"The eruption of war in Iraq last week set in motion a massive global PR network, cultivated by the Bush administration during the months-long buildup of forces. The network is intended not only to disseminate, but also to dominate news of the conflict around the world," PR Week writes. White House press secretary Ari Fleischer sets "the day's message with an early-morning conference call to British counterpart Alastair Campbell, White House communications director Dan Bartlett, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, Pentagon spokesperson Torie Clarke, and White House Office of Global Communication (OGC) director Tucker Eskew.... The OGC will be key in keeping all US spokespeople on message. Each night, US embassies around the world, along with all federal departments in DC, will receive a 'Global Messenger' e-mail containing talking points and ready-to-use quotes.... In a dramatic shift from past conflicts, administration officials have made it clear they'll rely on independent journalists, 'embedded' by the Pentagon with military units, to act as one of their most reliable PR vehicles," PR Week writes.

"Last week I found out that National Public Radio wants the opinions of antiwar activists -- as long as we follow the right script," writes University of Texas journalism professor and co-founder of the Nowar Collective Robert Jensen. "After the first question, it was clear [NPR's Scott] Simon expected me to follow a script that would go something like this: Yes, I'm against this war, but I know that Saddam Hussein is such a monster that nothing short of war can deal with him. Yes, I'm against this war, but now that the president has made this decision we should unify as a nation. Yes, I'm against this war, but -- in the end -- I realize that I should acknowledge that I am a naive and foolish person who can't deal the harsh realities of a harsh world.' Well, I didn't follow the script, and it wasn't long before it was clear in Simon's voice that he wasn't pleased. ... Simon should acknowledge that millions of people around the country and the world share a radical analysis of this war for oil and empire. And they are growing increasingly weary of the condescension of liberals."

Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh asks, "Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program?" How did the misinformation end up in the President's State of the Union address, and who has been fooling whom to make sure the US attacked Iraq?

" Exxon Mobil ... issued a call to arms on Monday, asking other energy firms to work harder to help it combat Big Oil's dirty reputation. The oil giant's vice president of public affairs, Kenneth Cohen, told attendees at the annual National Petrochemical and Refiners Association conference in San Antonio that ... 'In truth our industry has not done nearly enough to communicate the essential role we play and how we go about providing energy and products that contribute to economic growth ... and help improve the lives of millions of people around the world,' he said. ... More recently, the industry has suffered through accusations from anti-war activists that the U.S.-led attack on Iraq was motivated by a desire to control oil wealth..."

"These demonstrators wore shorts and ball caps, pushed strollers and carried American flags, but what most set them apart was the support they displayed ... for the American-led war in Iraq. ... It was meant as ... an angry protest against the antiwar sentiment that has been more visible elsewhere, particularly in large cities. 'Don't let these peace protesters confuse you,' Glenn Beck, a conservative radio host from Philadelphia, told the crowd estimated at 10,000 here today. ... Over the last few weeks, Mr. Beck, whose three-hour program is heard five days a week on more than 100 stations, has helped promote many similar demonstrations under the banner of Rally for America. Some have been financed by radio stations owned by his employer, Clear Channel Communications, the nation's largest owner of radio stations, in an arrangement that has been criticized by those who contend that media companies should not engage in political advocacy."