Changes

{{Show badges|Tobaccowiki}}'''Echo chamber''' is a colloquial term used to describe a group of media outlets that tend to repeat parrot each other's uncritical reports on the views of a single source, or that otherwise relies on unquestioning repetition of official sources. In the United States, the [[Republican Party]] uses a network of [[conservative foundations]], coordinated by the [[Philanthrophy Philanthropy Roundtable]], to support an echo chamber of [[think tanks]], [[industry-friendly experts]] and subsidized [described in [http://www.mediatransparency.org/stories/apparat.html an extensive report (March 2004) by Jerry M. Landay for Mediatransparency.org], supporting conservative media[[think tanks]], [[industry-friendly experts]] and subsidized [[conservative media]] that systematically spread its their messages throughout the political and media establishment. Typically, the message starts when conservative voices begin making an allegation (e.g., Democratic candidates are engaged in "hate-mongering" with regard to Bush). Columns start getting are written on this theme, which spreads beyond the subsidized first in conservative media(including blogs), but eventually begins appearing in places mainstream media like the ''New York Times, and becomes ''. This process can be used to turn an unsupported allegation or a [[partisan]] [[talking point and ]] into an "accepted fact." throughout the media. Opinion pollsters and image makers such as [[Frank Luntz[Maureen Dowd]], in a [[Michael Deaver]], [[Ed Rollins]http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/15/opinion/15DOWD.html?ex=1079845200&en=9608024a3e06a163&ei=5070 ''New York Times'' column run on 15 February 2004], [[Wirthlin Worldwide]] and [[Zogby International]] help develop the messages that echo in described the deceptive condition as one where "the bogus stories ... ricocheted through an echo chamberof government and media, by identifying hot-button "cultural" issues such making it sound as gunsif multiple, abortionreliable sources were corroborating the same story."  To influence the media, family values and the flag conservatives have also set up several organizations that have enabled serve as recruiting, training and career advancement programs for budding journalists. On university campuses, conservative foundations support several networks of conservative professors, including the party [[National Association of Scholars]] and the [[Collegiate Network]] of privilege to position itself as the party with which lower-middle and middle-class voters identify. == Examples == *[[David BrockIntercollegiate Studies Institute]], a which links and provides funds to more than 70 conservative journalist for student papers. The student papers in turn serve as conduits to the mainstream media, through organizations such as the [[American SpectatorNational Journalism Center]]that provides training, received $11,000 in funding from ideological indoctrination and a job bank that helps conservative student journalists begin their careers with internships and permanent job placements at publications including the [[John M. Olin FoundationNew York Times]] and the , [[Bradley FoundationWashington Post]], [[Wall Street Journal] to support attacks on University of Oregon law professor ], [[Anita HillABC]], after Hill testified before Congress that she had been sexually harassed by Supreme Court nominee [[Clarence ThomasCBS]], [[Fox News]], [[Time]], [[Newsweek]]. Brock wrote an article attacking Hill and later a book, titled ''The Real Anita Hill''and the [[Associated Press]]. He later regretted writing the book  Opinion pollsters and wrote a mea culpa titled ''Blinded by the Right''image makers such as [[Frank Luntz]], [[Michael Deaver]], in which he admitted that his writers were "a witches' brew of fact, allegation, hearsay, speculation, opinion[[Ed Rollins]], [[Wirthlin Worldwide]] and invective. ... I didn't know what good reporting is. Like a kid playing with a loaded gun[[Zogby International]] help develop the messages that echo in the echo chamber, I didn't appreciate the difference between a substantiated charge and an unsubstantiated one.by identifying hot-button " In factcultural" issues such as guns, Brock statedabortion, "Every source I relied on either thought Thomas walked on water or had a virulent animus toward Hill. I had no access family values and the flag that have enabled the party of privilege to Hill's supporters, and therefore no understanding position itself as the party with which lower-middle and middle-class voters identify. Part of their motivations, no responses to any of their chargesthe "echo chamber" effect relies