This is an abridged version of an article published in Taiwan's "The Journalist ", a weekly news magazine. In the article, the writer laments that the American media has become a political tool that assists the expansion of terrorism.
Three American missiles hit the Chinese embassy in
Yugoslavia "by mistake" and sparked off demonstrations and protests of students and the masses in mainland China. It is worthy to note the mode of reporting and the language used in the American media with regards to this incident.
First of all, there is the "mode of exclusion". The
American media has always love nitpicking where other things are concerned, but as to how three "intelligent weapons" could have hit a target "by mistake" and with such accuracy, the most basic media scepticism was not to be found. This is indeed an eye-opener.
Anyone with some knowledge will know that this was not an accidental hit. It was right on target. Therefore, the
American media should have posed these questions: Why was the Chinese embassy the target for missile strikes? Why did three missiles simultaneously struck "by mistake" and with such accuracy? Alas, they are not at all interested in these obvious questions.
This is a form of "mode of exclusion". Never ask
questions which are not supposed to be asked. For one, it is to shirk the responsibility in the international arena. For another, it is to shape the thinking modes of Americans within the United States. This "mode of exclusion" of the American media has developed into a new "political correctness" which appears on its own without any directives from the media bosses.
Secondly, there is "selective inclusion" and
"misinformation". For instance, in the reports on the
students' demonstrations and protests in China following the missile strikes, the American media, in its images and reports, has repeatedly reminded their readers and viewers that they were state-orchestrated demonstrations. This is very strange. It is strange to the point of perversity. The US has bombed another country's embassy, but does not allow the citizens of that country to protest. Any protestors who took to the streets must have been mobilised by the government.
Such a mean and despicable attitude stems from the
attempt to shirk its own responsibility by calling into
question the genuineness of the demonstrations. In the
reports of the protests and demonstrations by the American media, the inconvenience suffered by and the anxiety of the US embassy staff were played up, and the demonstrations were seen as a big threat. The fact that the US has bombed someone else's embassy was downplayed, while the seriousness of irrelevant incidents was exaggerated. Their deliberate obfuscation of the issue and shameless spouting of nonsense show up their malevolence.
And this is the American media's "model of argument". In his four books on the American media - "Manufacturing Consent", "Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies", "Turning the Tide" and "The Culture of Terrorism" - American linguistic doyen Noam Chomsky argues that the American media has already become a propaganda tool for American terrorism.
Its ultimate aim is to convince the public, make them realise how evil the enemy is, and set the stage for the inteference, sedition or support of national terrorism, so as to achieve the goals of perpetuating a never-ending arms race and armed conflicts. To all of this, a noble reason is bestowed.
In their news reports, the American media is becoming used to "excluding" or "including" the issues.
As the United States is seeking the disintegration of Yugoslavia in the current Yugoslav conflict, its media has vilified the Serbs in its one-sided reports, ignoring the massacres of the Serbs by Croatians, Bosnians and Kosovo Albanians.
Three years ago, the American media worked closely with the US government, and labelled the Kosovo Liberation Army as "terrorists". But today, they are seen as "fighters for a just cause". This arbitrary change in labels stems from the fact that three years ago, the United States had wanted both Croatia and Bosnia to secede.
If then it had included Kosovo, an inherent part of Yugoslavia, Yugoslavia would have given strong opposition, and the problem of Croatia and Bosnia would not have been solved.
However, the above problem has already been resolved, and Yugoslavia can now be disintegrated even further. To give legitimacy to its present cause, the US has transformed
former "terrorists" into "fighters for a just cause".
The US assigns labels on others according to its own strategies, and the media can lend support to such efforts with the necessary images and news angles. This is selective misinformation. In an era where the media is highly sophisticated and the people's memories are short, it is becoming increasingly easy to use the media in the manufacturing of consent.
In the media age, the structural control of the media, and the moulding of fixed models of argument and rhetoric through the media, are equivalent to moulding political agenda and public opinion. Control over the media means control over ideas, language and the way people discuss particular issues.
Most of what have happened in Yugoslavia can be
explained from the angle of how the media creates language and the way we think. The incident of the "accidental" missile hit is but one example.
