Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Reply to Douglas Kellner

By James S. Page

Abstract

This article responds to the analysis by Douglas Kellner of the way the Bush Administration has manipulated media coverage, especially coverage of the attacks of 11/9/01, to support an aggressive foreign policy. The writer is generally in agreement with the analysis, although the article makes posits five propositions: 1) there is nothing new in using terror and atrocity as a pretext for war, 2) the attacks and response reflects a deeply ingrained culture of violence, including within the USA, 3) the current conflict is profoundly theological in nature, 4) the discourse of the US Administration reveals a profound ignorance of the possible motivations of the attackers, and 5) the portrayal of the attacks and the response reveals the continuing atavistic appeal of violence. By way of conclusion, it is suggested that there needs to be an on-going commitment towards educating for a culture of peace and that developing a critique of militaristic discourse is one start to this

Topics: 200199 Communication and Media Studies not elsewhere classified, 200211 Postcolonial Studies, mass media, corporate media, media manipulation, Gulf War never happened, Gulf War did not take place, cultural critic, Jean Baudrillard, mass mediated, experienced reality, objective events, objective reality, Jihadist, Jihadism, attack, World Trade Centre, Pentagon, 2001, social trauma, 9/11, Douglas Kellner, US, United States, USA, United States, America, American, Bush Administration, George W, Bush, pretext, illegal, immoral, war, terror, atrocity, Maine, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, German, Belgium, U, boats, ethnic Germans, Sudentenland, Pland, Communist, ethnic cleansing, rationale for war, protection, innocent lives, non, combatants, premeditated killing of civilians, publicity, just war, last resort, prospects of success, principle of proportionality, war on terror, so, called war, phenomenon of 11/9/01, symbolism, symbolic, global capitalism, military power, media spectacle, military extravaganza, military extravaganzas, imperialistic agenda, television, dramatize terror, dramatize violence, live television footage, immediacy, victim, contemporary society, popular culture, theological, nature of war, televangelists, fundamentalist imagination, cosmic struggle, good and evil, Christian fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalism, Islam, religion of toleration, protect the faithful, religion of Jesus, irenic, discourse of the Bush Administration, ignorance, structural violence, martyr, self, sacrifice, war memorials, noble, heroic, unprovoked, role of the United States, global hegemon, unjust, global social order, atavistic, appeal of violence, appeal of war, protestations of horror, pacifist, theologian, Stanley Hauwerwas, sense of purpose, defeat of communism, Desiderius Erasmus, discourse of war, deconstructs, appealing narrative, war, violence, education for peace, education for a culture of peace, culture of violence, United Nations, UN, UNESCO, declarations, James Smith Page
Publisher: Taylor and Francis
Year: 2004
DOI identifier: 10.1080/1740590042000302094
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.qut.edu.au:3641

Suggested articles


To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.