Topic: News

Debt ceilings and the 'balance' bias
Peter Hart Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting blog USA August 2, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

There's been plenty written about how reporters skew reality by treating "both sides" as equally intransigent or inflexible when it comes to the budget deficit battle. Another example, from the L.A. Times today (8/2/11):

For Republicans, it was preventing any tax increase to upper-income families.

For Democrats, it was ensuring no cuts to Social Security, Medicaid and a handful of other programs that aid the elderly and the poor.

And for Obama, it was getting a deal that would end the threat of an economy-shaking default until after the 2012 presidential election.

None of the key players was willing to go all out to actually solve the nation's long-term financial problems. As a result, the deal doesn't.

The implication of course, is that opposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare is in some way comparable to opposing any tax increases anywhere under any circumstances. This glosses over the fact that the Bush tax cuts played a large role in creating the current deficit problem. And it evades the fact that it is certainly possible to fix the budget problem without cutting Social Security and Medicare. It is much more difficult to imagine how to do the same without raising revenues.

But the real lesson we must be taught over and over again is that both sides are to blame for not fixing the nation's problems. ...

The fires this time: In coverage of extreme weather, media downplay climate change
Neil deMause Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting blog USA August 3, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links

On April 14, a massive storm swept down out of the Rocky Mountains into the Midwest and South, spawning more than 150 tornadoes that killed 43 people across 16 states (Capital Weather Gang, 4/18/11). It was one of the largest weather catastrophes in United States history—but was soon upstaged by an even larger storm, the 2011 Super Outbreak that spread more than 300 tornadoes across 14 states from April 25 to 28 (including an all-time one-day record of 188 twisters on April 27), killing 339 people, including 41 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (CNN, 5/1/11).

Ensuing weeks saw Texas wildfires that had been burning since December expand to consume more than 3 million acres (Texas Forest Service, 6/28/11; CNN, 4/25/11), plus record flooding along the Mississippi River, which couldn’t contain the water from April’s storms on top of the spring snowmelt. On May 22, a super-strong F5 tornado killed 153 people as it flattened a large part of Joplin, Missouri (National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office, 5/22/11) ; in the first two weeks of June, a heat wave broke temperature records in multiple states, and the Wallow fire became the largest in Arizona state history (Washington Post, 6/14/11).

It was an unprecedented string of severe weather: By mid-June, more than 1,000 tornadoes had killed 536 people (NOAA, 6/13/11), nearly as many deaths as in the entire preceding decade. And it was only natural to ask: Were we seeing the effects of climate change?

Most scientists would say yes, or at least “probably.” The Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change, a global scientific body that has been a target of conservatives despite a record of soft-pedaling its findings to avoid controversy (Extra!, 7/8/07), warned on February 2, 2007, “It is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent.” (In science-speak, “very likely” refers to a certainty of greater than 90 percent, and is as near as you get to a definitive conclusion.) Other forecasts (e.g., Environment America, 9/8/10) have projected that wet regions will receive record rainfall thanks to increasing evaporation, while dry ones get record drought, as climate patterns shift to accommodate the new normal.

Yet despite these dire predictions, U.S. media were hesitant to investigate the links between climate change and this spring’s extreme weather. Much coverage settled for the cheap irony of contrasting extreme phenomena....

SIDEBAR: Don’t Need a Weather Channel to Know Which Way the Wind Blows

When NBC Universal purchased the Weather Channel in 2008, it was described by company CEO Jeffrey Zucker (New York Times, 7/7/08) as making the network “the pre-eminent leader in news and information. We’re No. 1 in business news, No. 1 in general broadcast news, and now we’re No. 1 in weather news too.” During this spring’s extreme weather events, NBC certainly made use of its new property, with repeated appearances by familiar Weather Channel faces on its news programs. ...

Forbes and Cantore should perhaps be cut some slack, as they’re meteorologists, not climate experts. The Weather Channel used to have an environmental reporting team, including a weekly show called Forecast Earth that focused on climate change—but they were all laid off as one of NBC’s first cost-cutting moves after purchasing the channel (WashingtonPost.com,11/21/08).

Intro: Media in Canada: Sun News Network, a.k.a. Fox News North, will launch on April 18
Salt Spring News March 9, 2011

Eight links. We introduced them thus:

As part of his attempt to control and shape public discourse in Canada, Prime Minister Stephen Harper saw to it that partisan appointments were made to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) and to the board of the CBC/Radio Canada. Further, his attempt to lower the standards of truth and fairness in broadcast journalism precedes the start of Sun TV, a network that has been shepherded in large part by Kory Teneycke, Harper's former director of communication.

Items: Sun Media ditches press council, citing issues with ‘political correctness’
Allison Jones The Canadian Press/Toronto Star Canada July 13, 2011

TORONTO—Sun Media has pulled its newspapers out of the Ontario Press Council, complaining about the “politically correct mentality” of the province’s print-media watchdog.

Glenn Garnett, Sun Media’s vice-president of editorial, sent a letter to the council earlier this week saying that the company’s newspapers were withdrawing their membership, effective immediately. “The editorial direction of our newspapers, especially our urban tabloids, is incompatible with a politically correct mentality that informs OPC thinking, in the selection of cases it hears, and the rulings it renders,” Garnett wrote.

The Ontario Press Council investigates complaints about some of the largest newspapers in Canada, including the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star. The press council has for years overseen 37 dailies, including 27 Sun Media newspapers such as the Toronto Sun, the Kingston Whig-Standard and the London Free Press. The council is made up of representatives of its member newspapers which, until this week, included Sun Media staff.

Last year, Sun Media’s parent company Quebecor announced it was withdrawing from the Quebec Press Council. Sun Media also owns daily newspapers in Manitoba and Alberta, but they do not belong to their respective press councils either. ...

Sun Media embracing 'shock value' over accountability: Media watchdog
Bradley Bouzane Postmedia News/Vancouver Sun Canada July 13, 2011

The departure of the Sun Media chain of newspapers from Ontario's print media watchdog is a blow to the accountability of Sun publications and does not bode well for the company going forward, says the executive director of an international group of media ombudsmen.

Jeffrey Dvorkin of the Organization of News Ombudsmen said the letter from Sun Media's vice-president of editorial, which stated the "politically correct mentality" of the Ontario Press Council is "incompatible" with the direction of that company's newspapers, strips the company of much-needed transparency required to maintain public trust.

"The difficulty is that there's now no mechanism in place for any kind of public accountability with Sun Media," said Dvorkin, who is based in Toronto. "It's really too bad and I think Sun Media is the ultimate loser by this short-sighted gesture. Unfortunately, I see them heading down a path that conveys more shock value — which is clearly something that is marketable — but a more important value of transparency and accountability is lost," Dvorkin said. "In the short term, they may find their audiences support them by watching their programs and buying their newspapers, but in the long run, accountability is lost and that becomes a real problem." ...

Sun Media yanks papers from press council
Postmedia News Canada July 14, 2011

The departure of the Sun Media chain of newspapers from Ontario's print media watchdog is a blow to the accountability of Sun publications and does not bode well for the company going forward, says the executive director of an international group of media ombudsmen.

Jeffrey Dvorkin of the Organization of News Ombudsmen said the letter from Sun Media's vice-president of editorial strips the company of much-needed transparency required to maintain public trust. "The difficulty is that there's now no mechanism in place for any kind of public accountability with Sun Media," said Dvorkin, who is based in Toronto. "It's really too bad and I think Sun Media is the ultimate loser by this short-sighted gesture." ...

The letter from Garnett reads: "It has become painfully evident that the editorial direction of our newspapers, especially our urban tabloids, is incompatible with a politically correct mentality that informs OPC thinking, in the selection of cases it hears, and the rulings it renders." Dvorkin said he wasn't surprised by the move because Sun Media's parent company -- Quebecor -- previously pulled out of a similar watchdog group in Quebec. He called the timing odd, given the recent explosion of a United Kingdom phone-hacking scandal.

Jim comment: Sun News Network (commonly shortened to Sun News) is an English language Canadian television news and opinion channel owned and operated by Quebecor Media through a partnership between two of its subsidiaries. Its slogan is "We're On Your Side Canada's Home for Hard News and Straight Talk". Sun News is currently headed by Kory Teneycke, VP of development for Quebecor and a former director of communications and chief spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. When Sun News launched in April of this year, my cable TV/Internet provider offered a free six-month trial (thereafter it will cost $2.95 a month as I recall). I began watching it everyday. I was curious to see what Harper and his cronies regarded as 'real' news and credible opinion. Also, I am a firm believer in the maxim, 'know your enemy'. I routinely dip into BBC, CNN, Global and MSNBC and the like to get their take on issues and events. I don't always agree with them (sometimes I'm angered or appaled) but I can usually understand their POV. Its a different interpretation of the data. After three days of surveying Sun News' programing at different times of the day, I stopped and I haven't gone back save for a handful of times. To my dismay, there was nothing on the channel—news or opinion—that reflected the worlds I live in, actual and/or ideological/philosophical. Sun's is truly a fairy-tale land often as grim as the Brothers Grimm's dark and violent worlds. The truth is ugly enough. For me, a media outlet that rejects dialectic, that embraces and promotes the dark, fear-filled side of life is not an outlet that leads to a better future. It does the opposite. Forty years ago, I proclaimed 'hello, Canada, glad to be here." These days I find myself muttering far too often, 'O, Canada!"

Related: In the USA the Fox News pack is on the warpath against media watchdog group Media Matters.

Is Fox News scared? Desperate attacks on watchdog group Media Matters suggest yes
Mark Howard AlterNet USA July 8, 2011

In the untamed jungle that is cable news, there is a ferocious and predatory beast stalking the terrain. Anyone who has encountered Fox News in the wild can attest to the spine-chilling threat imposed by the pseudo-news network. And now Fox News has the scent of new game.

The Fox News pack is on the warpath against the media watchdog group, Media Matters. In the past two weeks it has featured over 30 stories with the express purpose of challenging the group’s right to exist. Fox has assigned network stalwarts like Bill O’Reilly, Bret Baier, Charles Krauthammer, James Rosen, Dick Morris, and Bernie Goldberg to the mission. This is an unprecedented, broadly distributed attack by a major media enterprise against a non-profit group it regards as an adversary.

This latest batch of complaints stem from comments made last March by Media Matters founder, David Brock. He was quoted in Politico as saying that the organization was shifting its focus toward Fox News to one of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage.” Giving Fox the benefit of doubt, one might conclude it’s only fair that Fox defend itself from such an overt declaration of war. The only thing that might refute that perspective is – reality. If this is war, Fox is the aggressor. Fox News initiated its attacks long ago with aggressive and false assertions that cast Media Matters as hacks, anti-American, violent, and communist. ...

Why Rupert Murdoch love$ God: World's biggest sleaze mogul also getting rich from Christian moralizers
Frank Schaeffer AlterNet USA July 10, 2011

Here's what you might not know about Rupert Murdoch: he’s one of the leading religion publishers in the world.

Maybe one day soon Murdoch will go to jail as might his son, as will several of their UK editors if many alleged and disgusting and illegal acts of pirate “journalism” are proved true, ranging from bribing the police to hacking the phones of bereaved family members of killed service men and women and child murder victims. Make no mistake: when it comes to the Murdoch media “empire” we're talking about the lowest form of “journalism” as detailed by the Guardian newspaper.

So are religious moralizers and others writing about religious and/or “moral” themes prepared to enrich the Murdoch “ media juggernaut” forever while Rupert Murdoch further corrupts UK, American and Australian politics while his companies trade in human misery for profit by hacking murder victim's phones, paying off the police, elevating smut to a national sport and even hacking the phones of killed soldiers’ families?

You bet! ...

Rupert Murdoch is one of America’s number one publishers of evangelical and other religious books, including the 33-million seller Purpose Driven Life by mega pastor and anti-gay activist Rick Warren. Murdoch is also publisher of "progressive" Rob Bell’s Love Wins.

Rick Warren, Rob Bell and company helped Murdoch fund his tabloid-topless-women-on-page-3 empire, phone hacking of murdered teens and Fox News' spreading "birther" and "death panel" lies about the president. They helped Murdoch by enriching him. And these weren’t unknown authors just lucky to get published anywhere, they could have picked anybody to sell their books. ...

