Page 163 - Mass Media, Mass Propoganda Examining American News in the War on Terror

Free Speech Fatalities 153

censored in the last five or six months: people we don't know about, people who
don't have the forum that I have."'04
Despite problems with censorship, both Fahrenheit 9/11 and Stupid White
Men were very lucrative for the corporate media outlets that distributed them.
Stupid White Men made the New York Times bestseller list for over a year.
Fahrenheit 9/11 was also a financial success beyond most critics' expectations.
Moore's success demonstrated that it is not that the American public is disinter-
ested in anti-war views; in fact, they are often quite open to them when allowed
exposure.
By finding alternative distribution, Disney kept away from the release of
Fahrenheit 9/11, while still profiting from the venture. Although Disney only
played a behind-the-scenes role in the film's release, the company still made
over seventy million dollars from the project, as Fahrenheit 9/11 became the
most profitable documentary ever made, earning over $220 million from the
time of its theatrical running through its release on DVD.'~~ The negative reac-
tions to Moore's works reveal a great deal about censorship in the mainstream
media. Despite the fact that Stupid White Men and Fahrenheit 9/11 were worth
hundreds of millions of dollars, Disney and HarperCollins expressed few reser-
vations in attempting to prohibit their release. It seems that fear of the political
backlash of challenging the Bush administration was enough initially to scare
Disney and HarperCollins out of supporting these projects.

Radical Nationalism at the Helm

The stories documented in this chapter share similarities in that they demon-
strate the media's displeasure with those who are critical of the various aspects
of the "War on Terror," particularly the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This dis-
pleasure is in large part the result of nationalistic pressures on the establishment
press, as well as a general acceptance amongst many throughout the press that
patriotism during times of war requires a curtailment of dissent challenging the
official reasons for war. During the early phases of the Iraq and Afghan wars,
even minimal dissent was at times considered unpatriotic. As the conflicts
dragged on, nationalistic pressures often confined dissent within the "accept-
able" framework of discussion proposed by the Democratic and Republican par-
ties. However, nationalistic demands placed upon the American public do little
to promote real dialogue and debate in the media and amongst the public. Na-
tionalism as interpreted to limit dissent hurts informed discussion-at least if
citizens understand greater levels of balance reporting as requiring the inclusion
of not only pro-war views and pragmatic criticisms of war, but also challenges
framing the war as illegal, immoral, or imperial. In this sense, the mass media
has largely failed to promote a healthy dialogue between pro-war and anti-war
voices.