not only on repeating a given stance through as many separate channels as possible, but on casting alternative sources of information and no knowledge opinion as doing the same thing in the opposite direction. Long-standing accusations of whatever incriminating evidence they might have gathered against Thomas the "liberal-dominated media", suggesting that the bulk of mass media today forms some sort of liberal echo chamber, denies the idea that was not introduced the reverse may in fact be the hearing. .case. Although conservatives pioneered the "echo chamber" technique, they are not the only people to use it. ''The conspiracy theory I invented about the Thomas-Hill case could not possibly have been true, because I had absolutely no access to any of the supposed liberal conspirators'' newspaper reported that [[John Forbes Kerry: U. S... All Presidential Campaign 2004|Kerry campaign]] officials [[Joe Lockhart]] and [[Laura Nichols]] asked House and Senate press secretaries "to schedule their bosses on television and radio so that Democrats could create an 'echo chamber' where the sounding of my impressions of the characters I was writing about were filtered through their conservative antagonistspro-Kerry spin would create its own reality, all of whom I believed without question." *Brock also says that the "following the first 2004 presidential debate on September 30.[[Troopergatehttp://thehill.com/news/09282004/debate.aspx]]" allegations against Bill Clinton were instigated by  == Examples == * In September 2004, ''The Hill'' reported that the [[Peter SmithJohn Forbes Kerry: U.S. Presidential Campaign 2004|Kerry campaign]], a conservative financier and top contributor to [other Democratic Party leaders viewed members of Congress as part of their "echo chamber": "[Newt Gingrich]]Last week's political action committee] meeting between Kerry officials and congressional press secretaries is the sixth of the year, and it tracks with a larger effort by the House Democratic leadership to look at each individual lawmaker as a potential megaphone for the national message." [[GOPACDavid Castagnetti]]. Brock says he received $5,000 initially from Smith the House liaison for the Kerry campaign, remarked, "We want them [members of Congress] to amplify our message. We're encouraging members to investigation allegations (later proven baseless) that Clinton had fathered a child with an African-American prostitute in Arkansashost debate parties in their districts. "I was programmed to spring to action like [http://thehill.com/news/09282004/debate.aspx]*[[David Brock]], a trained sealconservative journalist for the [[American Spectator]]," Brock recalls in his book. "Peter offered me received $511,000 for my trouble, not through in funding from the ''Spectator'' but paid directly [[John M. Olin Foundation]] and the [[Bradley Foundation]] to me by check; getting by support attacks on my University of Oregon law professor [[Anita Hill book advance]], I was a whore for the cash. Although accepting a payment like this was most unusual after Hill testified before Congress that she had been sexually harassed by Supreme Court nominee [[Clarence Thomas]]. Brock wrote an article attacking Hill and unethical for later a journalistbook, in my mind it was no different from taking money from politically interested parties like titled ''The Real Anita Hill''. He later regretted writing the Olin book and Bradley foundations." *During wrote a mea culpa titled ''Blinded by the 2000 electionsRight'', the media echo chamber claimed falsely in which he admitted that [[Al Glore]] had pretended he invented the Internet, claimed he and his wife writers were the role model for characters in ''Love Story''"a witches' brew of fact, allegation, hearsay, speculation, opinion, and repeated a number of other false stories about Gore that painted him as someone invective. ... I didn't know what good reporting is. Like a kid playing with a bad habit of telling liesloaded gun, I didn't appreciate the difference between a substantiated charge and an unsubstantiated one. *In the buildup to war in Iraqfact, the echo chamber repeated and the Bush administration's claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destructionBrock stated, was tied to Al Queda, and that the people of Iraq would welcome "Every source I relied on either thought Thomas walked on water or had a Uvirulent animus toward Hill. I had no access to Hill's supporters, and therefore no understanding of their motivations, no responses to any of their charges, and no knowledge of whatever incriminating evidence they might have gathered against Thomas that was not introduced in the hearing. ..S. invasion as "liberation." == External links == *"[http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=2052 Buying a Movement: RightThe conspiracy theory I invented about the Thomas-Wing Foundations and American Politics]Hill case could not possibly have been true," (Washington, DC: People for because I had absolutely no access to any of the American Way, 1996)supposed liberal conspirators. . Or [http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/dfiles/file_33.pdf download a PDF version]] All of my impressions of the full report. *Dan Morgancharacters I was writing about were filtered through their conservative antagonists, all of whom I believed without question."