The Memory Hole In Action

Almost inevitably, the news gets framed according to received wisdom, which is generally waffling someone else’s agenda:

“It is not important to make sense,” [...] if one aspires to a successful career in journalism. “It is important only to be able to bandy the jargon of media discourse in a way that suggests in-depth knowledge.”

Information that refutes a well-spun narrative is by definition newsworthy. But once reported it sinks like a leaden cliche, only never to bounce back. Instead, it’s as if it never existed. This is how reporting gets distorted - the background is skewed to make the quotes make sense, instead of showing them up for what they are.

The oversight is rarely intentional; it’s just a consequence of institutional amnesia, which lends credibility to officialdom.

Remembering what your own journalists have reported isn’t always as a priority. Particularly not when it’s contradicting the powerful. But it should be, and could be, if the memory hole were plugged somehow.

Here’s an example from when Reuters’ global general news editor visited Baghdad on assignment.

From: Daniel Simpson
Sent: Tue 2006-10-31 16:45
To: Paul Holmes
Subject: Unheard Iraqi voices

Dear Paul,

Your interview with the Iraqi Foreign Minister yesterday led on his claim that “the presence of the multinational force is indispensable for the security and stability of Iraq and of the region”.

It made no mention, however, of the recent poll findings that three-quarters of Iraqis want U.S. troops to leave because they’re provoking more conflict than they prevent.

Why not?

The omission is all the more glaring in light of your reference in a blog post to “the Iraqi civilians on the receiving end of this conflict whose voice is never heard enough.”