Questions On The Journal And Danny Pearl
February 28th, 2002 - by: danny
*DID THE WSJ PUT DANNY PEARL AT RISK?*
*WACKY AT THE WHITE HOUSE*
*AT THE NATION EVENT*
The United States government has now posted a five million dollar reward for information leading to the capture of the killer or killers of Wall Street Journal reporter Danny Pearl.
As everyone following the story knows, Pearl was a first rate investigative journalist writing for one of the world’s leading newspapers. The newspaper condemned his death as an ‘act of barbarism,’ and seems to be acting honorably and impressively since his capture was revealed and his death announced.
Was this the case before his death?
WE ARE INVESTIGATING
Mediachannel.org is investigating suggestions that Pearl and other US reporters overseas are not getting adequate support from news organizations that are increasingly bottom-line driven, run by accountants and lawyers, not editors and reporters.
And we are inviting you to help if you have any direct information. I am burying the lead here for a reason.
Here is the problem. Reporting in conflict zones is dangerous. US reporters on the one hand are often denied access to covering US military or covert operations. On the other, they are considered by those hostile to US policy as if they are combatants, or at least on the same side as the US military. In some cases they act that way, asserting very little independence or critical distance while reporting on military operations.
At the same time, many of their lives are at risk. Some years back, the BBC hired former military officers to put overeas correpondents through a survival course, to prepare them to avoid kidnapping situations and practice safety skills. I met some of the experts who run that course in England, and was impressed with their savvy and seriousness. BBC and other news organizations now pay for such training courses as part of preparing journalists for risky environments.
A DEEP THROAT
Now the blockuster. I am being told by a “deep throat,” a journalist of the highest integrity, and with deep expertise on media issues, that this problem directly intersects with what happened to Danny Pearl. Remember, weeks before his capture, The Independent newspaper’s passionate reporter Robert Fisk, known worldwide for journalism that has been more than fair to Palestinians and others in the Middle East fighting oppression of all kinds, was nearly beaten to death in Pakistan by people who saw him only as a western reporter. So you didn’t have to be an American or Jewish to be concerned about these hazards.
On to Mr. Pearl.
Questions are being raised about the Wall Street Journal’s responsiveness on this security problem BEFORE this fatal incident took place. Could it have been avoided?
Yesterday, I received an e-mall that I have to pass on, even though I have not yet checked it out fully. I tend to doubt that the I would get a straight answer anyway, unless others in the know come forward . To me, the suggestions below ring true, given all the conversations I have had with reporters over the years who have worked around the world. I am not interested in trashing the Journal in any way, but rather in raising a life and death media issue that I am sure other reporters know far more about than I. Please share your experiences or thoughts on this issue. Write: dissector@mediachannel.org
THE ALLEGATIONS
Here is what I had been told:
“*Pearl had requested permission (and funding) to attend a course on survival techniques in combat zones (I’m not sure which course, but probably one offered in England). Other reporters (at WSJ and elsewhere)have done this. The paper turned him down.
“*He had written a memo for the paper on survival issues in conflict zones;it went nowhere.
“*He was worried about the fact that he hadn’t been able to find a reliable “fixer” and the paper had no resources to offer. It’s now being said that the paper was asking its reporters to take great risks but not adequatelyequipping, funding, or preparing them. It is trying to play in the big leagues but is not prepared to do so on the ground, organizationally, abroad.”
This is all on deep background to me. The source was very close to Pearl.
Issues like this need to come out of that closet of “deep background.” We all have to talk about them. I will be sending this column to others at the Journal and the editor to seek comment. I would like this not to be true. Since this aspired to be an “interactive” weblog, let’s find out what other concerns might be lurking here, behind the scenes.
THE EXTRADITION ISSUE
As I and other reported yesterday, the government of Pakistan said they would turn over the chief suspect, fellow LSE alumnus Omar Sheik, to the US even though no extradition treaty exists beteen the US and Pakistan. This issue was argued over at a White House press briefing with verbal calisthenics than seems ready to be turned into an Olympic event. Chief Presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer is a sure bet to win the Gold. Consider what passes for discourse in those hallowed halls that is home to the first family:
Q “The President said today he’s fully satisfied with the support, the help President Pervez Musharraf has been giving the U.S. government in the investigation of the kidnapping and the killing ofDanny Pearl. You said this morning that the U.S. government is pursuing the extradition. And the question is, if you do you know we don’t have an extraditiontreaty with Pakistan, how are you going to get him extradited?”