美国媒体变恐怖主义传声筒
● 南方朔
媒体的责任是报道事实，但作者认为美国媒体的选择性报道方式，已使它沦为政治的工具，在战争中更助长了恐怖行动的扩张。
美国的三枚飞弹，同时“误击”中国驻南斯拉夫大使馆，引发大陆学生及群众的示威抗议运动。非常值得注意的，乃是美国对整个事件的报道模式及其使用的语言。
其一是“排除模式”。美国媒体一向对别的事情喜欢鸡蛋里挑骨头，但对自诩“聪明的武器”却三枚居然都那么准地“误击”，连最起码的怀疑精神都告失去，宁不使人啧啧称奇。
稍微有点常识的人都知道这绝非误击，而是准确地击中目标。因此，美国媒体应当提出这样的问题：为什么以中国大使馆为打击之目标？为什么会三枚飞弹同时那么准确地“误击”？但对这些如此明显的问题，它们却毫无兴趣。
这就是一种“排除模式”，不去问不该问的问题，一则在国际上逃避责任，另外则是在国内误导美国人民的思考模式。美国媒体的这种“排除模式”，早已发展成一种不必媒体老板交代即会自动出现的新“政治正确”。
其二则是“选择性的包含”及“误讯”。以这次飞弹攻击所引发的大陆学生示威抗议为例，美国媒体在画面及文字上，即不断强调这是大陆官方都鼓动的示威。这实在是非常奇怪，而且奇怪到很变态的一种心态。将别人的大使馆炸掉，居然还不准抗议，抗议者一定是官方发动的群众。
这种心态的卑鄙与恶质，乃是在于非法化示威活动以逃避自己的责任。美国媒体在报道示威抗议时，并将使馆人员因此而造成的不便与不安，夸大处理，示威活动俨然变成了很具威胁性的事情。将自己炸别人写得轻淡几笔，却将不相干的事情写得严重无比，因果倒置，胡扯耍赖，其邪恶由此可见。
而这就是美国媒体的“论述模式”，当代美国语言学大师杭士基曾先后以《加工制造同意》、《必要的幻象：民主社会的思想控制》、《改变潮流》、《恐怖主义文化》等四本讨论美国媒体之著作，阐释美国媒体早已成为美国国家恐怖主义的宣传机器。
而其终极目的，则在于“说服公众，使人民了解敌人的邪恶，并设定干涉、颠覆、支持其国家恐怖主义的舞台，进而达到无休止的军备竞赛和武力冲突之目的，并使这一切都有高贵的理由。”
如果由近代美国媒体史的发展以观，60年代及70年代初之前是个阶段，当时的媒体可以说乃是一个单独的公正势力，它和“军—产复合体”的统治阶级并无太大的利益挂¤，因而遂能以中立的态度看待不正义的越战，并对越战进行批评。
反战运动和媒体的角色，使得越战终究无法取得正当性，而这也是美国在越南战场失败的主因。
不过，值得注意的，乃是越战尾声，代表了美国统治阶级的“三边委员会”曾特别就越战引起的统治危机进行研究，研究题目乃是《民主体制的可统治性》报告结论中指出，“媒体已成为国家权力的明显资源”，媒体的无法掌握，“内则使得民主过度，使政府威信扫地；外则使国家在国际社会的影响力衰退”或许正基于这样的觉悟，美国遂于1970年代中后期进行了一次大规模的媒体股权交换。
普利兹奖得主巴迪姜在《媒体垄断》这部著作里，即对这种“军－产－媒体”联合的新结构做了详尽的分析。从此以后，美国“自由媒体”的时代宣告结束，媒体与统治集团挂¤，并成为国家恐怖主义的宣传机器的新时代开始来到。
1960年到70年代初，媒体敢于揭露军特部门秘件，敢于抨击侵略活动之勇气，开始被一种新的“共识”及“政治正确”所收编。
杭士基教授在前述四本讨论到媒体控制的著作中，曾对80年代后，美国的媒体宣传及控制有过详细的讨论及分析。
例如，媒体会自动地设定出谁是“有价值的受害人”，或谁是“无价值的受害人”。当它要丑化某个国家时，就会从该国找出“有价值的受害人”。但若是美国的朋友，或对美国言听计从的庸属国，纵使再多人受害，媒体也将无动于衷，因为他们是“无价值的受害人”。
就以眼前的事情为例，库特族分布于中东各国，在伊拉克所受待遇最佳，在土耳其则所受待遇最惨，但因土耳其为美国之庸属国，纵使再多库特族被杀，也都只是“无价值的受害人”；伊拉克对库特族最好，但因它的反美，遂使得美国不断怂恿库特族反叛并使之成为“有价值的受害人”不久前，美国甚至协助土耳其至外国绑架库特族领袖，但美国媒体却对这样的行为无所置评。
美国媒体的堕落由此可见。易言之，这等于他们在决定什么人的死亡与受害是有价值的或无价值的。塞尔维亚人及伊拉克人的死亡当然没有价值。
例如，美国媒体已愈来愈习惯于报道新闻时，将什么话题“排除在外”及“包括进来”。
就以稍早前的波湾战争为例，美军有一个工兵旅即用挖土机挖出壕沟，而后将伊拉克伤兵用推土机推进壕沟活埋，主流媒体居然视为理所当然地不予报道；对美军轰炸造成伊拉克平民至少25万人死亡也无动于衷。
有关近年来的南斯拉夫动乱，美国为了肢解南斯拉夫，媒体也一面倒地丑化塞尔维亚人，对克罗埃西亚、波士尼亚，以及科索沃阿尔巴尼亚裔对塞尔维亚人的屠杀不予报道。
三年前美国媒体配合政府，将“科索沃解放军”定位为“恐怖分子”，到了今日，则又被视为“正义斗士”，标签的任意变换，原因在于三年前美国主要以肢解克罗地亚及波士尼亚为目标，设若当时也将南斯拉夫固有领土科索沃包括进来，势必造成南斯拉夫严厉反对，而使克罗地亚及波士尼亚问题亦无法解决。
而今前面的问题业已解决，已可进一步肢解南斯拉夫，为了合理化自己，于是昔日的“恐怖主义”立即翻转成了“正义斗士”。
完全根据自己的策略而决定将别人贴上什么标签，媒体都能充分配合地采取必须的画面和报道视角。这些乃是选择性的“误讯”，在这个媒体发达而人民健忘的时代，借着媒体来加工制造同意，已的确来愈容易了。
杭士基在《恐怖主义文化》里特别指出，当年的“伊朗－－尼游丑闻案”可以说乃是一个最特殊且成功，甚至“希特勒的助手弋贝尔及史大林都会为之大笑”的案例。
当时国务院为了替颠覆及侵略制造民意基础，特地在国务院下秘密设置“公关室”，展开一个代号“真理作业”的“心理战计划”，由“国安会”主控，“将宣传当作机密消息”发给媒体，为了如何掌控媒体，他们于85年3月，甚至草拟了一份厚达15页的备忘录。
那是近代美国借着掌控媒体而制造民意的最成功的经验，此后更江河日下，无往不利。
媒体时代，媒体的结构性掌控，以及借着媒体而塑造出固定的论述及修辞模式，也就等于塑造出了政治的议程及民意。掌控媒体也就掌控了概念、语言、人们谈论某个问题的方式。
发生在南斯拉夫的所有事情，有一大半都可以从媒体创造语言及思考方法的角度来加以切入。飞弹“误击”事件，不过是其中的一环而已
This is an abridged version of an article published in Taiwan's "The Journalist ", a weekly news magazine. In the article, the writer laments that the American media has become a political tool that assists the expansion of terrorism.
