Politicians are often compared to hookers. The reason is that just like a hooker has to pretend to like the client while engaging in a certain act, politicians also need to pretend to like the people they are supposed to serve.

To sum up, the propaganda model operates in the following way: A politician who is full of bullshit and has biased information is regarded as an expert. This so-called expert then provides the bullshit to the news organization to inform the public. The news organization, in turn, repeats the bullshit with charming voices and opinions. As a result, we all end up becoming stupid, except for Chomsky. He writes this book, which you read. After reading it, you may become depressed and even consider killing yourself.

Personally, I don't think I am capable of writing a serious review on this book. It seems to present a rather pessimistic view of the political and media landscape, which might be a bit overwhelming for some readers. However, it also makes us think about the role of politicians and the media in our society and how we can be more critical consumers of information.

3.5 Stars!

First published back in 1988, this work by Chomsky stands as one of the most renowned and highly praised among his many political writings. It delves deep into the US's questionable mainstream media and its alarming tendencies of blatant bias that align with US foreign policy. This issue has only deteriorated over time, as witnessed by events such as the illegal invasion of Iraq and the costly and failed ongoing War On Terror.

The text also highlights the atrocities in El Salvador during 1980-84, where death squads, working in tandem with the army and security forces, freely killed civilians at an average rate of approximately seven hundred per month. These victims endured rape, torture, and mutilation, with complete impunity. Only the murder of four American women led to any form of legal action due to congressional pressure.

The chapters on Indochina are equally sobering. They reveal the bitter and cruel actions of successive US governments following their failed campaigns. For instance, in 1977, when India attempted to send buffalo to Vietnam to restore the herds decimated by US violence, the US threatened to cancel "food for peace" aid. Carter's government denied rice to Laos, where agriculture had been destroyed by intense bombing. In 1983, Oxfam America was prohibited from sending solar pumps to Cambodia for irrigation, and in 1981, the US government sought to block a shipment of school supplies and educational kits to Cambodia by the Mennonite Church. It's clear that these actions have had far-reaching consequences and continue to shape the geopolitical landscape.

Infuriatingly and terrifyingly relevant.

Even up to this very day, it is impossible to update the book with current examples as there are simply too many to choose from. Venezuela, Syria, Iran, and the list goes on ad infinitum. It seems that all of these situations are following the same script.

One could argue that the book is dated, but in fact, this further validates its point. For instance, thirty years ago, the West supported and glorified Putin when he served their needs in a different way. It's all about the narrative, and it has all been carefully managed to achieve a certain end.

Some of these case studies have been lost in the whirlwind of history and the constant flow of news, while others, such as Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, still cry out for a proper reckoning. Thirty years later, the lies exposed in this book still persist as the official account. The past truly is the future, and every bit of truth uncovered is of great significance.

A true classic in the space that I read in college and recently revisited is the work by Chomsky and Herman. They present their case eloquently and support it with copious amounts of evidence.

However, their thesis is rather one-sided. The media was not, and is not now, solely dominated by right-wing corporate interests. Just like Donald Trump, Chomsky and Herman view the media as the enemy of the people, albeit for different reasons. This is incorrect. But it doesn't mean that the media is the people's best friend either. Instead, the media is the frenemy of the people, as its impact on society is a complex blend of positive and negative.

On the positive side, which Herman and Chomsky completely overlook, the media serves as a fundamental check on concentrated power, constantly bringing important facts to light. At its best, although not consistently, the media also produces high-quality analysis on important topics.

On the negative side, which Herman and Chomsky only get partially right, the media has several flaws. Firstly, it is partisan. A significant majority of journalists are liberal, there is a sizeable conservative minority, and in between is an apolitical middle. This mixture of ideologies interacts in a fragmented echo chamber of bias and prejudgment. Secondly, the media's incentive structure is in disarray. Chomsky and Herman do an excellent job of highlighting the power of incentives in the press. Journalists' goals often conflict with accurate reporting. They are motivated to become famous, win awards, create attention-grabbing headlines, and sell the news, which often does not align with accuracy or importance. Finally, the media creates oversimplified narratives. Due to its very nature of providing short explanations of complex subjects, much of today's journalism is misleading and lacks context.