MR. FLEISCHER: “I said this morning that the United States would very much like to get our hands on Omar Sheik and the others who are responsible. And thereis a judicial system in Pakistan that has cooperated with the United States. And one further point on it, even without an extradition treaty the United States can work productively with other nations, as other nations make their decisions about justice, pursue things through their courts, often in cooperation with the United States.”
“But since the gaggle, I’ve talked with some of the lawyers inside the White House and there is some updated information on a treaty, because there is actually a treaty dealing with extradition with Pakistan that was signed in 1931. It went into effect in 1942, prior to Pakistan becoming a sovereign state–because that was at a time when Pakistan was underthe British Empire.”
“But it’s interesting to note that the lawyers say that treaty does remain in effect, even though it was signed with the predecessor of the Pakistani government.”
Q “How can that be? There was no Pakistan in 1942.”
MR. FLEISCHER:”It’s an interesting question, Bill,but that’s the lawyers’ point, they do believe it remains in effect even though it was–”
Q “The treaty was with the British?”
MR. FLEISCHER: “The treaty was with Pakistan, which was under British rule.”
Q “But there wasn’t any Pakistan, as such.”
MR. FLEISCHER: “It was with the Pakistani authorities under British rule. So I think probably –”
Q “There were no Pakistani authorities.”
MR. FLEISCHER: “–that time. Of course there were Pakistani authorities; it was under British rule, but you still had Pakistani authorities.”
Q “Nineteen forty-nine.”
Q “It was part of India.”
MR. FLEISCHER: “You can argue it with the lawyers if you choose, but I can tell you–”Q “Bring them on….” (Laughter.)
THEY ARE MOURNING AT STANFORD
Finally on Pearl, Larry Bensky, whose radio fans at KPFA are pleased to have him back in the saddle at Pacifica’s KPFA, sends along a request by Pearl’s friends and fellow almuni at Stanford University for a memorial fund honor his memory.
Slain journalist Daniel Pearl was remembered Monday by friends, colleagues and teachers as a cherished member of the Stanford family who tried to build bridges through his reporting.
“The death of Daniel Pearl was an attack on freedom, on tolerance and on pursuing the truth,” President John Hennessy said at an emotional service at Memorial Church that attracted about 500 mourners from the campus community and beyond. “Although we are deeply saddened by his death, I can think of no better way to honor him than to live our lives in a way that would make him proud of his alma mater.”
“Hennessy announced that an anonymous alumnus has established an endowed fund in Pearl’s name. The fund, which will benefit undergraduates in the Department of Communication, has been established with an initial gift from the alumnus.
“Communication Professor Emerita Marion Lewenstein, one of Pearl’s former teachers,remembered him as gentle, compassionate and humorous, with an eye for the unconventional. Even in a group of high-achieving students, she said, Pearl stood out. Referring to a statement Pearl wrote in his freshman year, Lewenstein said, “He liked to explore untraditional areas and avoid well-worn paths.”
Knight Fellow James Areddy, a reporter for Dow Jones Newswires in Hong Kong, said the militants in Pakistan treated Pearl like an enemy when he was actually an unrecognized ally. “What disgusts me is that the ones who killed Danny Pearl essentially cut out their own tongues, unplugged their own amplifier,” he said. “They killed the very person who could give them a voice. Instead of allowing Danny to humanize them, they have villainized themselves.”
“Friends from Pearl’s years at Stanford remembered a gentle man who loved music, Kurt Vonnegut and soccer. Ty Kim, managing editor of KPIX Channel 5 News and a 1986 graduate, said he and Pearl shared a love of music. “Danny was a magnificent violin player,” he said, finding a connection between Pearl’s music and writing. “The music that came from him, the words that flowed from him–it makes perfect sense: the precision, intensity, the soulfulness, the gentleness, the compassion from within.”
“Classmate Karen Edwards said Pearl had a generous spirit… “When I think of Danny’s family, it makes me want to be a better mother. When I think of Danny’s life, it makes me want to be a better person. When I think of Danny’s death, it makes me want to work for peace.”
Gifts for the Daniel Pearl Memorial Fund may be sent to Memorial Gifts, 326 Galvez St., Stanford, CA 94305-6105.
THE NATION GATHERS THE FAITHFUL AND THEN SOME
The mediachanel.org was pleased to be a co-sponsor of the Nation Institute’s public forum last night on civil liberties since 9/11. C-SPAN was in the house — and one of their producers came over to tell me how much they like what we are doing which was a great way to start an evening. The Ethical Culture Society was packed- — a clear sign that there is a large audience for critical ideas that they are not reading, hearing or seeing in mainstream media outlets.