Salmon inquiry too secretive, participant complains
Mark Hume Globe and Mail Canada Last updated April 30, 2011

A federal public inquiry into the decline of sockeye salmon on the West Coast has come under fire for being too secretive. Alexandra Morton, one of the participants in the Cohen Commission of Inquiry, says the legal undertaking that all participants had to sign to gain access to documents is so restrictive it is keeping important information from the public. “I have become very concerned about the extent to which important aspects of the Cohen Commission are operating in secret,” said Ms. Morton in a written statement she said was approved by her lawyer. ...

Ms. Morton said the undertaking at first applied just to the commission’s database of documents, but it has been expanded to cover all applications, correspondence and legal material filed by participants. “Under the Commission’s new rules, the outcome of this Application cannot and will not be made public, and all Application material, including the submissions of the government and other participants are being kept secret from the public,” states Ms. Morton. “Commission counsel has directed that I cannot say what the information is, I cannot say whether I have made a report or not, and I cannot say what the position of the Federal and Provincial Governments were [regarding the application],” she states. “This is an inquiry into the fate of wild salmon, and not matters of national security!” she complained.

Gregory McDade, a Vancouver lawyer who is representing Ms. Morton at the inquiry, said undertakings are common in trials, but when the Cohen Commission starts to withhold details about its decisions on applications, he feels it has become too secretive. “I cannot say what the ruling is. I cannot say what the application was,” Mr. McDade said. “There’s a matter of urgent public interest here,” he said. “Nobody I know has ever seen a public inquiry conducted in this way. It seems to me the commission should be making its decisions public.” ...

Related: Death's door
Mark Sircus Natural News USA May 2, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

Before jumping into today's essay here is the latest news: Radioactive levels at Fukushima were about 250 times higher than a month before. TEPCO said the levels of caesium-134 and -137 increased about 250-fold and iodine-131 increased about 12 times compared with one month ago, after the accident had already happened.

The water level in the No. 4 reactor's turbine building rose by 20 centimeters in 10 days. TEPCO has detected 8,100 becquerels of caesium-137 and 7,800 becquerels of caesium-134 per cubic centimeter in the water in the turbine building's basement. The utility company said on Tuesday the 26th of April that the water level in the tunnel of the No. 3 reactor rose by 10 centimeters over three days. ...

Today you have to be a hound dog to sniff up any credible news about what is actually going on at that destroyed nuclear plant. It's very scary how the media has clamped down on most of the news so it seems like multiple nuclear meltdowns are not a big deal. ...

Salt Spring Islander Brendan Edwards writes:

The Japanese Government is admitting much higher releases of material from Fukushima at the same time that Canadian Government is reducing investigation and monitoring of exposure levels, following suit with US administration. Climate and weather data show that we are in the direct path of wind and rain currents which condense and transport radioactive materials (April showers bring more than May flowers!) It is incumbent upon each of us to be aware and take appropriate action.

Army of fake social media friends to promote propaganda
Darlene Storm Computerworld/PCWorld USA February 23, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

It's recently been revealed that the U.S. government contracted HBGary Federal for the development of software which could create multiple fake social media profiles to manipulate and sway public opinion on controversial issues by promoting propaganda. It could also be used as surveillance to find public opinions with points of view the powers-that-be didn't like. It could then potentially have their "fake" people run smear campaigns against those "real" people. ...

So while the U.S. government can talk a good talk, what it does and what it says often doesn't seem to jive. Gasp, I know, it's not a big shocker but sometimes I find that utterly frustrating. The President wanted an Internet Kill Switch, the FBI keeps pushing for backdoors on all-things-Net. What happened to a code of ethics? Does it disappear behind closed doors, dirty deeds done in the dark and used against the American people who are supposed to be free to express themselves?

Related: "Divergent opinions" means a murky future: Canada's Harper gov't has posited the kind of future it would like to see in TV news and punditry, thus plan to lift ban on false news prompts
Salt Spring News February 21, 2011

Five links. From one of those links:

A CRTC proposal that could make it easier to broadcast false or misleading news has prompted confusion and criticism among opposition MPs and consternation in at least one of the unions that represents Canadian journalists. It has also led to allegations of interference by the Prime Minister’s Office and a hastily called investigation by federal politicians, who were caught off guard by the move. ...

Noted: Another runaway general: Army deploys psy-ops on U.S. senators
Michael Hastings Rolling Stone USA February 23, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

The U.S. Army illegally ordered a team of soldiers specializing in "psychological operations" to manipulate visiting American senators into providing more troops and funding for the [AfPak] war, Rolling Stone has learned – and when an officer tried to stop the operation, he was railroaded by military investigators. ...

The orders came from the command of Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, a three-star general in charge of training Afghan troops – the linchpin of U.S. strategy in the war. Over a four-month period last year, a military cell devoted to what is known as "information operations" at Camp Eggers in Kabul was repeatedly pressured to target visiting senators and other VIPs who met with Caldwell. When the unit resisted the order, arguing that it violated U.S. laws prohibiting the use of propaganda against American citizens, it was subjected to a campaign of retaliation.

"My job in psy-ops is to play with people’s heads, to get the enemy to behave the way we want them to behave," says Lt. Colonel Michael Holmes, the leader of the IO unit, who received an official reprimand after bucking orders. "I’m prohibited from doing that to our own people. When you ask me to try to use these skills on senators and congressman, you’re crossing a line." ...

CRTC plan to lift ban on false news prompts political investigation
Gloria Galloway Globe and Mail Canada Last updated February 9, 2011

A CRTC proposal that could make it easier to broadcast false or misleading news has prompted confusion and criticism among opposition MPs and consternation in at least one of the unions that represents Canadian journalists. It has also led to allegations of interference by the Prime Minister’s Office and a hastily called investigation by federal politicians, who were caught off guard by the move. ...

The decision caught many people by surprise. “We’ve looked everywhere to try to find out who’s pushing this, and we can’t find anybody,” said Peter Murdoch, the vice-president of media for the Communication, Energy and Paperworkers Union, which represents more than 20,000 journalists, including those at The Globe and Mail. “It’s totally bizarre. Nobody in the industry has called for it,” Mr. Murdoch said. “Where is the motivation for change that would lower the standards of truth and fairness in broadcast journalism?” NDP MP Charlie Angus noted that the proposed change precedes the start of Sun TV, a network that has been shepherded in large part by Kory Teneycke, the former director of communication to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. “We all know our Prime Minister well enough to say we don’t have to be in the realm of conspiracy theory here,” Mr. Angus said at a news conference on Monday. “We can draw our conclusions and they are pretty clear.” ... “It seems astounding that the CRTC would consider such a move at a time when we see the growing backlash in the United States to the poisoned levels of political discourse in the American media.”

Related: False or misleading news’ only part of TV’s murky future
John Doyle Globe and Mail Canada February 9, 2011

Huge news pours forth in the TV racket – changes at the top at CTV, a new vice-chair of broadcasting appointed to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, and a proposed CRTC regulatory change to ease standards for radio and TV in terms of broadcasting “false or misleading news.” What does it all mean? What does the future hold? In answering, one can only be imprecise. The TV business these days is a vast swamp of fear and loathing, pity and terror, and sports. ...

2. The new vice-chair of broadcasting appointed to the CRTC. That person is already known as “an inexperienced puppet of the government” in some quarters. That would be NDP quarters. The person in question, Tom Pentefountas, “failed on every count” if you examine the official criteria for the job, says NDP heritage critic Charlie Angus. See, Angus and others believe that the government is appointing a friend of the government, not someone with solid experience in broadcasting and/or the regulation of broadcasting. “This appointment stinks,” Angus said Monday, in case you were missing his point.

Heritage Minister James Moore sees the situation differently, as you can imagine. He describes the appointee as “qualified” and “an articulate bilingual gentleman from Quebec.” Oh, and “his education is outstanding.”

What does all this mean, apart from implying that Minister Moore is very droll? The CRTC’s future role is unclear, that’s what it means. The federal government has come to use it as a political football to kick around. It’s useful to this government to paint the CRTC as an anachronism, a mysterious outfit devoted to stopping consumers from watching TV and surfing the Internet for free. The government has undermined the CRTC’s credibility at every turn and has yet to figure out how the CRTC should function in the current ever-changing media world. It doesn’t know what to do with the CRTC, just as nobody knows how the future of broadcasting will pan out. As soon as it does, the government has its man on the inside. ...

Conservatives deny CRTC takeover plan as critics slam 'partisan' hire
Mark Kennedy Postmedia News Canada February 7, 2011

OTTAWA — The Harper government is under fire for trying to take control of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) by making a partisan appointment to the senior ranks of the regulatory agency. But the government brushed off the criticism on Monday and continued with the same pattern by also appointing someone with partisan connections to the board of the CBC/Radio Canada. ... A Montreal lawyer, [Tom] Pentefountas is the former president of the Action Democratique du Quebec (ADQ), a political party with strong ties to the federal [Conservative Party of Canada]. Moreover, said opposition critics, he is a friend of Dimitri Soudas, the prime minister's director of communications. ...

Also Monday, [Heritage Minister James] Moore announced the appointment of Pierre Gingras to the board of the CBC. Gingras was an ADQ member of the Quebec National Assembly in 2007 and 2008 and formerly a mayor of Blainville. Angus said the CBC appointment, coming on the heels of the controversy over the CRTC choice, shows the government has a "complete contempt and disregard for Canadian institutions." "This puts us in the category of being like Berlusconi's Italy," said Angus. "Are we a banana republic or do we have independent bodies that have clear standards of how people are appointed?"

PMO admits it helped pick controversial CRTC VP
Mike De Souza Postmedia News/Montreal Gazette Canada February 15, 201

OTTAWA — The Harper government has confirmed that the Prime Minister's Office was involved directly in the nomination process that led to the controversial appointment of criminal lawyer Tom Pentefountas as vice-president of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, but described it as standard practice for full-time federal appointments. Although Heritage Minister James Moore and the office of Prime Minister Stephen Harper declined to comment directly about what happened, a government official who asked not to be named told Postmedia News that it was typical for members of the Prime Minister's Office as well as its administrative arm, the Privy Council Office, and the minister's office to be part of the screening process. ...

{CPC] senator's social network finds its way into federal posts
Jennifer Ditchburn The Canadian Press/Winnipeg Free Press Canada February 16, 2011

OTTAWA - Conservative Senator Leo Housakos has been in the upper chamber for only two years, but in that time a half-dozen of his friends and former associates have turned up in government posts — including the No. 2 job at the CRTC. The government says all its appointments are approved by the ministers of respective departments, and are based on merit. The opposition isn't buying it. ...

Heritage Minister James Moore said he has never spoken to Housakos about the CRTC or its appointments, nor did Soudas ever indicate to him his preference for the job.

"(Pentefountas) is going to do a great job. He's educated, thoughtful, bilingual, he's a Quebecer replacing a Quebecer, respecting the commitment our government made to ensure we have diverse voices across the country reflected on the CRTC, and he's going to do a fine job," said Moore. Both Housakos and Pentefountas worked within the Action Democratique du Quebec — Pentefountas was party president while Housakos oversaw the financing wing. Pentefountas, who also ran unsuccessfully for a provincial seat, did not return a call about his appointment. Another ADQ associate, former St-Eustache, Que. mayor Claude Carignan, was named to the Senate less than a year after Housakos reached the red chamber himself. ...

Before Masse, Weiner, Katalifos, Tremblay and Carignan received their federal appointments, they were all named on a special VIP guest list for a Conservative fundraiser for which Housakos was a key organizer in the spring of 2009, featuring Harper and host of government ministers. Housakos' office and the Prime Minister's Office referred all questions about the appointments to the departments under which they were announced.

Huffington Post, AOL deal: Why they did it
Dave Cook Christian Science Monitor USA February 7, 2011

At a luxury suite at the Super Bowl, leaders of AOL and The Huffington Post inked a deal that could change the online news game. AOL chief executive officer Tim Armstrong and Huffington Post co-founder and namesake Arianna Huffington agreed Sunday to a deal in which AOL is purchasing Huffington Post for $315 million. As part of the arrangement, Ms. Huffington will become president and editor in chief of the Huffington Post Media Group within AOL, integrating Huffington Post and AOL content. ...

Perhaps the most obvious effect of the deal is that Huffington Post is set to become an even more powerful online news source. Founded in 2005, the site has grown to 25 million visitors a month, and in 2010, it posted its first profit. Under the new arrangement, the two companies will have a combined base of 117 million unique visitors a month, AOL's website said. One draw for that larger audience will be the presence of both Huffington Post content and material that AOL has been producing on its own. This material includes Politics Daily, Moviefone, the tech blogs Engadget and TechCrunch, MapQuest, and its Patch local-news sites in 775 towns in the United States. Ms. Huffington will oversee editorial operations for all the AOL sites.

