It repeats the themes of "bloodbath" and "terror" classification and the categories and examples discussed include: In the study's frontispiece, countries that practice torture on an administrative basis during the 1970s are listed.

[7] One theme in the chapter is that, the very nature of the U.S. propaganda system is such that, analyses that present the Khmer Rouge in a favorable light, will be relegated to obscure sources.

[8] The authors discuss, among many other documents, Murder in a Gentle Land by John Barron and Anthony Paul,[9] a study extremely critical of the Khmer Rouge, which, they note was "widely and generally quite favorably reviewed" and "subject to extensive comment" served up to a "mass audience".

"[5]: 252 Not being published by a major house, The Political Economy of Human Rights received hardly any reviews in mainstream American newspapers and popular journals.

Margolis' main concern was that "Chomsky does not answer the nagging question of why so many of us in a free press end up echoing so much of what we're told from the government we're supposed to be watching.

He offers a paragraph or two proposing essentially that the media behave like other corporations or giant institutions, distributing favor and disfavor, reward and punishment, and that journalists practice a kind of 'voluntary censorship'.

[4]: 3–5, 26–31 In regard to the Cambodia chapter, Morris writes that Chomsky and Herman "attempt to discredit their opponents [e.g. Barron and Paul, see above] by challenging their integrity, or by taking issue with some point of detail which they then blow out of all proportion, suggesting the rest of the study is questionable", while "abandon[ing] all critical scrutiny when it comes to the pro-Pol Pot reports".

[4]: 30 As alleged examples of "pro-Pol Pot reports", Morris cites the direct participant in the Khmer Rouge's evacuation of Phnom Penh, Shane Tarr, and the academic specialists on Cambodia, Ben Kiernan and Michael Vickery.