Hamilton Fish, who heads the Institute, told me afterwards that The Nation’s circulation is up by thirty thousand since 9/11. Those readers and some of our own flocked to the meeting. Earlier that morning, organizer Janine Jaquet had worried that the sudden appearance of snow in the skies over New York would dampen the turn out. She had no such luck. The joint was jumping. Many were turned away. I had to intervene to drag Nation editor Katrina van den Heuval into the fray when an intern did not recognize her. I only managed to squeeze into half a seat in a packed pew.
The evening started with Publisher Victor Navasky noting that Arthur Schlesinger Jr, one of America’s top historians, who was on the panel for many years, refused to take part in NATION events. He was there along with that irrepressible story-telling- Texas-trash-talking journalist Molly Ivins, ACLU President Nadine Strossen, a quite brilliant Hussein Ibish of The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and the outspoken, Eliane Jones,President, NAACP Legal Defense Fund.
All may have been preaching to the choir about the erosion of civil liberties. Still, it was important to hear it all in detail. Frightening.
Moderator and practiced talk show moderator Phil Donahue, who lives up the street, was in fine form, if a bit too nice by not pushing the participants a bit more assertively. That became apparent when he turned to the floor to actor Danny Glover who raised a number of issues about issues and a larger context that were missing from the discussion including the role of oil, and a broader international framework about people elsewhere who don’t have any civil liberties, in part because of US foreign policy. This actor seemed to be more plugged in than many of the activists one thought would add those issues.
I got a question in on the role of the media in all of this, asking why some of these issues have received such scant coverage. The question got a big hand and was followed by others about our media. The answers are ones we all know, about the takeover of news organizations by giant companies, the infotainiment values etc. etc. Donahue spoke about how everyone on TV (and he should know since he was on for 29 years) has to try to be popular, which means staying away from news and opinions thought unpopular.
What troubled me is that the media framework–a key element in what the Administration is doing and getting away with–was an afterthought that had to be raised from the floor, and not by folks on the panel.
FOR MANY IN AFGHANISTAN, THE WAR IS NOT OVER
Canada. Com carries a story this morning following up folks still livng with the effects of US bombing; Stephene Thorne writes yesterday:
“HAJI MOHAMMAD KHAN, Afghanistan (CP) – It was the 15th day of Ramadan – about mid-November – when American aircraft rained seeds of despair on this tiny agricultural village south of Kandahar.
“They came at night like dandelion seeds blowing in the wind, yellow cluster bombs the size of pop cans drifting down beneath little parachutes onto the clay buildings, the fields surrounding them, the orchard beside them. The villagers ran from their homes, but the high clay walls that keep out the dry desert winds couldn’t stop the blasts, intended for a Taliban compound about half a kilometre up the narrow dirt road in an area speckled with destroyed tanks and equipment.
“Nine villagers were killed, including the entire family of three-year-old Saif Ullah, who now wanders the village shoeless, grimy from the constant dust, fearful of the horrors that now haunt him. Five other villagers were injured.
“The village took it from both sides in the seige that beset the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar. The Taliban for whom the bombs were intended looted the villagers’ abandoned homes.
“That was harvest season.
Now it’s planting time…”
As you plant, so shall you sow. And as you bomb, so shall you destroy. Interesting isn’t it that the New York Times today carries an op-ed arguing that Afghanistan’s only hope for rebuilding may be next door in a country dubbed part of the “axis of evil:
“To Rebuild Afghanistan, Look Next Door
By OLGA M. DAVIDSON and MOHAMMAD J. MAHALLATI
Iran, with a ready work force and strong ties to the Afghanpeople, is one of the best hopes for building a prosperousAfghanistan.”
HOW THE RIGHT ORGANIZES TO BULLY THE NETWORKS
A right wing website, Free Republic, is mobilizing its readers against the producer/writer of NBC’s West Wing. An e-mail advises about their well-organized campaign which, natch, I heard discussed yesterday morning on the Faux News Network.
“Please note the utter hypocrisy of these people. They ask their members to contact NBC to complain about Aaron Sorkin exercising his First Amendment right to criticize not George Bush, but the media for the way they’re COVERING George Bush. And on the same posting they put a link to the so-called First Amendment Action Network.
“Republic Network announces an INSTANT ACTION FREEP (IAF) aimed at Jeff Zucker, President of NBC Entertainment, over the comments of WEST WING Producer Aaron Sorkin about Bush!
