately or fairly reporting the news.
The UN’s oil-for-food program continues to develop as more evidence is uncovered showing the depth of the scam. It appears that either the UN was horrendously incompetent in managing the program, or was on the take. In any event, the UN was not doing its job and billions of dollars that was intended to go towards humanitarian aid was given to Saddam to buy palaces and weapons systems.
Yet, as an Instapundit reader astutely notes, there’s been a deafening silence on the part of the media:
With the UNscam story unravelling almost daily, no one seems to be talking about the CEO of UN Inc. I’m referring, of course to Kofi Annan. If this guy isn’t complicit in these crimes he would have to be the most astoundingly incompetent CEO in recent history, perhaps ever!
Compare the silence on the UN scandal with the cacophany of stories on Enron, WorldCom, and Martha Stewart. There is a clear double standard at play here. When a corrupt CEO loses billions of dollars, it’s all over the news for weeks. When a member of the UN does it, it’s as though it never happened.
There are a few reasons for this. The first, and most obvious reason is that the UN is a sacred cow among liberals in the media. Investigating a UN scandal is not something a mainstream journalist would do – it wouldn’t be healthy for their career. The liberal mindset of the media has placed a different standard of burden upon the UN than for a corporation. The groupthink is that corporations are bad and the UN is good – and the differential reporting between UNSCAM and the Enron/WorldCom/Stewart trial makes this clear. Fortunately there are real journalists like Claudia Rosett (who has another in-depth investigatory piece on UNSCAM today) who are willing to follow this story.
However, there’s a less ideological reason as well. The US media doesn’t care much for things that don’t involve A:) Americans and B:) celebrities. Therefore, Martha Stewart is much more “newsworthy” than Kofi Annan, even though Kofi Annan’s financial misdoings helped fund terrorism while Martha Stewart’s helped fund handicrafts and yacht builders. The media cares far more about things that happen to celebrities than it does about matters of consequence – celebrities bring in the ratings, while UN scandals don’t.
The media has dropped the ball on this story and shows little sign of being willing to pick it up again. The media exists in a bubble of groupthink that is difficult, if not sometimes impossible to pierce. Unless this whole scandal somehow ties in with an American celebrity, involves some kind of salacious sex scandal, or becomes so large it’s impossible to ignore, the media won’t leave it’s protective ideological bubble to give this issue the coverage it deserves.
UPDATE: And Spoons even makes a handy chart making it all clear.
or becomes so large it’s impossible to ignore
How can it get much bigger? If the media can still ignore the elephant in the living room, then nothing is impossible for them to ignore.
Of course, if any evidence came to light that someone in the Bush administration was on the take…
Two opinion pieces I’ve found through Google News:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-04-27-oppose_x.htm
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/19685.htm
Hmm…, USA Today and NY post I would say that its being completely ignored.
The USA Today piece was an op-ed by Chalabi that didn’t directly mention the scandal, and the NY Post is one of the few magazines following the story.
By any logical reckoning, this sort of thing deserves to be above-the-fold front-page material – but don’t be holding your breath for that.
I should note that here in France, where UNSCAM should be news, that it’s hardly getting any attention.
I frankly think that if UNSCAM had involved say, Clinton Admin officials of note, we still wouldn’t see much more coverage than we already have.
Re: France – it’s not news if the behavior isn’t seen as wrong. About the only entrepeneurship allowed in Europe these days is creative bribery.
I think a small part of the lack of reporting is there is no oppositional force to talk to – and that’s what the media thrives on, conflict. With Enron, they could talk to shareholders, prosecutors, other reporters commenting on the Culture of Greed, etc.
With Martha, they had a Wicked Witch to go after, with ambitious prosecutors to get juicy quotes, and Martha’s pals to provide another side, and the much-desired pictures of a perfectly presented ice queen made into a hopeless frump.
Who will prosecute this case? Which jails will these guys be put into? Who, precisely, are they representing who will be outraged enough to demand coverage? Who will be going through the perp walk?
So there’s no big payoff, not even the prospect of some mud sticking to George Bush.
Ergo: No story.
When should we expect Paul Krugman to declare UNSCAM the storty of the century?
hen i try to scan canadian papers, i see the same lack of coverage.. It seems that media bias is not
just limited to the US papers.. As a strong western canadian supporter of the US position in Iraq, and a strong supporter of your current president, I hope that the public can be made aware of the disgraceful conduct of “their” media..
keep up the good work..
Alberta Canada