It emerged last week that the U.S. Department of Defense has been selling the war to Iraqis by covertly planting fake news in their media; paying Iraqi newspapers to run favorable stories.

i would particularly recommend reading the transcript of the wicked propagandist BBC.
i read the transcript and thought yes that's pretty much the coverage i would expect of a bbc reporter embedded with a british unit. it gives a british grunt's eye view of the war on the ground and the mission. if i was a bbc embedded journalist i might have produced something similiar. if british journalists felt free and safe to explore the country and get a genuine iraqi perspective without the fear of being kidnapped and beheaded then there would be more balance but you can't blame the bbc for that. what exactly does aljazeera expect? the bbc will inevitably sometimes give the point of view of british soldiers when reporters are embedded, and share a common language nationality and culture with their companions but that does not make it pro war propaganda. i beleive in the ability of western journalists to, occasionally stand back and challenge their working assumptions. I don't think aljazeera is being malicious but it is being naive about the ability of individuals to detach themselves from their own culture. I also believe aljazeera in some of its reporting, of note particularly in its section on conspiracies, could learn quite a few lessons about impariality. It is the job of journalists to tell "stories". It is the duty of journalists to mediate their own reality as experienced by predominantly middle-class males and fight to subdue point of view and reach towards objective reality. i am sure a brief survey of some of the al-jazeera coverage of israel might reveal less than olympian impartiality. Al-jazeera is an important counter balance to the western media but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

UK too promotes Iraq war propaganda?