*Brock also says that the "[[http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A46598-2000Jan28 Think Tanks: Corporations' Quiet Weapon],Troopergate]]" Washington Postallegations against [[Bill Clinton]] were instigated by [[Peter Smith]], January 29, 2000, pa conservative financier and top contributor to [[Newt Gingrich]]'s political action committee, [[GOPAC]]. A1. *Jeff Gerth and Sheryl Gay StolbergBrock says he received $5, "Drug Industry Has Ties 000 initially from Smith to Groups With Many Different Voices," New York Times, October 5, 2000, <http://wwwinvestigate allegations (later proven baseless) that Clinton had fathered a child with an African-American prostitute in Arkansas.nytimes.com/2000/10/05/science/05LOBB.html>. *Robert Kuttner"I was programmed to spring to action like a trained seal, "[http://wwwBrock recalls in his book.prospect.org/print/V13/13/kuttner-r.html Philanthropy and Movements]," The American Prospect, July 2, 2002. *Curtis Moore, "[http://www.sierraclub.org"Peter offered me $5,000 for my trouble, not through the ''Spectator'' but paid directly to me by check; getting by on my Anita Hill book advance, I was a whore for the cash. Although accepting a payment like this was most unusual and unethical for a journalist, in my mind it was no different from taking money from politically interested parties like the Olin and Bradley foundations."*During the 2000 elections, the media echo chamber claimed falsely that [[Democratic Party]] presidential candidate [[Al Gore]] had pretended he invented the Internet, claimed he and his wife were the role model for characters in ''Love Story'', and repeated a number of other false stories about Gore that painted him as someone with a bad habit of telling lies.*In the buildup to war in Iraq, the echo chamber repeated and the [[Bush administration]]'s claims that Iraq possessed [[weapons of mass destruction]], was tied to [[Al Qaeda]], and that the people of Iraq would welcome a U.S. invasion as "liberation."*"News outlets ideologically allied with Bush have been happy to assist in confusing the public" "That half or more Americans think Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attack -- perhaps the most media-covered event in our history -- stands as '''a horrific indictment of U.S. media today. Such levels of ignorance can't be found in other countries'''." [http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1201-13.htm]*Newsweek Magazine and NBC television partnered for a week of unbalanced promotion of corporate interests. [http://www.citizen.org/congress/civjus/tort/media/]*Major New Study on [http://www.cissm.umd.edu/documents/WMDstudy_full.pdf '''Media Coverage of Weapons of Mass Destruction'''] concludes[http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0309-12.htm], [http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000456632]: **Many stories stenographically reported the incumbent administration's perspectives on WMD, giving too little critical examination of the way officials framed the events, issues, threats and policy options.**Too few stories offered alternative perspectives to the "official line" on WMD surrounding the Iraq conflict**most journalists accepted the Bush administration linking the "war on terror" inextricably to the issue of WMD**most media outlets represented WMD as a "monolithic menace" without distinguishing between types of weapons and between possible weapons programs and the existence of actual weapons*''Knight Ridder'' (March 15, 2004) reported that "A June 26, 2002, letter from the [[Iraqi National Congress]] to the Senate Appropriations Committee listed 108 articles [in major English-language news outlets worldwide] based on information provided by the INC's Information Collection Program, a U.S.