As Huffington steps into her new role as editor in chief of a larger news organization with more robust content, she is likely to become an even larger figure in US society. For a sense of her presence already on the media and social scene, consider this string of events: Huffington was at a high-level private-equity conference in New York when talks with AOL began; she was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, when Mr. Armstrong made the formal offer for her company; and she signed the deal at the Super Bowl in the Dallas area. ...

Vancouver BC headquartered Adbusters is an almost 90,000 strong global network of "creatives working to change the way information flows, the way corporations wield power, and the way meaning is produced in our society."

Huff & puff it down
Adbusters Culturejammer blog British Columbia Canada February 7, 2011

Socialite Arianna Huffington built a blog-empire on the backs of thousands of citizen journalists. She exploited our idealism and let us labor under the illusion that the Huffington Post was different, independent and leftist. Now she’s cashed in and three thousand indie bloggers find themselves working for a megacorp.

But the Huffington Post is not Arianna’s to sell. It is ours: the lefty writers and readers, environmentalism activists and anti-corporate organizers who flooded the site with 25 million visits a month. So we’re going to take it back. We’ll stop going to her site. And we’ll stop blogging for her too. Then we’ll give birth to an alternative to AOL’s HuffPo by using the #huffpuff hash tag to tell the world about our favorite counter-culture websites and indie blogs.

We are the ones who built the Huffington Post. And now we will be the ones who will huff & puff it down.

With Huffington Post sold to AOL, NaturalNews invites top alternative health authors to join truly independent news network
Mike Adams NaturalNews USA February 8, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

The Huffington Post was sold to AOL for $315 million yesterday, meaning the site, which was once the darling of independent media, is now clearly positioned as institutionalized media. As the editor of NaturalNews, I have, over the last several months, received several concerning emails from credentialed medical writers and natural health authors whose stories were dropped from consideration for publication at Huffington Post. There was a rising sense of frustration long before this sale that seemed to indicate HuffPost was headed in the direction of conventional media. Yesterday's sale to AOL merely confirms this. ...

As it happens, NaturalNews is, just this month, launching a format change that will make NaturalNews.com more like what the Huffington Post used to be: A collection of stories from independent thinkers, grassroots authors and people who challenge the status quo. A site where intelligence takes precedence over conformity, and where authors and writers who question the status quo are welcomed... and even featured! Beginning today, NaturalNews is actively welcoming credentialed writers and op-ed authors who wish to be featured on NaturalNews.com as part of our new format which places more emphasis on featured contributing writers. We especially welcome former Huffington Post writers who want to be part of a truly independent, yet well-established health news site that already reaches millions of readers each month.

We have nothing against the Huffington Post, which will no doubt continue to be a very influential news organization under AOL, but we'd like to offer HuffPost writers who saw their best stories dropped a new opportunity to get greater visibility (and more freedom of speech) at NaturalNews.com. Specifically, we welcome medically credentialed health writers and published authors who are aligned with the principles of holistic healing, nutrition and disease prevention. We also welcome experienced speakers, researchers, thought leaders, grassroots leaders and others who deserve greater recognition at a truly independent alternative media site that's rapidly growing in its audience and its content. ...

Related: Comcast-NBC Universal deal: Can company now crush its rivals?
Gloria Goodale Christian Science Monitor USA January 19, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

Los Angeles - America’s largest cable operator, Comcast, has cleared its final hurdle in its bid to take a 51 percent stake in NBC Universal, with the Federal Communications Commission and the US Department of Justice signing off on the $30 billion deal. As is the case with many a prenuptial between two high-profile entertainment figures, the agreement is full of devilish details for both sides. But this is one contract that will be pored over by more than the standard looky-loos: Since this merger touches both film and television content, as well as Internet and telecommunications-services distribution, it creates a vertically integrated media behemoth. And it’s on a scale that many observers say even the experts don’t quite grasp. ...

Right: Screen capture of part of Al Jazzera English (AJE) coverage of Egypt. The English-language version of the Arab network is making the failures of cheap American cable "news" obvious. The network’s coverage of Egypt's turmoil has been superb. Since launching in 2006, AJE has become one of the world leaders in the coverage of Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Al Jazeera English is available in Canada to Bell TV, Rogers and Vidéotron subscribers. (Here Salt Spring Island, Shaw Communications offers AJE as a "pick and pay" channel for an additional $2.95 a month.) In November 2009 the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) announced that they would include AJE on its digital ‘Lists of Eligible Satellite Services’. The announcement from the CRTC followed a formal application process and a 30-day consultation notice period during which Canadians were allowed to submit letters voicing their opinions of AJE. The submission process demonstrated an overwhelming demand for the channel with 98% of the submissions, approximately 2,800 letters and emails, being positive.

Al Jazeera's Egypt coverage embarrasses U.S. cable news channels
Alex Pareene Salon.com, War Room blog USA January 28, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

There is a curfew in effect in Egypt, but thousands of protesters remain in the streets in Cairo, Suez, Alexandria and across the rest of the country. President Hosni Mubarak is expected to speak soon. Police might've fired tear gas at praying demonstrators. And Fox reported on how ICE arrested some immigrant sex offenders in Virginia.

Fox, CNN and MSNBC are all acquitting themselves better than they did the day Tunisia's government collapsed. All of them have reporters in Cairo, and are airing footage of the demonstrations on the streets. But none of them are reporting on the situation as compellingly as Al Jazeera English, which has reporters across the country. And if you're in the United States, you can probably only see Al Jazeera English online. If you're watching Al Jazeera, you're seeing uninterrupted live video of the demonstrations, along with reporting from people actually on the scene, and not "analysis" from people in a studio. The cops were threatening to knock down the door of one of its reporters minutes ago. Fox has moved on to anchor babies. CNN reports that the ruling party building is on fire, but Al Jazeera is showing the fire live.

CNN, to its credit, is using coverage from the grown-ups at CNN International. MSNBC had Dan Senor (council on foreign relations) reporting from Davos. Yes, liberal MSNBC was getting live analysis from a neoconservative former spokesperson for the occupying U.S. government in Iraq. Fox just had former U.N. Ambassador and ultra-hawk John Bolton on to warn us about the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Jazeera had an opposition party leader on the phone.

All three of the major U.S. cable news networks are prefacing breaking news on their chyrons with the words "Al-Jazeera reports." Al Jazeera was criticized for being reluctant to cover the Egyptian protests as zealously as it covered Tunisia -- and I can't speak to that, because I obviously can't watch the Arab-language version of the channel -- but its English-language network is, today, mandatory viewing for anyone interested in the world-changing events currently happening in Egypt. The American networks barely qualify as an interesting supplement. ...

Al Jazeera English blacked out across most of U.S.
Ryan Grim Huffington Post USA January 30, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

WASHINGTON - Canadian television viewers looking for the most thorough and in-depth coverage of the uprising in Egypt have the option of tuning into Al Jazeera English, whose on-the-ground coverage of the turmoil is unmatched by any other outlet. American viewers, meanwhile, have little choice but to wait until one of the U.S. cable-company-approved networks broadcasts footage from AJE, which the company makes publicly available. What they can't do is watch the network directly.

Other than in a handful of pockets across the U.S. - including Ohio, Vermont and Washington, D.C. - cable carriers do not give viewers the choice of watching Al Jazeera. That corporate censorship comes as American diplomats harshly criticize the Egyptian government for blocking Internet communication inside the country and as Egypt attempts to block Al Jazeera from broadcasting.

The result of the Al Jazeera English blackout in the United States has been a surge in traffic to the media outlet's website, where footage can be seen streaming live. The last 24 hours have seen a two-and-a-half thousand percent increase in web traffic, Tony Burman, head of North American strategies for Al Jazeera English, told HuffPost. Sixty percent of that traffic, he said, has come from the United States. Al Jazeera English launched in the fall of 2006, opening a large bureau on K Street in downtown Washington, but has made little progress in persuading cable companies to offer the channel to its customers. The objections from the cable companies have come for both political and commercial reasons, said Burman....

Al Jazeera English leads Egypt coverage, but most Americans still can’t watch it
Alex Weprin TVNewser USA January 31, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

While some of the American TV networks are receiving praise for their coverage of the situation in Egypt (ABC News and CNN come to mind) there is little doubt that the one network receiving the most praise from media critics is Al Jazeera English.

Even after the Egyptian government revoked its broadcast license, the network continued to broadcast to the rest of the world. This morning six Al Jazeera reporters were detained by the military. They have since been released, but their equipment has been confiscated.

While Al Jazeera English is available via an online stream here in the U.S., it is only available on cable TV through a few small cable providers in places like Vermont and Washington DC. Journalism professor Jeff Jarvis has started a campaign called “We Want Our Al Jazeera English Now,” but will the big guys like Comcast or Time Warner Cable take that cue? Probably not. ...

Jeff Jarvis is an American journalist. He is the former television critic for TV Guide and People magazine, creator of Entertainment Weekly, Sunday editor and associate publisher of the New York Daily News, and a columnist on the San Francisco Examiner. He wants his MTV AJE and he wants it now.

We want our Al Jazeera English NOW
Jeff Jarvis Huffington Post USA January 30, 2011

What the Gulf War was to CNN, the people's revolutions of the Middle East are to Al Jazeera English. But in the U.S., in a sad vestige of the era of Freedom Fries, hardly anyone can watch the channel on cable TV.

Cable companies: Add Al Jazeera English NOW! It is downright un-American to still refuse to carry it. Vital, world-changing news is occurring in the Middle East and no one -- not the xenophobic or celebrity-obsessed or cut-to-the-bone American media -- can bring the perspective, insight, and on-the-scene reporting Al Jazeera English can.

Yes, we can watch AJE on the internet. But as much of an internet triumphalist as I am, internet streaming is not going to have the same impact--political and education impact--that putting AJE on the cable dial would have. I can watch AJE in the Zurich hotel room where I am now; I want to be able to watch it on my couch at home. So call your cable company. Tweet your demand (#WeWantOurAJE). Write a song and make a video about it. We want our Al Jazeera English.

Related: AJE often presents unfiltered reports from the 'Arab Street'. James Zogby is President of the Arab American Institute and the author of Arab Voices: What They Are Saying to Us, and Why it Matters (Palgrave Macmillan, October 2010). Zogby argues in his book that to succeed in the Middle East, the United States needs to listen more to actual Arab voices, and not let preconceived myths about the Muslim world dictate policy. He writes below regarding the present unrest and American policy-makers reactions: "I suspect this celebration of the "Arab street" is born more of an anti-Arab animus, than of a real commitment to Arab democracy. ... Evidence that this support for revolution is based more on what these folks don't know mixed in with a dash [of] anti-Arab sentiment can be seen in how they deal with the democratically elected Arab leaders or governing groups they do know. There is no cheering, for example, from Congress or the Washington Post editorial pages for the new Hizbullah-backed government in Lebanon, the Hamas-led Gaza Strip or the emergent Sadrist bloc currently at the center of the Iraqi government. In the case of Lebanon and Gaza there is a taboo placed on any engagement with these groups and calls to suspend all American assistance programs -- all of which appears to undercut the professed commitment to democracy."

Limited options in the face of turmoil
James Zogby Huffington Post USA January 30, 2011

Across the Middle East, dramatic events have been unfolding in rapid-fire succession, confounding U.S. policy makers. First, Tunisia erupted in mass protest leading to the abdication of that country's president and the dissolution of its ruling party. While developments there were fermenting and still unresolved, attention was diverted to al Jazeera's much hyped release of leaked notes recording conversations between Palestinian negotiators and their American and Israeli counterparts. As revelations go, the "Palestine Papers," as they were marketed, didn't amount to much. However, as an effectively orchestrated and well-timed political attack designed for maximum impact, they proved quite devastating. That manufactured story was all the rage for a few days last week, only to be eclipsed by the upheavals in Egypt which upended most everything else in the news. Dramatic scenes of mass mobilizations calling on President Mubarak to step down, clashes with riot police, and burning government buildings, proved too enticing to the world's media. As a result, other major unfolding stories across the region were either pushed to back page coverage or completely off the page. Thus during the past few days there has been scant mention of: the inauguration of a new Hizbullah-backed government in Lebanon, raising fears of new sectarian tensions; anti-government demonstrations across Yemen and Jordan challenging the rule of two other U.S. allies; and a still unsettled situation in Iraq with the formation of a "new" government being compromised by continued violence and sectarian and factional disputes.

