They published 20,000 copies of it, and were ready to distribute it.
The publisher was owned by a big conglomerate, Warner Brothers, now part of Time Warner.
But it does not matter, because this is a world of alternative facts.
The media commentary is mostly propaganda and ideology.
The reason for this was that we went through the media and said, “We don’t know what the facts are, we can’t know, but we will compare the facts available with what came out of the media filter,” and it was grotesque: There was lying at a level that would have astonished Stalin. We recently published a new edition of the book, and we didn’t change a comma, because there was nothing wrong with it.
But that is the kind of reaction you get with Manufacturing Consent.
And there was everything you could do about it: You could just call it off.
The reaction was, not a word on our chapter about East Timor; that disappeared.
Alan Mac Leod interviewed Noam Chomsky via Skype on March 13, 2018, for Mac Leod’s new book Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. What parts did you write and what parts did he write?
They discussed the origins of the classic work of media criticism (co-authored with Edward Herman) Manufacturing Consent, the role of that book’s “propaganda model” today, Google and Facebook, Donald Trump and Russia, fake news and Syria. Alan Mac Leod: I would first like to ask you about how Manufacturing Consent came about. Noam Chomsky: Ed wrote the basic framework, the institutional analysis, the corporate structure, the relations to government programs and the fundamental institutional structure of the media—that was basically him.