-funded effort to collect intelligence in Iraq. The assertions in the articles reinforced [[George Walker Bush|President Bush]]'s claims that [[Saddam Hussein]] should be ousted because he was in league with [[Osama bin Laden]], was developing nuclear weapons and was hiding biological and chemical weapons. Feeding the information to the news media, as well as to selected administration officials and members of Congress, ''helped foster an impression that there were multiple sources of intelligence on Iraq's illicit weapons programs and links to bin Laden.''" [Italics added.] ==Philip Morris & the Echo Chamber Technique== In 1998 [[John Scruggs]], a Washington D.C. lobbyist for [[Philip Morris]] described the "echo chamber" approach to advocacy as constituting the repetition of a selected message by the most credible sources that surround a decision maker. "The more a particular view or piece of information 'echoes' or resonates through this group, the greater its impact. Grassroots efforts are so effective in modern day advocacy programs because they cause many constituents to repeat the same message to the target Member. Grasstops or "Influentials" campaigns work because those highest on the hierarchy scale, with the greatest degree of credibility, repeat the same or similar messages. You will note that the echo chamber effect can work in two different ways. First, the same message can reverberate among multiple sources toward the target Members. For example, the same information from polling data captured in a single poll can be repeated by the media, congressional colleagues, lobbyists and advertising. Second, similar but complementary messages can be repeated by a single source...Either the repetition or "piling on" approach provide the same result: enhanced credibility and influence of the essential message," he explained. [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xiz37c00] == SourceWatch Resources ==*[[incestuous amplification]]*[[Iraqi National Congress]]*[[media censorship]]*[[media reform]]*[[The U Network]]*[[John Forbes Kerry: U.S. Presidential Campaign 2004]]*[[Banana Republicans: The Echo Chamber]] == References ==* [[Stephen Halper]] & [[Jonathan Clarke]]. 2004. ''[[America Alone; The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order]]''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 194-196.  == External links ==*John Scruggs, "[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xiz37c00 The "Echo Chamber" Approach to Advocacy]", Philip Morris, Bates No. 2078707451/7452, December 18, 1998.*Hans Nichols, "[http://thehill.com/news/09282004/debate.aspx Dem lawmakers primed for big post-debate spin: Kerry seeks to avoid mistake that hurt Al Gore in 2000]," ''The Hill'', September 28, 2004.*[http://www.ncrp.org/Releases/PR-03-12-2004.htm National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy](NCRP) "has issued a new report on the grantmaking of politically conservative foundations, revisiting the analysis and conclusions reached in NCRP's seminal report on conservative philanthropy in 1997. The new report greatly expands on the 1997 research, looking at 79 conservative foundations and their grants to 350 archconservative policy nonprofit organizations between 1999 and 2001."*The [[Hudson Institute]]'s Bradley Center for Philanthropy and Civic Renewal [http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=hudson_upcoming_events&id=162 wonder if they "got it, well, Right"].*"[http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=2052 Buying a Movement: Right-Wing Foundations and American Politics]," (Washington, DC: People for the American Way, 1996). Or [http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/dfiles/file_33.pdf download a PDF version] of the full report.*Dan Morgan, "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A46598-2000Jan28 Think Tanks: Corporations' Quiet Weapon]," Washington Post, January 29, 2000, p. A1.*[http://www.pulitzer.org/bycat/National+Reporting Jeff Gerth] and Sheryl Gay Stolberg, [http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/05/science/05LOBB.html "Drug Industry Has Ties to Groups With Many Different Voices"], New York Times, October 5, 2000.*Robert Kuttner, "[http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/13/kuttner-r.html Philanthropy and Movements]," The American Prospect, July 2, 2002.*Curtis Moore, "[http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200207/thinktank_printable.asp Rethinking the Think Tanks]," Sierra Magazine, July/August 2002. *Robert W. Hahn, "[http://www.policyreview.org/OCT02/hahn.html The False Promise of 'Full Disclosure'],'" [[Policy Review]], [[Hoover Institution]], October 2002. *[http://www.mediatransparency.org Media Transparency] provides descriptive summaries of many groups and individuals associated with the right, plus a database of conservative grants and foundations.