And that is the biggest problem with this book: it only tells part of the story. The authors go too far in arguing that right-wing corporations focused solely on profits dominate the entire media ecosystem. The truth is, and was when this book was written, much more complicated than that.

Manufacturing Consent is an extremely dense work that is filled with numerous case studies sourced from all over the globe. It essentially presents all the evidence to show that the so-called moral high ground of the USA is actually constructed upon propaganda.

Promoting American ideals like freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right of assembly, fair democratic elections, and civil rights, among others, always takes a backseat to national interests. When it comes to pursuing foreign policy objectives, the state is more than willing to set aside these fundamental pillars of Western society in order to support dictators and war criminals. They do so without any fear of reprimand or accusations of hypocrisy from the Fourth Estate. An important aspect to note is that they are not merely turning a blind eye to immoral and dysfunctional behavior abroad; instead, they are actively providing support to the perpetrators, thereby suppressing the ability of developing countries to strive for a fair and prosperous society.

I truly would have loved to have dedicated more time to this extensive mountain of historical analysis. However, I was up against the due date of my library book and managed to finish it just in the nick of time. I firmly believe that I could pick up this book a second time and still glean a great deal of valuable insights from it.

"In a system of high and growing inequality, entertainment is the contemporary equivalent of the Roman “games of the circus” that diverts the public from politics and generates a political apathy that is helpful to the preservation of the status quo.”

Mandatory reading can have a profound impact on us. It can make us feel queasy at times, not only because of the events being described but also due to their massive implications.

The book in question zeroes in on very specific events. However, it's important to note that there could have been thousands of other books exploring an almost endless supply of Western crimes and propaganda campaigns.

This kind of reading should, hopefully, prompt us to question our own country. We need to look beyond the surface and examine the actions and motives that may have been hidden from us. By doing so, we can gain a more accurate understanding of the world around us and make more informed decisions.

It's essential to be critical thinkers and not simply accept what we are told. We should strive to uncover the truth and hold our leaders and institutions accountable for their actions. Only then can we hope to create a better future for ourselves and for generations to come.

**Title: Essential Reading for Everyone**

Reading is an activity that enriches our minds and broadens our perspectives. It is essential for everyone, regardless of age, gender, or background. There are countless reasons why reading should be a part of our daily lives.

Firstly, reading helps us to improve our vocabulary and language skills. By exposing ourselves to different words and sentence structures, we can enhance our ability to express ourselves clearly and effectively. This is especially important in today's world, where communication is key.

Secondly, reading allows us to learn about different cultures, ideas, and experiences. It opens up a whole new world of knowledge and understanding, enabling us to empathize with others and develop a more global perspective. Through reading, we can gain insights into the lives of people from different walks of life and learn from their mistakes and successes.

In conclusion, reading is an essential activity that offers numerous benefits. It is a great way to relax, unwind, and expand our minds. So, make it a habit to read every day and discover the joy and power of books.

I had high expectations of learning about the mass media from this book. However, to my disappointment, it turned out to be a platform where the author simply aired their grievances about the popularity of anti-communist policy in America during the Cold War.

To be honest, I was truly astonished by the intellectual laziness exhibited in this book. There was some rather superficial discussion about consumerism and oligopoly, and a bit more persuasive but still not in-depth hand-waving about the journalists' reliance on the federal government for news. What was lacking was a deeper critical exploration or study of how exactly the mass media functions and why certain stories appear in the media. Instead, the authors repeatedly hammered home the point that US foreign policy made morally wrong decisions in the name of anti-communism and that these decisions had broad popular support. I don't know if it's a media propaganda conspiracy or if Americans simply don't care much about foreign policy, are somewhat racist, and are only interested in news about communism abroad when America is winning.

It is incredible to me how out of touch the authors are and how they present this thesis without actually conducting any new research, simply repackaging their favorite stories.

I will give credit where it's due. The first chapter was a fairly interesting starting point, but unfortunately, the rest of the book failed to delve deeper. The chapter on Vietnam also provided an interesting perspective.

However, there are some fundamental questions that remain unaddressed here. Does the media shape public opinion, or is it the other way around? Does the author's theory apply to anything other than anti-communism? Does the same pattern exist in any other country? Did this pattern exist in America at any time before the Cold War?