The pace, the extent, and the consequences of all these events have confronted U.S. policy makers with a difficult set of challenges. While America remains, at least rhetorically, committed to human rights and political freedom, the imperative to protect national security interests often trumps other concerns. This is especially problematic in the current unrest since all of the countries boiling over are led by governments that have been close allies of successive U.S. administrations or are viewed as important to regional stability or broader national security objectives. As a result, in almost every instance, the U.S. has very little leverage (or even contact) with the opposition groups in question and/or little ability to impact the outcome of the ferment. Furthermore, at this point, with the exception of Lebanon and Palestine, much of the dissent rocking the region has nothing to do with the U.S. Despite the fact that we are closely identified with the governments in Egypt, Jordan, and Yemen, protesters in those countries have, for the time being, ignored the U.S., since they have bigger fish to fry.

This has complicated the policy-makers' dilemma. There is concern that too much of an embrace of the protesting movements would appear unseemly or even risk being rejected. On the other hand, it is impossible and equally unseemly to ignore the unrest, the social, economic and political conditions that created it, and the horrible repression with which it was met. At the same time, about all that full throated support for the protests would do is pull the plug on regional allies -- opening the door to the unknown. ...

Keith Olbermann's abrupt departure from "Countdown," which he announced on Friday, came as a shock to many fans. Photo: MSNBC, via Associated Press. MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines insisted Kieth Olbermann's exit had nothing to do with the acquisition of parent company NBC Universal by Comcast, which received regulatory approval last Tuesday. Heh! The NYT reports:In a New Yorker interview, Olbernann's boss, Phil Griffin of MSNBC recalled those early appearances: “First day he was in TV, I knew right away that Keith had something that I’d never seen. He was made for this. I mean, the guy is crazy, but he is made for this.” (In the same interview, Mr. Olbermann could not help commenting: “Phil thinks he’s my boss.”)


Keith Olbermann fired? MSNBC relationship was 'failing for a long time'
David Brauder Huffington Post USA January 22, 2011

NEW YORK — Keith Olbermann's exit from MSNBC appeared abrupt to viewers of his show, but the talk-show host and his network were involved "in a relationship that's been failing for a long time," an NBC Universal executive said Saturday.

Olbermann's announcement at the end of Friday's "Countdown" that it would be his last show quiets, at least for the moment, the most dominant liberal voice in a cable-television world where opinionated talk has been the most bankable trend over the past several years. As Olbermann read from a James Thurber short story during a three-minute exit statement Friday night, MSNBC simultaneously e-mailed a statement to reporters that the network and host "have ended their contract." Neither indicated a reason nor addressed whether Olbermann quit or was fired. ... Olbermann and his manager did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Saturday. One clue Olbermann offered in his goodbye statement was that he'd "been told" that Friday was his last show. ...

"He did more than anybody to establish the credibility of progressive views through market-driven success," said David Brock, founder and CEO of the left-wing media watchdog Media Matters for America. Olbermann's show was also an incubator for left-wing talent on the air, he said. Two-thirds of MSNBC's prime-time lineup, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell, got their own shows after successfully subbing for Olbermann. His show also gave platforms to bloggers like Josh Marshall and Markos Moulitsas, as well as his own organization and the Center for American Progress, Brock said. "Countdown" took off at a time when there was a large imbalance toward conservatives in radio and television political talk, Brock said. "Keith led the way in correcting that," he said. "Now we're back to some degree of the balance going the other way." ...

Phil Griffin, MSNBC's chief executive, expressed confidence in his new lineup Saturday while declining to talk about what happened with Olbermann. "They're tested," he said. "We didn't have to bring anyone here who is new. We brought in people we know and who will succeed and that's why we're confident going forward." Anyone who expects the volume of political rhetoric on MSNBC will go down will be "rudely surprised" in about a week, said Brent Bozell, founder of the conservative watchdog Media Research Center. O'Donnell "is every bit as mean-spirited (as Olbermann), but not as creative," Bozell said. "I don't think the philosophy of MSNBC will change one iota." While he disagreed with most everything Olbermann said, "he had probably the best-produced show on television," Bozell said. That's the danger for MSNBC and liberals – Olbermann may be replaced by someone who has the same viewpoints, but not necessarily with a show people are as eager to watch. "I'm not in the slightest bit surprised" by Olbermann's exit, Bozell said. "I've been expecting this to happen for a long time. But I was expecting a more spectacular blow-up." ...

A tribute to Olbermann: Why he is different from the pundits at Fox News
Mitchell Bard Huffington Post USA January 23, 2011

Visit this page for its embedded links.

Black and white is easy; nuance is hard. Which is why it's much easier to just lump media outlets and personalities into simple boxes: left v. right, or partisan v. objective, for example. So if you want to play that game, it's easy to dismiss Keith Olbermann, who broadcast his final episode of Countdown on MSNBC Friday. It's simple to dash off a hack piece (like this one in the Daily Beast, which revealed its simple-minded bona fides by invoking the right's favorite jab at Olbermann: he used to work in -- gasp! -- sports) that lumps Olbermann in with Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, as if they all do the same thing just because they are all loud and aggressive. I know nuance is less popular, but I feel compelled to try and give Olbermann his due.

An analysis of how MSNBC (which uses a traditional journalistic approach to report facts, but then, ditching objectivity, critically assesses how the facts compare with the progressive take on issues) differs from Fox News (essentially a right-wing propaganda operation pretending to practice journalism, with no allegiance to facts) is a book-length endeavor and beyond the scope of a blog piece. But Olbermann's approach reflects the difference between the two networks. Anyone charging that Olbermann's show was equivalent to Beck's clearly hasn't watched either of them. Olbermann wasn't objective, but he was honest about it, not disingenuously claiming to be "fair and balanced." But his shows were well-researched and relied on facts to make his progressive points. To be sure, Olbermann used inflammatory language, and he wasn't always as respectful as some thought he should be. But when he railed about something, he relied on quotes, polls, statistics and history (unlike the concocted charges offered by Beck as facts) to make his points. ...

Olbermann split came after years of tension
Bill Carter and Brian Stelter New York Times USA January 23, 2011

... Many people inside the television industry are astonished that a cable network’s highest-rated host, whose forceful personality and liberal advocacy had lifted MSNBC from irrelevance to competitiveness and profitability, would be ushered out the door with no fanfare, no promoted farewell show and only a perfunctory thanks for his efforts. But underlying the decision, which one executive involved said was not a termination but a “negotiated separation,” were years of behind-the-scenes tension, conflicts and near terminations. ...

Mr. Olbermann popped up on MSNBC for the first time in 1998, hosting a news show that evolved, against his wishes, into a nightly examination of the Clinton sex scandal. He left and joined the Fox Sports Network. That stint ended in acrimony as well. Rupert Murdoch, head of the News Corporation, which ran the sports network, later said, “I fired him; he’s crazy.” He joined MSNBC in 2003 as a fill-in host. Less than two months later, Mr. Olbermann won the job full time. He transformed the show into “Countdown,” and he — and MSNBC — were off and running. He managed to expand his audience steadily. Starting from a base of a couple hundred thousand viewers, he jumped more than 50 percent from 2006 to 2007, reaching 726,000. From there he built the show until it surpassed one million viewers a night, still well behind Fox News but ahead of CNN. ...

...

Oh, sing
Little Mocking Bird
Sing your song

Well, he sang and sang
His voice was heard
His tune was carried
By every bird

...

That's how a song was born

Excerpted from "The Mocking Bird" a popular song first recorded by the Four Lads, April 16, 1952 (reaching #23 on the Billboard chart that year). The Four Lads were a Canadian male singing quartet which had great international success in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. They had been 'discovered' by the legendary Columbia Records producer, Mitch Miller. Miller was one of the most influential figures in American popular music during the 1950s and early 1960s, both as the head of Artists and Repertoire at Columbia Records and as a best-selling recording artist with an NBC television series, "Sing Along with Mitch".

OSS veteran Frank Wisner ran most of the early peacetime covert operations as head of the Office of Policy Coordination. Although funded by the CIA, OPC wasn't integrated into the CIA's Directorate of Plans until 1952, under OSS veteran Allen Dulles. Both Wisner and Dulles were enthusiastic about covert operations. By mid-1953 the department was operating with 7,200 personnel and 74 percent of the CIA's total budget. Wisner created the first "information superhighway." But this was the age of vacuum tubes, not computers, so he called it his "Mighty Wurlitzer." The CIA's global network funded the Italian elections in 1948, sent paramilitary teams into Albania, trained Nationalist Chinese on Taiwan, and pumped money into the Congress for Cultural Freedom, the National Student Association, and the Center for International Studies at MIT. Key leaders and labor unions in western Europe received subsidies, and Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty were launched. The Wurlitzer, an organ designed for film productions, could imitate sounds such as rain, thunder, or an auto horn. Wisner and Dulles were at the keyboard, directing history. - Daniel Brandt, Journalism and the CIA: The Mighty Wurlitzer, 1997

Many journalists and some CIA officials dispute the Agency's claim that it has been scrupulous in respecting the editorial integrity of American publications and broadcast outlets. - Carl Bernstein, 1977

Today, barely any story reaches the media that hasn’t been artfully packaged.... - David Guyatt (no date but post 2006). Following a twenty eight year career in investment banking based in the City of London, Guyatt now pursues a career writing in a variety of mediums as well as researching and producing factual material on a wide range of associated subjects.

The CIA and the media: How Americas most powerful news media worked hand in glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and why the Church Committee covered it up
Carl Berstein Carl Bernstein USA

After leaving The Washington Post in 1977, Carl Bernstein spent six months looking at the relationship of the CIA and the press during the Cold War years. His 25,000-word cover story, published in Rolling Stone on October 20, 1977, is reprinted below.

In 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America’s leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.

Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters. Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go‑betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without‑portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring‑do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full‑time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations. The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception for the following principal reasons: ...

Subverting journalism: Reporters and the CIA
Kate Houghton Committee to Protect Journalists USA 1996

American journalists have long been bitterly opposed to the recruitment of reporters by U.S. intelligence agencies, and the fraudulent use of journalism credentials by intelligence operatives. Since the mid-1970s, journalists and others-including some of the nation's top foreign policy-makers-believed that the CIA could no longer recruit reporters as spies. They shared a widespread but inaccurate assumption that the U.S. government had banned such objectionable practices as part of a package of reforms revamping codes of conduct for covert intelligence operations adopted in response to recommendations of the 1976 Church Committee report. In its investigation of U.S. foreign and military intelligence operations, the committee-the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, chaired by Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho)-found that more than 50 American journalists had worked clandestinely as CIA agents during the Cold War era. The committee's final report strongly condemned this practice and unequivocally called on the intelligence community to "permit American journalists and news organizations to pursue their work without jeopardizing their credibility in the eyes of the world through covert use of them."

In fact, during the subsequent two decades, the CIA merely curtailed the practice. The issue was spotlighted anew in the spring of 1996 by the release of a Council on Foreign Relations task force report on U.S. intelligence-gathering policies and practices-which in turn inadvertently prompted the passage of the first U.S. law explicitly permitting the practice. ... Looking beyond the immediate threats to the lives of journalists, the threat this law poses to the integrity of journalism is profound. In the United States, the First Amendment protects the rights of the press to practice its craft without fear or favor from the government. If American journalists become agents of government rather than its critics, as they already are in so many countries, the practice will have a corrosive effect on our democracy. "Whatever gains may be justified and whatever grounds may be used to justify intelligence work by the press, in whatever form it may take, it seems to me that these gains must still be assessed in the context of what they do to the press as an institution in a free society," Zuckerman testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee. "To be the instrument of government rather than a constitutional check on government would undermine the good that independent journalism does for an open society."

The CIA and journalism
SourceWatch USA Last modified January 23, 2010

Links to a book, online resources and a selection of articles, Congressional committee testimony and essays.

Operation Mockingbird
Spartacus Educational UK n.d.

Spartacus Educational is a British online encyclopedia focusing on historical topics. Articles are geared toward students. Visit this page for its embedded links.

In 1948 Frank Wisner was appointed director of the Office of Special Projects. Soon afterwards it was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the espionage and counter-intelligence branch of the Central Intelligence Agency. Wisner was told to create an organization that concentrated on "propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world." Later that year Wisner established Mockingbird, a program to influence the domestic American media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham (Washington Post) to run the project within the industry. Graham himself recruited others who had worked for military intelligence during the war. This included James Truitt, Russell Wiggins, Phil Geyelin, John Hayes and Alan Barth. Others like Stewart Alsop, Joseph Alsop and James Reston, were recruited from within the Georgetown Set. According to Deborah Davis (Katharine the Great): "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles." In 1951 Allen W. Dulles persuaded Cord Meyer to join the CIA. However, there is evidence that he was recruited several years earlier and had been spying on the liberal organizations he had been a member of in the later 1940s. According to Deborah Davis, Meyer became Mockingbird's "principal operative".

