Media Gems - Anderson Cooper Moving from Journalism to Propaganda

CNN, "Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees", aired on 3 August 2006. Two instances of shameless media bias. You can find them both in the transcript at:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/03/acd.01.html


Gem 1: Cooper goes chemical

Excerpt:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. JOHN ABIZAID, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: It should not be lost on us, for example, that Hezbollah fields greater and longer range weapons than most regional armed forces. If left unchecked it is possible to imagine chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons being transferred to militias or terrorist organizations by a state actor.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Chemical, biological or nuclear being transferred to a group like Hezbollah. Certainly a terrifying scenario for many. For more on Hezbollah, the fighting and peace keeping mission. I spoke earlier to retired Brigadier General David Grange, who's also a CNN military analyst. And I began by asking him about General Abizaid's belief that Hezbollah wants nuclear weapons.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: What do you the likelihood of that really is?

My comment:

Cooper takes what "is possible to imagine" and turns it into a near-certainty by moving from the general statement about "militias or terrorist organizations" to "Chemical, biological or nuclear being transferred to a group like Hezbollah." Let's keep in mind that General Abizaid represents an army which was not even able to find such weapons in Iraq! Well, not only do such claims remain phony because there has never been evidence to Hezbollah's desire to acquire such weapons, but there have been reports about Israel using phosphorus bombs in Lebanon during the current conflict. They should be investigated.


Gem 2: Cooper becomes more Gillermanish than Gillerman himself

Excerpt:

COOPER: When you really listen to these speeches that Nasrallah has given in the past, I mean, it's a speech that an Adolph Hitler could have given, I mean essentially these guys are Islamic fascists. And then you hear the president of Iran talking about essentially a final solution against the state of Israel and you compare that to suddenly seeing Hezbollah flags in Trafalgar Square and demonstrations. Do you feel like the world understands what Hezbollah is really all about?

GILLERMAN: I certainly hope the world understands because this war is not just about the safety of Israel or the freedom of Lebanon, it is about preserving civilization as we know it. When...

My comment:

Adolf Hitler, no less? For all I know, Nasrallah's speech was neither agressive nor anti-Jewish/anti-semitic. He was firm, indeed, but he was clear as to his intention of stopping the shelling of Israel as soon as Israel stops shelling the Lebanese. His threat of shelling Tel Aviv was conditional, i.e. he would do it only if Israel pursued the shelling of Beirut. And where did the term "Islamic fascists" come from? Anderson is borrowing this from neocon litterature, isn't he? Does he know the definition of the word "fascism"? Does he know the difference between "Islamic" and "Islamist"? Hezbollah's flags in London bother him? But isn't that freedom of expression? Finally, would Anderson Cooper say, for instance, that Olmert is a "Zionist fascist" because Beirut is being shelled and Lebanese civilians are being murdered by the hundreds?


What is clear is that Anderson Cooper is no more an anchor than I am a sports champion. He has just transformed himself into an instrument for Israeli propaganda.