The War You Don’t See by John Pilger

After having abandoned ITV to X-factor, Corrie and Emmerdale, I was both pleased and surprised to find John Pilger's 'The War You Don't See' on their listings for the 14th of December. Of course it was shown at 22:35, meaning that, as one journalist at The Guardian put it, “almost anyone who didn't see the war wouldn't see this programme either”. Still, I would call this an occasion for some Christmas cheer – ITV aren't completely locked into populist television. Words: Tyler McGee

John Pilger is a celebrated British war correspondent who has reported on conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan, as far back as the Vietnam War. I still remember watching 'Palestine is still the Issue' years ago (and probably years after it was released) when I was first getting interested in politics, and before the long period of personal inactivity and disillusion that followed the Iraq War.

I remember being out in London with about a million protesters on February 15th, marching to keep our government from entering a war that the majority of the country was against. It was the largest political demonstration our country had ever seen, and indeed still is, and it entirely failed to do anything of value. The war continued, with the voices of the people who would be forced to pay for it largely ignored. As a 17-year-old boy, this served to alienate me and pull me away from a politics that I no longer felt involved in, and that I refused to trust. I became angry first, and then dropped out and lost interest. That's my story, and I imagine others may have felt the same.

Our government took us to war with a foreign country, against the will of the people. They lied to us about the reasons for war, and launched an offensive which has killed, and is killing, a multitude of civilians. In the western world, we take a huge pride in our 'free press', and rightly so. But during this time of warmongering, our media were notably silent. They didn't offer the public with strong alternatives, and they didn't call a spade a spade. They neglected crucial facts that would have helped make the case against war, and galvanised opposition.

This documentary explores the connection between media and government propaganda, and shows us a truer picture of the media – not as unbiased journalists fighting to give us the facts, but rather as people who were willing to accept without question the answers of the most powerful people, who have vested interests in manipulating public opinion. Those whose job is to keep us informed become complicit accomplices to war propaganda through their inability or unwillingness to question official truth. At times, it seems that the media’s interests fall directly in line with that of government.

‘The War You Don’t See’ traces government manipulation of the media and thus of public opinion, starting from WW1. Pilger provides a wonderful insight into the importance of emotive stories over actual facts – the rise of image and spin above the facts of a situation – starting with a brief look at Edward Bernays.

Edward Bernays was a real pioneer of public relations and propaganda, and helped sell WW1 to the American public. He did this using mostly dramatic and emotive images, rather than any real discussion of the reasons for joining the war. This has been usual ever since. This same man was also instrumental in marketing cigarettes to women, by making them into a symbol of Women's Liberation; another great example of marketing death to make it look like something desirable. America's (and to a lesser extent, the UK’s) inability to shake off the dangerous connection between war and patriotism is a result of this sort of marketing, which links national pride to support of the military.

The theme of image presented as truth – of image as more important than content or fact – comes up quite a bit in this documentary, and a few examples are offered. Obama’s campaign is mentioned: sold as a wonderful force for positive change as an anti-war Democrat, when the truth is that he has approved the largest ever defence budget, and authorised increased drone attacks on Pakistan, amongst other things. Anti-war becomes warmonger in the doublespeak of public relations.

In fact, manipulating the public's opinion is shown to be a top priority for government, as can be seen by the amount of spending on public relations, and the amount of time spent controlling journalists on the ground. This has had a dramatic effect on the way that war is reported.

The War You Don’t See discusses the impact of media reliance on government sources, and introduces the concept of embedded journalists. These are journalists who, in return for safe passage in war zones and direct access to officers and troops, embed themselves with a particular group of troops or officers. This gives the military direct control and access to what journalists do, where they go, and what they see.

One of the outcomes of embedding is ‘made for TV moments’: a dramatic image put forward as truth, even though the event is completely staged. A perfect example of this is the triumphant dismantling of Saddam’s statue in Baghdad. Most journalists were contained in a particular hotel, and only able to see the events taking place in front of their balconies. The jubilant scenes of happy civilians welcoming their liberators were nothing but fabrication, orchestrated by the military for their benefit. Even the destruction of the statue was ordered by a psychological operations officer.

The story they were sold was false, and because journalists were shown nothing else (and, crucially, did not push against the presented version of the truth) this image of the army as liberators was not often challenged. The ‘humanitarian’ side of the war was sold in papers across the country, while the economic gain (through control of resources) was downplayed. In truth, the Shock and Awe campaign had let loose approximately 1700 air sorties down on Baghdad, a tactic designed to 'paralyse the country' and destroy food, clean water, and infrastructure. This was a tactic that was not properly discussed by the media in realistic terms – the massive civilian death toll was not of interest, and the use of a tactic that involves widespread destruction on every level of society was rarely questioned.