One of the most important journalists under the control of Operation Mockingbird was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), C. D. Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (Miami News), Herb Gold (Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times). According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman) these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner. The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work. After 1953 the network was overseen by Allen W. Dulles, director of the Central Intelligence Agency. By this time Operation Mockingbird had a major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. These organizations were run by people with well-known right-wing views such as William Paley (CBS), Henry Luce (Time Magazine and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Alfred Friendly (managing editor of the Washington Post), Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor).

The Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) was funded by siphoning of funds intended for the Marshall Plan. Some of this money was used to bribe journalists and publishers. Frank Wisner was constantly looked for ways to help convince the public of the dangers of communism. In 1954 Wisner arranged for the funding the Hollywood production of Animal Farm, the animated allegory based on the book written by George Orwell. According to Alex Constantine (Mockingbird: The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA), in the 1950s, "some 3,000 salaried and contract CIA employees were eventually engaged in propaganda efforts". Wisner was also able to restrict newspapers from reporting about certain events. For example, the CIA plots to overthrow the governments of Iran and Guatemala. ...

Was the assassination planned in 1960? Johnson as Vice President
John Simkin Educational Forum UK February 19, 2006

... Despite this dirty tricks campaign, Johnson was unable to stop Kennedy being nominated. Johnson was obviously upset by this result but comforted himself with the fact that as Majority leader, he remained the second most powerful man in American politics. The great surprise is that Johnson was willing to sacrifice this power in order to become Kennedy’s running-mate. In his book, The Making of the President, Theodore H. White, expresses shock at both Kennedy’s decision to offer Johnson’s the post, and his eventual acceptance of what appeared to be a demotion. White adds that this mystery will only be solved by “tomorrow’s historians”. (7) The idea that Johnson should be Kennedy’s running-mate was first suggested by Philip Graham of the Washington Post. Graham, the key figure in the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird, had been campaigning strongly for Johnson to get the nomination. However, when Graham arrived at the Democratic Party Convention in Los Angeles on 8th July, Johnson told him that Kennedy would win by a landslide. Graham then had a meeting with Robert Kennedy and was finally convinced that Johnson had indeed lost his race to be the presidential candidate. According to Katharine Graham, her husband and Joe Alsop, arranged a meeting with John Kennedy on 11th July. Alsop started the conversation with the following comment: “We’ve come to talk to you about the vice-presidency. Something may happen to you, and Symington is far too shallow a puddle for the United States to dive into.” Graham then explained the advantages that Johnson would “add to the ticket”. What is more, it would remove Johnson as leader of the Senate. (8) ... After the meeting with Graham and Alsop, Kennedy told his aide, Kenneth P. O’Donnell, that it made sense to have Johnson on the ticket but he knew that he would never accept the position as it would mean he would lose his powerful position in the Senate. Kennedy assured O’Donnell that Stuart Symington, “who was acceptable to both the labor leaders and the Southerners” would be his running-mate. (11)

The mystery that has to be explained is not that Johnson was offered the post, but that he accepted it. Bobby Baker has provided an interesting account of the discussions that went on about the possibility of Johnson becoming Kennedy’s running-mate. Baker describes how Johnson told him that Kennedy was coming to see him at his hotel. John Connally was of the opinion that Kennedy would offer him the job. Johnson asked Baker what he should do. Baker replied: “It’s no disgrace to hold the second highest office in the land and be one heartbeat away from the presidency.” Connally added that Johnson would be able to deliver Texas for Kennedy. At this stage Johnson appeared to be against the idea. He told Baker that he would have “trouble with some of my Texas friends if I decide to run.” Sam Rayburn was one of these “Texas friends” who was strongly opposed to the suggestion that Johnson should become Kennedy’s running-mate. He quoted another Texan, John Nance Garner, who held the post under Franklin D. Roosevelt, as saying: “The office ain’t worth a pitcher of warm spit.” However, according to Baker, John Connally and Phil Graham “worked on” Rayburn until he “came round” to the idea that Johnson should become Kennedy’s running-mate. ...

What we do know is that Kennedy’s close political advisers were shocked when Johnson accepted the post. They, like Kennedy himself, expected him to reject the offer. Why would Johnson give up his position as the second most powerful position in the country? Kenneth P. O’ Donnell was highly suspicious of Johnson’s motives. When he mentioned this to Kennedy he replied: “I’m forty-three years old, and I’m the healthiest candidate for President in the United States. You’ve traveled with me enough to know that. I’m not going to die in office. So the Vice-Presidency doesn’t mean anything. I’m thinking of something else, the leadership in the Senate. If we win, it will be by a small margin and I won’t be able to live with Lyndon Johnson as the leader of a small majority in the Senate.” (15) The problem with this argument is that Johnson was also aware that as Vice President he would lose his political power. This is why Kennedy told his aides that Johnson would turn the offer down. Yet there is evidence that Johnson was desperate to become Kennedy’s running-mate. One of Kennedy’s most important advisers, Hyman Raskin, claims that Kennedy had a meeting with Johnson and Rayburn early on the morning after his nomination. According to all other sources, at this time, these two men were strongly opposed to the idea of Johnson becoming Kennedy’s running-mate. However, Kennedy told Raskin a different story. Johnson was very keen to join the ticket and “made an offer he could not refuse”. Raskin took this to mean that Kennedy was blackmailed into offering Johnson the post. (16) This view is supported by another of Kennedy’s close advisers. Pierre Salinger was opposed to the idea of Johnson being Kennedy’s running-mate. He believed that the decision would lose more votes than it would gain. Salinger believed that Kennedy would lose the support of blacks and trade unionists if Johnson became the vice-presidential candidate. Although Johnson would deliver Texas his place on the ticket would mean Kennedy would lose California. A few days after the decision had been made, Salinger asked Kennedy why? He replied, "The whole story will never be known. And it's just as well that it won't be." Salinger also got the impression that Kennedy had been blackmailed into accepting Johnson. (17)

Kennedy must have been very concerned about this development. Why would Johnson blackmail him into accepting a post that had less power than the one that he already had? It only made sense if Johnson was going to continue using this strategy as vice president. Maybe this was only the first of many threats of blackmail. Would Johnson use his position to force Kennedy to appoint his friends such as John Connally and Fred Korth to important positions in his administration? Kennedy must also have considered another possibility. Did Johnson plan to replace him as president? This seems to have been on Kennedy’s mind when he told Kenneth O’Donnell that he did not intend to die in office. Given these events, it is possible that the assassination of John F. Kennedy was considered as early as 1960. If so, it is important to look closely at those people who played important roles in obtaining for Johnson the post of vice president.

Subverting the media
David Guyatt DeepBlackLies UK n.d.

In discussing the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Dan Rather, the well-loved anchorman for CBS Television, described the now famous Zapruder film that captured footage of the shot which killed President John F. Kennedy. The movie, taken by amateur cameraman, Abraham Zapruder, was quickly snapped-up by Life magazine for $250,000.00. Although Life published still frames of the movie, the 18 second film was kept under lock and key – not to be seen by Americans until 1975. But Rather’s remarks were misleading. He told his viewers that the film showed JFK falling forward – confirming the official view that Kennedy had been shot from behind. However, the film clearly showed Kennedy lurching violently backwards, evidence of a frontal shot. To add to the confusion, the Warren Commission report printed two frames of the film in reverse – again implying a rear shot - an accident the FBI typified as a “printing error.” Meanwhile, still pictures lifted from the Zapruder film were also published by Life magazine. Remarkably, they too were published in reverse order, thereby creating the impression that the President had been shot from behind by lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald. Until the film was shown to Americans in its entirity, no one was the wiser. Following the broadcast in 1975, a massive controversy followed giving rise to ongoing allegations of conspiracy.

The Zapruder film clearly showed President Kennedy had also been shot from the front. The result immeasurably strengthened the charge - that had been bubbling in the background – that the President had been assassinated as a result of a well orchestrated conspiracy, and that this was covered-up to protect the guilty, who many now believe involved senior figures in the CIA and US military. Not least it was pointed out that Henry Luce, the founder of Life magazine was a close personal friend of Allen Dulles, the Director of the CIA. Moreover, the individual who purchased the Zapruder film for Life magazine was C.J. Jackson, formerly a “psychological warfare” consultant to the President. Inevitably, these events were to lead to accusations that the media were culpable of the worst form of toadying and propaganda. This, in turn raised serious questions about the role and integrity of the mass media. Some years later, Washington Post reporter, Carl Bernstein – who came to fame with his colleague Bob Woodward, for their expose of the Nixon administration’s illegal re-election campaign activities, known as “Watergate” – dropped a media bombshell on an unsuspecting America.

In an October 1977, article published by Rolling Stone magazine, Bernstein reported that more than 400 American journalists worked for the CIA. Bernstein went on to reveal that this cozy arrangement had covered the preceding 25 years. Sources told Bernstein that the New York Times, America’s most respected newspaper at the time, was one of the CIA’s closest media collaborators. Seeking to spread the blame, the New York Times published an article in December 1977, revealing that “more than eight hundred news and public information organisations and individuals,” had participated in the CIA’s covert subversion of the media. “One journalist is worth twenty agents,” a high-level source told Bernstein. Spies were trained as journalists and then later infiltrated – often with the publishers consent - into the most prestigious media outlets in America, including the New York Times and Time Magazine. Likewise, numerous reputable journalists underwent training in various aspects of “spook-craft” by the CIA. This included techniques as varied as secret writing, surveillance and other spy crafts. ...

Attention! Be sure to switch on your B-S Detector. Make sure, however, you set the alarm to "low." OK? OK. Now you're ready to approach what passes for 'THE NEWS'. Wait! Just before you go, perhaps peruse the following commentaries.

Why people lie
h2g2 BBC UK May 9, 2003

... Lies. We hear them everywhere. Be it from the mouth of a politician glossing over the facts or a desperate student trying to cover up for his night of hedonism and disregard for homework, lies are being told all over the place by just about everybody you can name. A lie is an untruth, a deviation, big or small, from what is known to be real. It is a false statement deliberately presented as being true, thus misrepresenting a situation or giving a totally wrong impression about something. ... In most situations, we lie for one reason or another. It may be to get out of trouble, to gain an unfair advantage over somebody, to earn respect from others. Whatever the reason, good or bad, it can be justified.

But what about compulsive lying? There are those who are compulsive liars, who are compelled to tell lies even when it would do them no good, or when the truth would serve them better. These are people who say they'd bought a certain item from Shop X when in fact they'd obtained them from Shop Y; people who would say that they had been to a certain place even when they have not. How does it profit these people to lie? Paul Ekman, a psychiatry professor from the University of California, San Francisco, attributes this to 'duping delight'. People who tell such lies do so not to get out of trouble, but for fun. For them, lying is like a drug that provides an adrenalin surge or a 'kick' sensation, and the feeling of being able to control the person they are lying to. However, there are individuals who seem to lie automatically without the intention to deceive. Jerald Jellison, a psychology professor at the University of Southern California, suggests that this may be due to momentum. A person who gets away with his first lie may be carried by the momentum of how easy it is to slip a lie past people. The second time around, it gets easier to repeat the lie with embellishments. The more you get away with it, the more you lie. And before you know it, lying has become second nature. ...

And what of those that have been deceived? Jolly good for those who see through the lie. However, countless others will fall for it, hook, line and sinker. This is not necessarily because they are unable to think for themselves, but because they may feel that there should not be a need to question the person's integrity, especially if he is a person of power. Status can sway the people. And in some cases, when the liar is exposed, it is not he who the people are angry with - it is the person who exposed him. This frequently happens to BG Burkett, a Dallas stockbroker and Vietnam veteran who exposes phoney war stories. Many feel that he has deprived them of a good story and a hero - and has cast a shadow of doubt over other people's war exploits. In extreme situations, lies can also create turmoil, political upheaval, even war as people of one country are turned against the people of another because wildly inaccurate information has been propagated and their feelings have been stirred. The most tragic hazard of lying, however, is that too often a person who repeatedly tells a certain lie will end up believing it himself. It may start out as an attempt to impress or to get sympathy, but as the lying goes on, the person himself may lose track of reality, until at the end he can no longer differentiate between reality and the fiction he has created. ...

