The media fifth column
(Via Instapundit) Over at Strategy Page, Jim Dunnigan writes on the media's role in asymmetric warfare:

The same thing almost happened in Iraq in 2003. During the first two weeks of the American advance into Iraq, any real, apparent or imagined delay of the coalition forces was instantly declared the beginning of a coalition defeat. Even as American troops moved within sight of Baghdad, the pundits were still gravely talking about bloody house to house fighting. There was much talk of asymmetric warfare by the Iraqis, and there was a lot of guerilla type attacks. But the American troops came up with new tactics faster than the Iraqis could think of ways to get around the American advantages.

Using the media as an asymmetric warfare weapon is pretty common, and sometimes it works. It worked in Somalia. It worked several times in the Balkans during the 1990s. Islamic fundamentalists use the media as one of their more potent weapons. The use of imbedded reporters during the Iraq war is seen by the Department of Defense as a use of asymmetric warfare against potentially dangerous media. Indeed, many media pundits have said as much, and darkly warn that the media cannot tolerate more such "defeats" in the future.

It's been working since at least the "Tet Offensive." But what I would be interested in knowing is how the media became the handmaiden of totalitarians everywhere and of every stripe?

UPDATE: In a related vein, Kathy Kinsley points to Time to watch the BBC bias that costs each of us £116 a year.

No, BBC bias is not a piece of partisan trickery - it is a state of mind. So strong is the state of mind that a great many of the acts of bias, perhaps the majority of them, are quite unconscious. It is time to delve into that unconscious. Hence our Beebwatch, which starts on the opinion pages today.
...
Why are we bothering? Because anyone who wants to watch television in this country must by law pay £116 a year to the BBC for the privilege. It is like compulsory tithes to the Church of England in the 18th century. You may be interested to know what sermons your money is paying for.

And of course, that is the part that grates the sensibilities. It's one thing for fulminating asshats to spout nonsense. It's quite another for them to do it on the taxpayers' nickel.