DUCKPOND

As I recall John Lukacs, the writer of Five Days in London, was of the view that Churchill’s greatness as a orator and war-time Prime Minister was not just his inspiring speeches, but that he remained credible. The truth could be told and be believed. Surely, if correct, this would be a wondrous result to behold, and I might hope that it might be once again become exampled, in the remaining days of my life.

Joseph Gobbels, as I remember, did not believe this to be true regarding Churchill, yet he recognized the problem, which is to imply that he was a superior propagandist to many of today’s political leaders, media managers and advisers. The great Karl Christian Rove comes to mind as the greatest artist of the current time, somewhat like the greatest quarterback who possess that extra spit second timing and decision-making that shades his best contemporaries. As far as I am aware Rove has never troubled himself over the credibility, believing I suppose, and not unreasonably that when you hold an effective monopoly over radio talkback and can intimidate the press there is no problem.

However, it is a strange yet true fact that the world is a bigger place, with vastly more people, more wealth, albeit less military firepower than the United State of America. Now this larger world, strange also to relate has other sources of information, despite Rubert Murdoch. The problem of credibility becomes an issue, if it was not an problem for democracy in countries including Australia. But since in the United States, democracy and the Constitution, as it appears are largely passe in the question of truth, accountability and transparency in government have been transcended in that country, and so have become formally and informally irrelevant, the great Karl Christian Rove may well again be right in that section of planet Earth.

The United States government media managers are aware of the problem and are attempting to address it. Karen Hughes is charged with the job. She declared apparently, “My job starts with the truth.” And she finishes her interview with Der Speigel by saying about George Walker Bush:

I know him so well personally, that I sometimes am stunned by what I see as a caricature of him that has emerged in some press coverage. He’s a very warm person, he’s a very thoughtful person, he’s a very decent person. He cares deeply about people, he’s a wonderful leader. I think all of us should take a breath and be a little bit more charitable about how we view each other.

Sure Hughsie. You have gotta do better than that mate. I have viewed Mr Bush charitably, and I think I have come to the view of Vice President Richard Bruce Cheney, who could never be charitable, except in large measure to himself. The inference is mine, but the reference is here (also from Speigel on Line).

Meanwhile truth withers, as democracy withers – there as here. The wind ferociously blows, it seems, in the one direction.

Perhaps the analysis is overly pessimistic, nor deep enough or as accurate as it should be. There is a problem. I doubt that most media are players in addressing the problem.