Switch on your B-S detector
Justin Raimondo Antiwar.com USA May 28, 2010

Visit this page for its embedded links.

When people ask me the "what do you do?" question in casual conversation, and I answer "I write a column on foreign affairs," my interlocutor is invariably impressed: wow, you mean you write about all that really heavy, important stuff, the sort of stuff that’s Greek to us everyday ordinary types? That’s great! Well, actually, it isn’t all that great, or, rather it’s not as great as they might imagine, because, you see, all too often I’m dealing with subject matter that’s light as a feather, intellectually – and also, essentially, bullsh*t. Due to the fact that a lot of what I write about concerns the pronouncements of public officials, whose ability to generate b-s is unrivaled. ...

Oh sure, there are stylistic and strategic differences between Republican and Democratic administrations: the former insist, at least in theory, [.pdf] on going it alone, while the latter prefer to "partner" with their European social democratic friends. The right wing, or radical caucus, of the War Party is stylistically Napoleonic, thick with grandiloquent phrases like "global democratic revolution," while the "left" partisans of the same murderous policy are notable for their sanctimony, invoking "humanitarian" goals as cover for brazen imperialism. However, both camps share certain ideologies and themes which vividly illustrate the old saw that "politics stops at the water’s edge." And both employ the same methodology of deception in their mutual quest to put one over on the American people and drag us into their world-planning, empire-building schemes — in the name of "national security." As propaganda, the Obama-ite national security canon isn’t all that convincing. This CNN story reports a lot of skepticism from the foreign policy community, and with good reason. As CNN put it,

"The report says the US has been hardened by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that in future the emphasis will be on diplomacy, with war as a last resort. ‘Our long-term security will not come from our ability to instill fear in other peoples but through our capacity to speak to their hopes,’ it says."

This from a government that is currently fighting two and a half wars – in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan – and is threatening to launch a third, against Iran. This from a regime that is covertly sending out operatives to Iranian Baluchistan, Somalia, and god knows where else to wage covert wars of assassination, repression, and terror. As my old friend and mentor Murray Rothbard used to say: Are we to be spared nothing? ...

Lies that Stephen Harper told us
Dawg's Blog Ontario Canada September 14, 2008

Visit this page for its embedded links.

... The man has likely never felt genuine compassion in his life. He doesn't have it in him. But some folks are bound to be taken in. That's what the art and science of image-making is all about. The reality is, of course, that Harper is a micromanaging, intolerant bully and control freak, nasty, anti-intellectual and contemptuous of the arts, a man for whom government is a one-man show and for whom opposition is treason. But his flacks redefine those harsh realities thus: Harper, they say, is a real leader, a take-charge guy, a man who can face down the leftist media, a fierce Canadian patriot. ... The Harper image is all silk purse, the Harper reality is a sow's ear that wouldn't pass muster even at the neutered CFIA [Canadian Food Inspection Agency]. The question is: how many voters who have been put off by Harper's hard-right radicalism will be lulled and gulled by this campaign conservatism with a human face?

The dog ate my homework and other justifications
Norman Farrell Northern Insights British Columbia Canada May 26, 2010

... USC Prof. Jerald Jellison calculates that today, ordinary people tell 200 lies a day, including white lies and false excuses. Jellison says that once people learn how easy it is to lie, they are more willing to repeat, even with embellishments. Soon, lying becomes second nature. Harvard Philosopher Sissela Bok says casual lying has become entrenched and is now an accepted part of many professions, including law, medicine and journalism. Bok also argues that lying by the government has begun to corrupt politics. She says that political lies are rarely justifiable and exceptions should themselves be openly debated. "Otherwise government leaders will have free rein to manipulate and distort the facts." These academic views surprise no thoughtful person. In British Columbia, it is apparent that Gordon Campbell and his associates, after tasting electoral failure in 1996, resolved that truthfulness was an impediment to power. ...

Now click on over to BC Mary's The Legislature Raids (which we hope you do every day, regardless). She has a post today (May 28), "Railgate writedown. It's the passengers, stupid!" and a post from yesterday (May 27) "The BC Rail scandal 'conspiracy theory'" that are germane. In the latter Robin Mathews writes:

... Conspiracy Theorists, of course – we all know – are “theorists”. They try to find explanations for events that lack coherent and rational explanation. They are very often described as “freaks” and “nut cases” and people with “feverish imaginations”. They are described in that way for two reasons. The first reason is because they are frequently “freaks” and “nut cases” and people with “feverish imaginations”. The second reason is because … they aren’t people of that kind … but they are on to something that suggests corrupt links among forces that don’t want corrupt links to be seen. So they have to be called “freaks” and “nut cases” to invalidate their theories. The Mainstream Press and Media have refused to take the BC Rail Scandal seriously, have refused to do investigative reporting on it, have refused – even – to report important facts presented to them. ... The Mainstream Press/Media are staffed by jolly, rotund journalists, for the most part, who roll on the floor in laughter at the suggestion they might be serving another master than truth in their non-reporting of the BC Rail Scandal story. “Sounds,” they say, “like Conspiracy Theory to us – sounds like what you’d expect from freaks and nut cases.”

The big story, the BIG Conspiracy Theory begins in 2001 … and before. U.S, power in the world is being challenged by an enormous debt load and by rising economies – China, India, a South American (“anti-American”) bloc… and more. To remain “paramount”, the U.S. must consolidate undisputed power over global primary resources and infrastructures. And (connected) the U.S. must consolidate undisputed power over global movements of capital. ... The first part is (principally) our “Conspiracy Theory” story: “The U.S. need to consolidate undisputed power over global primary resources and infrastructures” – and, as a part of that, increasingly to integrate Canada into the U.S. to end Canadian priorities in the use of Canadian wealth. Paul Tellier was the magician who took publicly-owned CN Rail, privatized it, and delivered it – in fact – to U.S. private ownership. In 2001 Paul Tellier travelled to Vancouver. He gave a speech saying BC Rail should do what CNR has done. ... In the 1996 B.C. election Gordon Campbell promised to privatize BC Rail. He lost the election on that promise. In the 2001 election he promised not to sell or privatize BC Rail. In power, he began almost immediately to break his promise, and – as events have proved – to get BC Rail into the hands of the CNR. Conspiracy theorists point out that Gordon Campbell has appeared to keep close and strange contacts with various representatives of U.S. power. The magnificent Canadian Mainstream Press/Media – as well as the fiercely aggressive (?) B.C. NDP Opposition – have never, ever investigated Campbell’s frequent trips to the U.S. – New York, California, and elsewhere – to find out what he does there, what he really does …. ...


Thanks to Mário Silva, Lisboa, Portugal, for this graphic—agradecimentos sinceros.

Jim comment: I really can't remember how long it has been since the North American newspapers I read have had a reporter dedicated to the labor beat. If ever there was a TV network/station that had one, I must have missed that. As for radio, it has been more than 20 years. The editorial hostility to us ordinary folks and the dearth of any reporting at all (generally speaking), much less balanced and in-depth reporting of labor/social justice issues, limns the propaganda bubble we are coerced to live within.

Life inside the 2010 official media bubble
Geoff Dembicki TheTyee.ca British Columbia Canada

Inside the main press centre for the Winter Games. Photo by G. Dembicki. Accredited journalists are different from you and me. But for a day, Geoff Dembicki lived in their pricey Canada Place world.

In a soft whisper, Hannah asks if I'm comfortable. Her hands begin to knead my neck. They tip-toe along the arches connecting to my shoulders and pull the skin taut. Candlelight shivers along dark walls. Folk music oozes from a small ghetto blaster on the carpeted floor. Hannah's hands creep lower down my back. They flutter across my spine. I stare at a Greek head sculpture, wrought from imitation marble, mounted to a column in the centre of the room, surrounded by smooth, tiny stones. Rosewater fumes soften the air. Hannah squeezes the flesh below my armpits. She burrows palms into my shoulder blades. "Okay, all done," she says. I sit up from my blue-padded massage chair, almost intoxicated. Six other chairs form a small circumference around the Greek sculpture. I watch an older man soften under the gentle pats of his masseuse. "Are these real?" I ask, rubbing green leaves from a potted plant between my fingers. "No, I don't think so," Hannah replies.

Thousands of media personnel now walk the linoleum hallways and carpeted chambers of the Main Press Centre for the 2010 Winter Games. It's an exclusive bubble, sealed from Vancouver by accreditation and security. Media gain access by paying large sums of money. I got in with a temporary day pass procured by a colleague. I ate McDonalds, studied dead animals, chugged Coke and got my back rubbed by Hannah for free. It would appear media centre staff are trained to ignore journalists who know what they're doing, and pounce on the ones that don't. It happens several times during my visit. Present an innocent question, hesitant step or shaky glance and suddenly bubbly helpers in light-blue Vancouver 2010 sweaters come to the rescue. ...

After several hours wandering up and down Canada Place's delegate concourse, I get hungry. The most convenient option is Ballroom C. The former conference hall has been converted into a temporary McDonald's with Coke-sponsored food court alongside. Imagine a high-school cafeteria with carpeted floors. The "Canadian Carvery" food station offers daily roasts, Nanaimo bars and an inexplicable "Lemon curd slice." No thanks. I'd rather eat at the Golden Arches. "One double cheeseburger meal with Coke please," I ask a smiling McEmployee. My fingers drum the counter. It's like every McDonald's I've ever been to. Yet something feels off. I sit at an olive-green fast-food booth with artificial flowers on the table. An electric fireplace simulates flames beside plump purple chairs. My french-fry container has greasy fingerprints down the side. Between gulps of Coke, I eavesdrop on two German reporters. I'm informed later all the deep-fryers, cash registers and burger photography will be taken away once the Olympics are over. For now, the mobile McDonald's is open 24/7. I can't help but wonder how long it'll take the smell of grease to go away.

 ... For all the talk and hype surrounding Vancouver's Games, the foreign media are here, watching and recording and typing and filing. ... For journalists looking to unwind, the MPC has set up a temporary bar on the premises. ...

Related: Dazzled BC media missing real BC news
Harvey Oberfeld Keeping It Real British Columbai Canada February 15, 2010

...

Privatization! That’s exactly what many critics of the government have thought was the plan all the time: turn the BC Ambulance service over to a FOR-PROFIT corporation? Friends of the government? Friends of a politician or some well-placed campaign contributor? Of course, that would explain the governnment’s long “inability” to reach a negotiated settlement with the paramedics and refusal as well to submit the lengthy dispute to binding arbitration. The implications of privatization for the public could be enormous: reduced service; loss of experienced senior paramedics; inaquately trained replacement staff, etc. Big questions! And if the note I received and the Times-Colonist are accurate, the implications for British Colubians are far more critical than the Olympic Games.

But believe it or not … there was only ONE major media outlet I could see that was on to this story last Thursday: The Victoria Times Colonist, in a headlined story “B.C. looks at privatizing ambulances”. And among those quoted: a Health Ministry spokesperson pointing out there are precedents for private ambulance services in other provinces. The privatization idea has beend floated before .. but surely the fact that the paramedecs’ latest “consultation” talks are reportedly in trouble and a ministry official has confirmed privatization is an option … the media should be right on it: investigating, probing, asking questions … and demanding answers. But maybe that’s just too difficult to do … when you’re enjoying and covering all the dazzling lights, events and freebies the government and its VANOC arm are providing you.

Fox News kills TV story on Monsanto’s rBGH growth hormone for dairy cows & PBS slants healthcare “documentary”
The Bovine Canada June 15, 2009

Here’s a great video describing an extremely well-documented case of news manipulation on a story involving Monsanto. This story is from a few years back, so if you pay attention to alternative news sources, you may already have heard it. Stay tuned though, there’s more recent news to follow. ...

Junk science study says factory farming is better
Jill Richardson La Vida Locovore USA June 13, 2009

The usual suspects are still peddling BS about the benefits of factory farmed milk. That's right. You read the words "benefits" and "factory farm" in the same sentence. However the independence of this "study" is tainted by the inclusion of Roger Cady, who once worked for Monsanto and now works for Elanco (the former and current owners of rBGH), on the team of researchers. ...