If the only argument was that the mainstream media has its own masters and can be controlled to speak or not speak about a certain topic, then this argument might hold true today. However, that wasn't the only argument. They labeled the media as right-wing, but now, a large percentage of all Western media has a strong left-wing bias.

An updated edition that includes the left-wing bias would result in a timeless piece of work that everyone could agree with.

The authors draw many conclusions instead of allowing the reader to decide for themselves, especially regarding some of the decisions of the media. It's as if they knew what was going through the minds of anchors, editors, journalists, and reporters. They've selectively chosen examples and sources and ultimately failed to prove what they set out to do.

Just read the first chapter and the conclusion, and that will be sufficient.

I read this—or most of it—many years ago and felt it was time for a reread. As I plow through this hallmark of American liberal thought, I realize how much Chomsky shaped my thinking throughout my life as someone who is interested in justice and democracy. Either you find great truths in this work or you find it to be radical hogwash.

I came upon Chomsky because of his work in linguistics, as languages have always been a fascination. Rereading this book 25 years later, I realize how much he shaped how I view politics. Chomsky only rates behind the Canadian polymath, John Ralston Saul, as the most influential thinker in my pantheon.

I didn’t vote for Ronald Reagan twice and despised almost every aspect of his conservative presidency. This book outlines his crimes in Central America and our country’s hypocrisy when dealing with Cuba and Nicaragua and the double standards we have employed when addressing the policies of our far-right “allies” in that region.

Had this book been written today, it would take on the criminal neglect in the media of global climate change, something that is all but ignored on TV, sadly a place where most Americans get their “news.” Our President regularly watches Fox and Friends, three half-wits who parrot whatever right-wing idiocy they are fed that day while grooming each other for lice. It is truly a sorry state of affairs that the media, which should be informing the public, is instead promoting misinformation and stupidity. We need more thinkers like Chomsky to speak out and expose the truth.

I first added this to my 'books to read' list after watching the movie, \\"Good Will Hunting\\". And I was truly not disappointed. This book is, without a doubt, one of the very best, if not the most well-written book I've ever read.

I don't mean to imply that the information within was so life-altering that I would never be the same. But rather, first and foremost, the sentence structure and the flow of thought are crystal clear, engaging, and masterfully pieced together. The authors sift through a vast amount of information, carefully wading through fact and fabrication, seemingly slipping each piece into place with effortless ease.

Not only does this represent their extensive bank of information on the three case studies (among others), but it also shows that they can present that information in a relevant and atmospherically readable way. I really enjoy a great many books, and I do so for numerous reasons. With Manufacturing Consent, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book simply for the sheer joy of how it was written. The content, however, was also quite challenging.

What the authors share does indeed bring significant alterations to the table. After reading this book, you will no longer be able to sit back and watch the 6 O'Clock news in the same way again. In fact, due to this book and others like it, you probably already don't. From my own upbringing and experience, I suspect that many people do not trust the media. The media (as defined in the book as the \\"mass\\") has sold its soul to two-faced entities, namely the devil and the love of money. It is truly sickening to now know more of the truth behind the three case studies shared. And to suspect that this is still happening even today. In fact, as I write this, my stomach weakens. We desperately need these stories to be told, and we need to be the ones to tell them.

I'm a bit surprised that I didn't manage to read Manufacturing Consent years ago.

As a 27-year-old who has read a considerable number of left texts, I suppose I wasn't overly shocked by any of Chomsky's findings or analysis. However, it still stands as solid and necessary research.

Perhaps due to a sense of familiarity, I was particularly captivated by the sections on America's entanglement in Laos and Cambodia.

Yes, at this point, I might be the wrong audience. But I know, truly know, that if I could send this book to myself 10 years ago, it would have had a profound impact on my life.

It makes me wonder how many others out there could benefit from reading this important work.

Maybe it could open their eyes to the hidden truths and power dynamics that shape our world.

Even though I've come across similar ideas before, Chomsky's detailed analysis and incisive arguments still have the ability to make me think more deeply about the role of the media and the manufacturing of public opinion.

I hope that more people will take the time to read Manufacturing Consent and engage with its ideas.

It could potentially lead to a more informed and critical citizenry, capable of challenging the status quo and working towards a more just and equitable society.