No Questions Asked takes an overarching view of media coverage from the day of the 9/11 attacks through the war in Iraq. It also compares and contrasts how the U.S. media vs. international media covered key events during this period. Fact-based rather than polemical, the book explains why journalists responded the way they did during wartime and explores the ramifications for democracy of a weak press. The Fourth Estate's most important job is to present unbiased, accurate information about events, issues, and policies to the public. Without public scrutiny, administrations can become a breeding ground for bad and dangerous ideas. In recent years, for several reasons―including the brilliant psychological manipulation of the nation after the September 11, 2001, attacks―the American media have allowed administration officials to present information to the public without having to worry much about answering uncomfortable questions or having their policies deconstructed for public consumption. Relevant information is buried deep inside newspapers, and gaping holes can be found in many stories; in short, obvious and important questions remain unasked. The lack of questions from reporters led to a misunderstanding of the facts by the American public and, consequently, to their support of policies based on misinformation. Polls have revealed that more than half of Americans believe mistruths about the war in Iraq and world terrorism. Many, including members of the media, say the press has failed to do its job. Very few news reports filled in the basic blanks―the who, what, where, when, and whys―about U.S. foreign policy, the USA Patriot Act, the administration's insistence on the need for secrecy and more power, the truth about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and the necessity of sending our soldiers to topple another country's dictator, throwing an already tenuous region into dangerous imbalance. Very few reports are filling in those blanks now. With the passage of time, it has become more and more apparent how the American press failed to question the Bush administration response to the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., according to independent journalist Finnegan, who explores those failures and what they may have cost the nation. Fear of being perceived as unpatriotic and willingness to accept information doled out by the administration led many journalists to retreat from their responsibility to question policies on the war on terror. The administration was not adequately probed on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the need to topple Saddam Hussein, and the Patriot Act and a host of other policies that have been set in place since 9/11. Finnegan describes the buildup to war and the psychological manipulation the administration used on the public and the press. Finnegan also compares U.S. coverage of 9/11 and the war on terror and coverage by the press abroad. This is a penetrating look at American news coverage at a critical time in U.S. history. Vanessa Bush Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved “Finnegan's convincing, readable, and meticulously researched book concerns the failure of the US press to adequately cover real news since the 9/11 attacks. Conservatives will probably accuse Finnegan (an award-winning journalist and a scholar of the psychology of terrorism and the media) of a liberal bias in maintaining that the Bush administration and Fox News bullied a compliant media into censoring key news stories and printing pro-administration propaganda pieces. But no one can deny that the alarming evidence Finnegan presents in support of that contention is well documented and raises questions that need to be asked. This book is more substantive than some other books on the subject (Bernard Goldberg's work comes to mind), many of which are underresearched and rancorous in their attempts to expose the media as liberal, and it is easier to read than David Barker's heavily footnoted, statistic-laden Rushed to Judgment (2002), which argues that the media are 6rnservative. Although the debate over whether the media is fundamentally left- or right-wing may never be settled, Finnegan addresses the controversy with a minimum of snarkiness and moral outrage and a preponderance of facts and intelligent analysis. Essential. All readers; all levels.” ― Choice “Finnegan's basic argument is that the American media have been largely responsible for such misperceptions because they have failed to maintain an independent, critical position in relation to 11 September, the war on terror, and the current Bush administration more generally. Her aim is thus to present examples of these failings, which she does to great effect by examining how various major American newspapers and television networks have covered news items ranging from the allied bombings of Afghanistan, to the effects of the USA Patriot Act (2001), to aspects of the war in Iraq….and on to the devastation of Hurricane Katrina….[T]