What's behind the shake up at 'Canada's newspaper of record'?
Nick Fillmore rabble.ca Canada June 2, 2009

The media community was buzzing last week over the departure of the Globe and Mail’s Chief Editor Ed Greenspon, replaced by the highly-decorated John Stackhouse, who most recently whipped the Globe’s bastion of free enterprise thinking -- "The Report on Business" (RoB) -- into shape. Within hours of the Globe upheaval, David Akin of CanWest News Service in Ottawa Tweeted that the “gossip” was that Greenspon had been forced out because he refused to agree to a new round of staff cuts. But others speculate that it’s possible Greenspon was fired or resigned on the spot following a dispute with Globe Publisher Phillip Crawley over a number of issues. Greenspon had spent a long six years as Editor-in-Chief and either he or Crawley, or both of them, may have felt his time was up. Stackhouse may have gotten close to the truth when he said on the Globe website that, while he and Greenspon have “similar visions of what quality journalism is,” he would be better than Greenspon at cooperating with other divisions at the Globe as well as with outside organizations with which the paper needs to build partnerships. ...

A few words about the future of media
Craig Newmark Huffington Post USA January 3, 2009

A democracy needs a trustworthy, vital press to survive. People who really know a lot of about the news business talk to me, an outsider, and here's how I read the consensus. There are two big issues regarding the survival of news organizations: trust, and business models. News organizations earn trust by visibly doing a lot of fact-checking, and by keeping their financial interests separate from reporting. The latter means that the income of the news organization should not influence what or how they report. Looks like this is a real concern for Millenials. Note that fact-checking can be expensive; editorial integrity can also cost revenue.

There are a number of business models which might support news organizations and allow them to thrive. Sponsorship, pay-per-view, subscriptions, philanthropy, and advertising are all possible. However, advertising which focuses on specific products or services is threatened by review sites. As a consumer, I ignore almost all specific ads, and use review sites. For  example, a very trustworthy review site is offered by Consumer Reports.(Disclosure: I'm on their board.)
Taking this together, trustworthiness will differentiate a small number of news organizations from a much larger number of organizations, which forgo fact-checking, etc. ...

Canada needs a serious agenda for media innovation
Steve Anderson TheTyee.ca British Columbia Canada June 5, 2009

Big telecom's monopolistic control over the net is threatening to leave Canada with a last generation Internet. We have fallen behind many European and Asian countries in terms of Internet access, speed, and cost, moving Canada from 2nd to 10th place within the 30 OECD countries. Our broadband connection speeds have also fallen below the OECD average, and we rank 27th in terms of cost versus speed. According to the OECD, for countries to remain internationally competitive, "Governments need to promote competition and give consumers more choices. They should encourage new networks, particularly upgrades to fibre-optic lines." The OECD's report states the obvious but what is Canada doing? ...

Series: Dan Froomkin on news' future
Dan Froomkin NiemanJournalismLab USA May 2009

You can link to all four essays from this page.

Dan Froomkin — former editor of washingtonpost.com and deputy editor of Nieman Watchdog — diagnoses what he sees wrong with the American news business and prescribes some fixes.

Related: Frances Bula is a long-time newspaper & magazine writer and an instructor in the journalism program at Langara College in Vancouver. She posted the following observations on her blog, "State of Vancouver". The question is who is going to support the serious dollars it takes to do real journalism?

What’s wrong with giving away journalism content?
Frances Bula State of Vancouver Canada May 18, 2009

I haven’t bothered to wade too far into the fray over whether journalism is dead, as so many people have been filling up bandwidth and killing trees to opinionate on the issue. But one issue I haven’t seen thrashed out is the argument I frequently read in (gasp - paper editions of ) journalism magazines or online is the one that says mainstream journalism did itself in by giving away its content for free on the Internet. That’s an argument I don’t get, because newspapers and some magazines have been giving away their content for free, in paper form, for a very long time. Community newspapers, of course, and some magazines get delivered free to doorsteps all over this region. And the subscription fees that people pay for papers like the Vancouver Sun, the Globe or even the New York Times — even though they may seem hefty — do little more than cover the cost of paper and distribution.

The actual journalism has, for at least a century, been paid for by advertising. So what I find to be the mysterious question is whether that will continue. Lots of papers are now doing a great job of creating content that works for the web, with blogs, sound slides, video, and all kinds of other bits and pieces that take advantage of the web’s instantaneous and multi-media capabilities. And they’re getting millions of page views as a result. But the advertisting to pay for all that is not following them there. Everyone in the business knows that the income and rates for web advertising don’t even begin to cover the costs of a serious news operation. I’m not sure why not, whether it’s because the print-ad sales reps at newspapers are telling them print is a better choice, whether advertisers don’t believe those page-view numbers, whether they believe them but think they’re all teenagers in Serbia looking for Britney Spears, or what, but something is not transmitting. So the big issue is, who is going to support the serious dollars it takes to do real journalism? ...

Unravelling the spin: Separating news from PR
Daron Letts rabble.ca Canada March 11, 2004

... Current media attention notwithstanding, the collaboration between corporate and government propaganda is nothing new. John Stauber describes himself as “an investigative writer” and “democracy activist.” He has co-authored four books on propaganda and edits PR Watch, a newsletter for the Centre for Media and Democracy in Wisconsin, which he founded in 1993. His project is to provide resources for journalists and researchers “seeking to recognize and combat manipulative and misleading PR practices.” What advice would you offer to overworked, underpaid, independent journalists who encounter corporate or government PR officials in their daily work? ...

What should critical news readers look for when they assess the news they're exposed to? The academics who have tried to ascertain how much of mainstream news is the result of organized PR typically find that 40 per cent or more of the news is the product of public relations. The PR experts know that getting a journalist to turn PR into reporting is golden. ... The media are businesses that deliver your brain to advertisers; they are big business themselves, and they are more and more unwilling to engage in, support, initiate or even tolerate the gutsy, investigative journalism that might offend special interests but is essential to democracy. The best way to get news now is to use the web and access many different sources, using features like google and yahoo and lexis/nexis, finding websites and newspapers and magazines online that provide in-depth and independent coverage. The viewpoint most lacking in the mainstream press is usually the critical voice willing to expose special interests

How can independent journalists and critical news readers work together to demand accountability? Independent journalists need to have the courage and integrity to pursue their craft even if it threatens their livelihood. This often means considering finding alternative venues, perhaps working for a non-profit public interest organization, pursuing books and freelancing, and utilizing new technologies like websites, blogs and listservs. Citizens need to fight media monopolies and support independent media and courageous reporters both morally and with contributions of cash. We must all realize that our media and our democracy are in a crisis because of the shared monopolies dominating news reporting. ...

The best of times, worst of times
Rick Salutin Globe and Mail Canada April 17, 2009

At newspapers, it is the best of times - journalistically. ... And it is the worst of times. People say the industry is teetering on extinction. ... In the past, newspapers often did wretched work journalistically. They incited wars, truckled to wealth and power, suppressed news uncomfortable to advertisers, mythologized their own integrity -- and thrived economically. Now there is better journalism, with a wider range of resources, lots of other papers available, outsiders (such as bloggers) ready to keep insiders honest -- but it all may implode economically, due to ad losses. Yet, ads are not at all essential to journalism. Papers were once like other products: Users paid full cost, as you do for a loaf of bread. They often seem antithetical to news. Did cigarette ads, for example, hold back stories on lung cancer? There must be other ways. It would be nice to save the baby and let the bathwater -- ad revenue -- drain away, as it's been doing.

Would that mean adding public support, instead? Perhaps. If banks are kept afloat to maintain a flow of credit, what about the flow of information? Isn't it crucial? Or bailouts? Maybe. If you pay for national defence, why not for national debate? Is it worse for papers to depend on public funds than on ads? Private broadcasters are already demanding public support and they are the papers: CanWest Global, CTVglobemedia. How would the model look? A mix of ads, subscriptions, public subsidy somehow distributed internationally in an imaginative way? It's a challenge. But we already live in a mixed media reality. The CBC and BBC interact fruitfully with private journalism. As for new technologies: The Internet was a public project, handed over to the Googles of the world. Let them give something back. But newspapers, with or without the paper, are crucial to any benefits that accrue through new technologies. They can be supplemented by alternate sources but not replaced, and there's a great public benefit to be reaped. It isn't about state control of content. It's about policies that would allow newspapers to carry on, and evolve, on their own.

BC Mary provided us with both links below. Do visit her site regularly to have access to the most thorough and forthright on-going examination of what is, apparently, one of British Columbia's largest (and as yet not fully exposed) political scandals. We are reminded of Sir Walter Scott's maxim: Oh what a tangled web we weave / When first we practice to deceive. (Marmion, 1808)

Press gallery president Scott Sutherland joins B.C. public affairs bureau
Charlie Smith Georgia Straight British Columbia Canada April 5, 2009

The press gallery in Victoria isn't the most transparent organization in the province. It has no Web site, which means it's impossible to go on-line and find a membership list or a copy of the constitution and by-laws. I thought I would try to find this information by contacting the president. But I've just been informed that the man who was president, Canadian Press reporter Scott Sutherland, has joined the B.C. Liberal government's public affairs bureau. The B.C. government's directory shows him working both sides of the fence simultaneously, but that's only because the directory hasn't been updated to show that Sutherland has left journalism. ...

I'm interested in this issue because two prominent members of the press gallery—Vaughn Palmer and Keith Baldrey—will speak at the annual general meeting of the B.C. Chamber of Commerce in late May. The chamber's president, John Winter, is fronting for a Coalition of B.C. Businesses-created election advertising sponsor, which is vigorously promoting the B.C. Liberals. I would like to know if Winter is paying Palmer and Baldrey to speak. And if so, how much? And, I might add, I'm interested in knowing if the press gallery has any rules about members accepting payments from business associations. Hence, my desire to see a copy of the membership list, the constitution, and by-laws. ...

Related: With Fourth Estate under siege, governments seek to manage the news
Miro Cernetig Vancouver Sun British Columbia Canada April 6, 2009

Everywhere I go, I'm asked whether or not I'll have a job much longer. I often detect a smidgen of schadenfreude in the inquiry -- the guy who so often writes bad news might be getting some of his own. For a brief moment after Watergate, when Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman played reporters in All The President's Men, we journos were cast as glamorous urban heroes. But it's been downhill ever since. For all our supposed commitment to truth, justice and the Canadian way, we consistently rank with used car salesmen in popularity polls. Nobody much cries over the closure of newspapers or TV newsrooms or laid-off journalists. But as the provincial election campaign begins, you might want to show the Fourth Estate a little love -- or maybe just a little more respect. We're under siege -- and not just because of our shrinking TV and newspaper budgets. We're being outgunned by the governments you elect, who over the last decade have quietly created immense news management systems to keep us all "on message." ...

... governments seek to manage the news
BC Mary The Legislature Raids British Columbia Canada April 6, 2009

This is the story I've been meaning to write. But Miro Cernetig has done it for me, done it better, and carries impressive credentials for doing such things. He checks in, of course, by blaming the N.D.P., but in B.C. media, we know about that; he's just showing his up-to-date membership card at the entrance to the corporate palace. The rest of his column is great ... Miro Cernetig, in another life, has been bureau chief for The Globe and Mail in Vancouver, Edmonton and the Arctic, China and New York. He was also the Quebec bureau chief for The Toronto Star and most recently served as The Vancouver Sun's political correspondent in Victoria.

BC Mary provides the link to the story below. Do visit her site regularly to have access to the most thorough and forthright on-going examination of apparently one of British Columbia's largest (and as yet not fully exposed) political scandals.

With Fourth Estate under siege, governments seek to manage the news
Miro Cernetig Vancouver Sun April 6, 2009

Everywhere I go, I'm asked whether or not I'll have a job much longer. I often detect a smidgen of schadenfreude in the inquiry -- the guy who so often writes bad news might be getting some of his own. For a brief moment after Watergate, when Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman played reporters in All The President's Men, we journos were cast as glamorous urban heroes. But it's been downhill ever since. For all our supposed commitment to truth, justice and the Canadian way, we consistently rank with used car salesmen in popularity polls. Nobody much cries over the closure of newspapers or TV newsrooms or laid-off journalists. But as the provincial election campaign begins, you might want to show the Fourth Estate a little love -- or maybe just a little more respect. We're under siege -- and not just because of our shrinking TV and newspaper budgets. We're being outgunned by the governments you elect, who over the last decade have quietly created immense news management systems to keep us all "on message."