As the documentary continues, you see that journalists who criticise the accepted government story are often denied access to officials, whilst those who toe the military/government line are given priority access. This reward and punishment approach to public relations, combined with embedded journalism, is a stalwart defence against truth finding and proper investigative journalism on the front line of the war effort.

In fact, sometime the danger to journalists comes from our own allies. The documentary details the killing of non-western journalists in Israel, as well as the bombing of Al-Jazeera offices in Kabul and Baghdad. Al-Jazeera claimed that the USA was to blame for the attack. Pilger links this to the fact that Al-Jazeera had been vigilant in reporting the 'hidden' parts of the war – e.g. interviewing victims, and courageous on the ground reporting.

However, even though so much effort is put into stopping truth from leaving the battlefield, this does not mean that genuine investigative journalism is not available, and Pilger takes the time to show and discuss some of these sources.

The documentary itself starts with chilling footage of the US military killing civilians in Baghdad. In fact, throughout ‘The War You Don’t See’, Pilger shows Wikileaks’ footage, films from journalists on the ground, and interviews with victims. One of the things I really appreciated about the programme was the amount of genuine courageous reporting that is shown, from Al-Jazeera and other sources. Some of this is hard viewing, but crucial to understanding the way that our governments wage war in our names.

He asks the mainstream media to explain why these sources, which in the public domain, were not given full discussion and airtime. Often the answers from the journalists he interviews seem either inadequate, or actually apologetic for their failure. Watching this documentary, you see time and again how the media have not only beaten the drums for war, but have often played a crucial role in justifying it.

Often, it is not that the information is not there, but rather that it is reported in a toned-down ‘objective’ format, which marginalises the victims. This allows us to keep our feelings of moral superiority, and ensures that opposition is kept low. Our very methods of waging war have increased civilian deaths in every conflict that we have been involved in. I found one set of statistics personally shocking. Pilger claims that 10% of casualties in WW1 were civilians, and this number rose to 50% in WW2, 70% in Vietnam, and as high as 90% in Iraq. All the while, our army takes less and less damage, with more attacks performed by high-tech machinery – some even unmanned, like the US drones currently operating in Pakistan. This is rarely spoken of in the mainstream media, but the fact is that our wars are full of injustice and humanitarian failings, even to the point of our own British troops torturing civilians – another clip shown in the film that I found difficult to stomach.

In truth, the policies of the UK government have a focus on the control of resources, and the creation of beneficial economic situations for British corporations. Not only that, but they will engage militarily to support these policies. The impact of this has been the death of millions, through our support of coups, the finance we have given to armies and dictatorships, and our own military intervention. The only things that can halt these policies, and start to redress the problem, are accountability and transparency. When the public know the fullness of the facts, it becomes much harder for the government to proceed with anti-social policies. When journalism fails to deliver the facts to the public, power cannot be held to account, and will continue to get away with murder.

The War You Don’t See is not intended to provide (and it does not provide) an academic study of government manipulation, nor a perfect blow-by-blow account of media failure. Nor does it even go so far as to provide a definite answer for why the media have failed us so fantastically (although a number of points are raised). What we see here are interviews, quotes, discussion, and analysis of particular points, which have been deemed important to the argument Pilger is making. It makes great viewing, but it is not academic. If you are interested in a more detailed examination, Noam Chomsky is a great scholar on these issues, and his book ‘Manufacturing Consent’ (amongst others) would make for great study. In fact, I can see as the influence of Chomsky and Herman’s Propaganda Model on this film as a whole.

One of my only criticisms of this documentary is the lack of sources provided. I wouldn’t say that documentaries are the best place for academic sourcing, but I was surprised to see no source list, or further research section, on the website. We should be able to see Pilger’s sources, so that we can investigate and verify his conclusions. I have emailed him requesting a source list, and will link it if it is sent to me. (My email is below, if you’re interested).

That said, his argument is cogent, and if you take the time to research the general points he makes, you will find that he is almost certainly reliable, and provides a truly alternative view to the standard media representation of conflict issues. He provides a wonderful insight into the use of emotive stories over actual facts - the rise of image and spin over and above the facts.

BOXOUT

Good afternoon,

I am currently doing a write up of your excellent film for a small internet magazine, called Toxin. I would really appreciate a list of sources, if you have one. In fact, it would be a great idea to publish such a thing on your website, so that the public can trace your conclusions, allowing us to deepen our understanding of the issues involved.

I understand that you may be busy, but I believe this request for transparency is important. Your documentary, whilst being brilliant, helpful, and much better than the usual media offering, would be improved by allowing the public to engage on a more powerful and informative level.

Thank you again for The War You Don't See.

Yours sincerely,

W. Tyler McGee