Three American missiles hit the Chinese embassy in
Yugoslavia "by mistake" and sparked off demonstrations and protests of students and the masses in mainland China. It is worthy to note the mode of reporting and the language used in the American media with regards to this incident.
First of all, there is the "mode of exclusion". The
American media has always love nitpicking where other things are concerned, but as to how three "intelligent weapons" could have hit a target "by mistake" and with such accuracy, the most basic media scepticism was not to be found. This is indeed an eye-opener.
Anyone with some knowledge will know that this was not an accidental hit. It was right on target. Therefore, the
American media should have posed these questions: Why was the Chinese embassy the target for missile strikes? Why did three missiles simultaneously struck "by mistake" and with such accuracy? Alas, they are not at all interested in these obvious questions.
This is a form of "mode of exclusion". Never ask
questions which are not supposed to be asked. For one, it is to shirk the responsibility in the international arena. For another, it is to shape the thinking modes of Americans within the United States. This "mode of exclusion" of the American media has developed into a new "political correctness" which appears on its own without any directives from the media bosses.
Secondly, there is "selective inclusion" and
"misinformation". For instance, in the reports on the
students' demonstrations and protests in China following the missile strikes, the American media, in its images and reports, has repeatedly reminded their readers and viewers that they were state-orchestrated demonstrations. This is very strange. It is strange to the point of perversity. The US has bombed another country's embassy, but does not allow the citizens of that country to protest. Any protestors who took to the streets must have been mobilised by the government.
Such a mean and despicable attitude stems from the
attempt to shirk its own responsibility by calling into
question the genuineness of the demonstrations. In the
reports of the protests and demonstrations by the American media, the inconvenience suffered by and the anxiety of the US embassy staff were played up, and the demonstrations were seen as a big threat. The fact that the US has bombed someone else's embassy was downplayed, while the seriousness of irrelevant incidents was exaggerated. Their deliberate obfuscation of the issue and shameless spouting of nonsense show up their malevolence.
And this is the American media's "model of argument". In his four books on the American media - "Manufacturing Consent", "Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies", "Turning the Tide" and "The Culture of Terrorism" - American linguistic doyen Noam Chomsky argues that the American media has already become a propaganda tool for American terrorism.