I first noticed this by luck. A few years ago, I was asked by an editor to find the song Carole Taylor "loves to hate." Dutifully, I e-mailed the then finance minister with my BlackBerry. Taylor got back to me and said she'd mull it over it. It was a piece of trivia she hadn't thought about, either. But inside government, my question took on a life of its own. It wasn't Taylor's doing, but my little e-mail was automatically entered into the government's communications matrix. Days later, I got another e-mail back from Taylor's assistant, who asked my reasons for asking. "I just need to know the song she loves to hate," I responded, feeling slightly ridiculous, wondering what the fuss could possibly be. (Taylor's answer, if you need to know, was "Feelings".) Then I noticed something curious underneath that official's e-mail back to me. He'd forgotten to delete the "tracking history" of where my original question had been dispatched. It showed I'd been vetted by the premier's office, one of his senior aides, a deputy minister and then handed back to the mighty Public Affairs Bureau. What's the Public Affairs Bureau? Well, PAB is essentially an in-house information spin machine, housed in the legislature's basement. ...

Related: Media corporations jumping ship: Such a crisis demands solutions equal to the task. So what are they?
Salt Spring News April 5, 2009

Six links.

The death and life of great American newspapers
John Nichols and Robert W. McChesney The Nation USA Webposted March 18, 2009

Communities across America are suffering through a crisis that could leave a dramatically diminished version of democracy in its wake. It is not the economic meltdown, although the crisis is related to the broader day of reckoning that appears to have arrived. The crisis of which we speak involves more than mere economics. Journalism is collapsing, and with it comes the most serious threat in our lifetimes to self-government and the rule of law as it has been understood here in the United States.

After years of neglecting signs of trouble, elite opinion-makers have begun in recent months to recognize that things have gone horribly awry. ... A newspaper industry that still employs roughly 50,000 journalists--the vast majority of the remaining practitioners of the craft--is teetering on the brink. ... But for all the ink spilled addressing the dire circumstance of the ink-stained wretch, the understanding of what we can do about the crisis has been woefully inadequate. Unless we rethink alternatives and reforms, the media will continue to flail until journalism is all but extinguished. Let's begin with the crisis. In a nutshell, media corporations, after running journalism into the ground, have determined that news gathering and reporting are not profit-making propositions. So they're jumping ship. ... Mired in debt and facing massive losses, the managers of corporate newspaper firms seek to right the sinking ship by cutting costs, leading remaining newspaper readers to ask why they are bothering to pay for publications that are pale shadows of themselves. It is the daily newspaper death dance-cum- funeral march. But it is not just newspapers that are in crisis; it is the institution of journalism itself. By any measure, journalism is missing from most commercial radio. TV news operations have become celebrity- and weather-obsessed "profit centers" rather than the journalistic icons of the Murrow and Cronkite eras. ...

So this is where we stand: much of local and state government, whole federal departments and agencies, American activities around the world, the world itself--vast areas of great public concern--are either neglected or on the verge of neglect. Politicians and administrators will work increasingly without independent scrutiny and without public accountability. We are entering historically uncharted territory in America, a country that from its founding has valued the press not merely as a watchdog but as the essential nurturer of an informed citizenry. The collapse of journalism and the democratic infrastructure it sustains is not a development that anyone, except perhaps corrupt politicians and the interests they serve, looks forward to. Such a crisis demands solutions equal to the task. So what are they? ...

In Canada: Will big media use the economic crisis to abandon their public role?
Canadian Media Guild Canada November 20, 2008

Two of Canada’s biggest media conglomerates have announced cuts as fallout from the bursting financial bubble spreads. Last week, Canwest announced it was cutting 560 jobs in its TV and newspaper operations; this week, CTVglobemedia warned of looming layoffs. The economic crisis makes the announcements seem reasonable and prudent, but the cuts are unfortunately part of a longer trend. Why invest in local programming and reporting when the real money is in newspaper monopolies, cable specialty channels and prime-time simulcasting of American hit shows? ... The crisis of local news is not an effect of the current economic climate. The CRTC points out that spending by private broadcasters on local programming has been flat for ten years, the same decade the bubble inflated and profits were healthy. In the same period, spending on “non-Canadian programming” – the stuff from Hollywood – grew by 61%. The reality is that the media conglomerates have been chasing levels of profit that are not found by producing the good quality local programming that polling tells us people want to watch. Big broadcasters have followed a shortcut to profits by various combinations of reducing local operations, and therefore costs, lucking into the right Hollywood hits for prime-time and enjoying a steady stream of cable revenues for their specialty channels. ...

Commons to look into media crisis
Harris MacLeod The Hill Times Canada March 23, 2009

The House Canadian Heritage Committee will hold hearings later this month to look into how the country's media industry is being hit by the global economic crisis, and if there is anything the government can do. But NDP MP Charlie Angus, said the situation for some companies, such as CanWest Global Communications Corp., which has been teetering on the edge of bankruptcy for months, is so dire that the government needs to act now before large chunks of Canada's media infrastructure disappear forever. "I'm very, very concerned that we're going to lose media infrastructure that is not going to be replaced," said Mr. Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ont.). "Once these regional domestic voices are gone it's going to be very difficult to replace them." Mr. Angus said the government has been "asleep at the switch" in protecting Canada's media industry. Canwest, CTV, and public broadcaster CBC, three of Canada's largest media organizations, have all been hit hard by the economic downturn along with daily newspapers across the country. ... CTV has already closed TV stations in Southern Ontario, and has also laid off staff, and CBC is expected to announce massive layoffs in the coming weeks. Canwest is suffering the most, though the company has managed to get another extension, this time until April 7, to negotiate an agreement with its creditors to manage the company's nearly $4-billion debt. Last week The Canadian Press reported that the government was considering stepping in to provide some relief for Canwest, possibly by loosening regulations and making tax changes. The company's CEO, Leonard Asper, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) have reportedly had at least one face-to-face meeting. ...

Harper government game-playing and the media crisis
Lise Lareau -30- Canada March 18, 2009

So let’s get this straight. Seems CanWest hired a former senior advisor to Stephen Harper to help with its lobbying efforts to stave off bankruptcy. This is only reported after Heritage Minister James Moore says he’s considering ways to help private broadcasters weather the economic storm. ...


Another layoff day at CBC: so sad and so inconclusive
Lise Lareau -30- Canada March 25, 2009

It all seems so familiar. Waiting for the CBC job cut announcement that’s been looming for weeks, and then hearing it, for yet another time, another year. But this year's version somehow seems so ... hollow. We know that taking 800 jobs out of the CBC will have immense consequences, yet we have no faces or programs to attach to those job losses. In most cases, people are going home tonight not knowing how or if their own show or their own workplace will be affected. At Radio-Canada, we did learn that weekend news shows are being scrapped except for the one in Ottawa, the TV noon shows in Ottawa, Quebec and Moncton are gone, and the morning radio show in Windsor is being cancelled. But the details are coming out painfully, one piece at a time. ... Yet at the end of the day, we know very little except the CBC is once again not being supported by the government, for no reason other than straight politics being played by Harper’s PMO. Stephen Harper mused about privatizing English TV as far back as 2004 and we all know about last year’s culture cuts. ...

Mercola.com USA March 28, 2009

Source: Reporters Without Borders Only peace protects freedoms in post-9/11 world

It is not economic prosperity but peace that guarantees press freedom. That is the main lesson to be drawn from the world press freedom index that Reporters Without Borders compiles every year and from the 2008 edition.

Said Reporters Without Borders:

“The post-9/11 world is now clearly drawn. Destabilized and on the defensive, the leading democracies are gradually eroding the space for freedoms. The economically most powerful dictatorships arrogantly proclaim their authoritarianism, exploiting the international community’s divisions and the ravages of the wars carried out in the name of the fight against terrorism. Religious and political taboos are taking greater hold by the year in countries that used to be advancing down the road of freedom.”

Aside from New Zealand and Canada, the first 20 positions on the Index are held by European countries, with Iceland, Luxembourg and Norway tied for first. While the economic disparities among the top 20 are immense, what they have in common is a parliamentary democratic system, and not being involved in any war. This is not the case with the United States, which ranks 36th domestically and 119th outside its own territory.

The worst violators of free expression were Turkmenistan (171st), North Korea (172nd) and Eritrea (173rd).

...

Dr. Joseph Mercola comments:

All truth goes through three phases.

1. First, it is ridiculed.
2. Second, it is violently opposed.
3. Third, it is accepted as being self evident.

So if you want to get to the truth, you often have to keep an open mind, do more than a little bit of digging, and even then take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt.

The final edition. Jim comment: Since I settled in British Columbia the only American newspaper I purchased on a regular basis was the P-I. It was a good newspaper with solid staff writers. Its coverage of international, regional and local news was, for decades, first-rate. Even latterly (as its substance declined these past few years as with all corporate newspapers), you could still find gems of news and insight proffered by its in-house staff. I'll miss it. Yes, there will be an online edition but many of those by-lines I turned to on a regular basis have received THE phone call or the dreaded summons to the managing editor's office—whichever, they resulted in the pink slip. And, shucks, with what am I going to start the fire on those cold mornings? I feel like yet another thing has passed and left my life a little bit emptier. You weren't all my world, P-I, but you were a respected and welcome part of it.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer halts print edition: The 146-year-old newspaper will continue publishing online
Patrick Oppmann CNN Money USA March 16, 2009

SEATTLE (CNN) -- The Hearst Corp. announced Monday it will publish its last print edition of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer on Tuesday and shift the operation of Seattle's oldest business wholly to the Internet. "Tonight we'll be putting the paper to bed for the last time," Editor and Publisher Roger Oglesby told a silent newsroom in Seattle, Washington, Monday morning, according to a posting on its Web site. "But the bloodline will live on." The newspaper said delivery would be halted to more than 117,600 weekday readers. "The company, however, said it will maintain seattlepi.com, making it the nation's largest daily newspaper to shift to an entirely digital news product," it said. ... The 146-year-old newspaper is the latest to take drastic steps in the face of declining readership and advertising revenue. Last month, the Rocky Mountain News in Denver, Colorado, published its final edition after nearly 150 years. ...

Seattle Post-Intelligencer folds, and with it, a watchdog of western asbestos reporting
Kellyn Brown Flathead Beacon Montana USA March 17, 2009

First, the Rocky Mountain News, now the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Two of the West’s oldest daily newspapers have folded. The P-I will move to an online-only format and stay in its current building on the Seattle waterfront. Its staff will be greatly reduced, but the iconic blue globe will keep spinning, for now. And while few here will lose sleep over the the P-I’s demise, Western Montana is indebted to its efforts. Investigative reporter Andrew Schneider broke the story of the asbestos poisoning in Libby, and 10 years later is still following the W.R. Grace criminal trial on his blog. The P-I’s special report, “Uncivil Action,” is a testament to what journalism does right. And I doubt, without Schneider’s dogged reporting, the tragedy in Libby would be exposed for what it was – not just corporate indifference to human life, but a government unwilling or unable to stop it. Schneider’s lead on his story in November, 1999, titled “A town left to die”:

LIBBY, Mont. – First, it killed some miners. Then it killed wives and children, slipping into their homes on the dusty clothing of hard-working men. Now the mine is closed, but in Libby, the killing goes on. The W.R. Grace Co. knew, from the time it bought the Zonolite vermiculite mine in 1963, why the people in Libby were dying. But for the 30 years it owned the mine, the company did not stop it. Neither did the governments. ...

...

Related: Why newspapers can’t be saved, but the news can
Eric Etheridge New York Times USA March 16, 2009

The Rocky Mountain News is dead. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer will publish its last issue Tuesday. The Detroit Free Press has cut home delivery to three days a week. The Star Tribune in Minneapolis and the Inquirer and Daily News in Philadelphia have all declared bankruptcy.

According to Clay Shirky, this is what a revolution looks like.

The old stuff gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place. The importance of any given experiment isn’t apparent at the moment it appears; big changes stall, small changes spread. Even the revolutionaries can’t predict what will happen. Agreements on all sides that core institutions must be protected are rendered meaningless by the very people doing the agreeing. . . . Ancient social bargains, once disrupted, can neither be mended nor quickly replaced, since any such bargain takes decades to solidify.

And so it is today. When someone demands to know how we are going to replace newspapers, they are really demanding to be told that we are not living through a revolution. They are demanding to be told that old systems won’t break before new systems are in place. They are demanding to be told that ancient social bargains aren’t in peril, that core institutions will be spared, that new methods of spreading information will improve previous practice rather than upending it. They are demanding to be lied to.

There are fewer and fewer people who can convincingly tell such a lie.

Shirky, a well-known Internet observer and analyst, has been writing for some time about the future of newspapers, or rather the lack of one (”2009 is going to be a bloodbath,” he told the Guardian in January). On Friday night he dropped his latest description of the existential crisis papers face, a long essay (some 2,700 words) that has been much discussed and linked to all weekend. ...