Politics of U.S. Intelligence Agencies (Essay Sample)

Politics of u.s. intelligence agencies
Name of the student
Institutional affiliation
Date
Does Simpson essentially prove his case? Why? What, if anything should be done with respect to intelligence agencies, the military, government in general, and/or business interests trying to direct, if not control, academicians' research? Why?
Simpson analyzes the extent and effect of the state intelligence and military involvement in matters of psychology warfare and a cold war. He looks deeper in the manipulation of the academic and media functions by the state to favor the state in research and broadcasting.
Simpson has argued that the US government's psychological warfare systems have facilitated the shaping of mass communication research. It has made it be a discrete scholarly field that is powerfully manipulating the selection of (academic) leaders. It also plays a role in defining which of the competing scientific prototypes of communication would be financed, expounded, and fortified to thrive. Yes, he has tried to substantiate this argument in his book.[Taylor, P. (2002). Global communications, international affairs and the media since 1945. Routledge.]
Simpson points out that the US Federal agencies for example, the Department of Defense, U.S. Information Agency, and Central Intelligence Agency and their precursors gave huge funding to all large-scale communication research projects are done by U.S. scholars for the period 1945 and 1960. During the 1950s, the government spent close to $1 billion in funding these projects.[James, B., (1953). Containment or Liberation? New York: John Day,p. 188]
He notes clearly that the government allocated between $7 billion and $13 billion per annum to universities. These are those which offered studies relating to social psychology, anthropological studies of foreign communication systems, overseas audience, and foreign public opinion survey. It also funded other such systems that facilitated the coming up of mass communication research as a distinct course.
There is a clear indication also that the government propaganda and intelligence departments coordinated well with prolific communication research institutions for example Carnegie Corporation and the Ford Foundation in the allocation of huge amounts of funding to them. He notes further that eminent government institutions like the FBI ruthlessly depressed any contrary scientific concepts regarding communication and treated as subversive. Therefore, the government dictates persons to head these research institutions precisely those that will favor and advocate for the government's position concerning communication research.
Simpson also argues that starting from World War II U.S national security campaigns are always in line with commercial goals of prolific advertisers and media houses. He notes clearly how Brigadier General Robert McClure issued out a list comprising of RIAS radio station in Berlin, Voice of America, the Star and Stripes daily newspapers, troop education programs in Europe and Far East had intentions which favored the U.S intelligence mission.
He also points out that between fifty and seventy-five documentary films were produced each year. There was also up-to-the-minute news bulletins made every week aimed at furthering U.S security campaigns.
There was total control of all U.S commercial films. Postal censorship and publication licensing on every newspaper, magazine, and book publisher around the U.S. was controlled. There was also control of the operation of cultural centers in sixty cities by the U.S authorities. The publication of five slick foreign-language magazines intended to distribute to overseas audiences, U.S. State Department indeed was generating one magazine of that type. McClure also pointed out that indeed there was the production of plainly hundreds of millions of informative booklets and flyers and the publication of daily U.S. military state newspapers in three nations.
Simpson also noted that the U.S Intelligence organizations together with the military largely entered academia, precisely in the Social Sciences and Communications Studies. Eventually, educational liberty was limited and theoretical research tainted to aid political ambitions. He outlines how after 1945 there was the formation of an alliance of educational entrepreneurs and the government's psychological warfare systems. Public Opinion Quarterly, a sabbatical of U.S. State Department accountable for eastern European affairs was in the center of focus. It constantly published articles which vividly elaborated America's prowess in psychological warfare aimed at advocating U.S programs in the field of communication research.
He notes that a large number of POQ's editors and facilitators always had an unusual relationship with the U.S. government's psychological warfare at the Department of
State, CIA, and the armed services and these aimed at ensuring the state has totally influenced the field of social sciences to favor it.
...