Talking points:
1. Shocked at the unpatriotic comments of WW Producer Aaron Sorkin during this time of war/hostilities/terrorists/nationaltension, etc.
2. At a time when we should be pulling together to support our President and our troops, Mr. Sorkin engages in petty partisan attacks to score political points and increase divisiveness.
3. I am contacting NBC sponsors of this show and telling them I will not purchase their products until they pull ALL advertising from this show.
4. I will reduce or eliminate my tuning in NBC until Mr. Sorkin is removed as producer of West Wing.
5. I will be telling all my friends and relatives to do the same.
They then give emails and addresses to target I have yet to see any progressive groups do anything similar. Maybe they should.
IN THE EMAIL.. FROM MONTREAL AND CYBERSPACE
“My name is Marc Couroux and I am a media-artist living and working in Montréal. I have been an avid reader of your work for the past few years and have found it to be an invaluable resource. Information is the first steptowards activism and your work has consistently provided me with some of the essential first steps allowing me to better understand the media and how it shapes our view of the world. I admire your work with MediaChannel and am delighted that it is gaining in notoriety.” And then someone tagged bohaire515 had less time to write, but, did so. Anyway with this shot comment: “Subject: good writing. Thanks” I try.
Thanks back. Good luck to ALTERNET.org as they launch their new book AFTER 9/11 tonight with a book party at the Nathan Cummings Foundation. I plan to be there since I have a piece in the book and get a word or two in. What do you expect? I will also be keynoting the Global Entertainment Summit at the Hammerstein Ballroom (New Yorker Hotel at 34th and 8th Avenue) this Saturday at ll AM, Be there or be square. Awaiting your comments — and feedback. Write dissector@mediachanel.org
See the whole Post / →
Humor And News: What’s So Funny?
February 27th, 2002 - by: danny
POLITICAL HUMOR*PEARL AND THE JOURNAL* PALAST ON VOTER PURGE
Cartoonists of the world attention: you have more power than you think. According to the New York Times front page, the Secretary of Defense, Donald (“rummy”) Rumsfield has closed down the planned Office of Strategic Influence in part because “editorial cartoons about the office’s proposed activities made it impossible to do its job.” You oh so clever wiseguys with brush and pen have “damged” a key asset in the free world’s war on terrorism, and it has been shut down.
SAY GOOD BYE TO THE OSI
You want here something really funny, that is if the office itself was not a joke to begin with, Rumsfeld ran the gamut and emotions and positions in one statement. Here are the three sentences on his response to a question about whether or not the Pentagon’s “integrity” has been compromised.
First, he said, “I doubt it.”
Then he followed with: “I hope not.”
And finally, retracking somewhat and covering all bases, “If it has, we’ll rebuild it.”
This increasingly sounds more we are watching a morality play at the theater of the absurd. The only question is if it is a comedy of a tragedy.
MONITORING POLITICAL HUMOR
Lets start with the first possibility. For some time, conservative media monitors have been tracking the comedy explosion on American TV, noting that the jokes on late night television offer more insights into what Americans a are thinking, or even the information they are getting than than the news programs. You may recall a study during the 2000 election that showed that 25% of younger voters relied on late night comediens for ALL their political information. At that time, Time Magazine referred to political coverage as “electotainment.” And Eric Efron of the dear departed Brills noted, “there is nothing new about comedians milking the news. What’s new is the extent to which the news has been milking the comedians.
And now news analysts are monitoring all the yuks all the time. Here’s the latest from Robert Lichter’s Center for Media and Public Affairs which says that last year it monitored 13,007 news stories on all the evening news shows. You would expect that, even if it sounds less like a life and more like a life sentence. But would you guess that they “logged 3, 480 jokes about public affairs and public figures from the monologues of late night comedians”? “* Jokes Up: Prior to September 11th in 2001, 6.8 political jokes were told per night on the three shows combined. That number dropped 54 percent to just over three jokes per night in the month following the terrorist attacks. Since then, political humor has gradually returned to late night television — with the most recent month showing a rise to over 9 jokes a night, exceeding pre-attack levels by 38 percent. “* How Far They’ve Come: Letterman’s current level of political joking is 10 times higher than the first month after the attacks and above his pre 9/11 average by 65 percent. On Leno, the number of political jokes is 58 percent above initial post-attack totals and 27 percent above his pre-9/11 average. Conan O’Brien — though less reliant on political humor — is averaging 6 times as many political jokes since the immediate aftermath and 32 percent higher than prior levels. “oNot So Star-Studded: Guests of a more serious bent (e.g., Dan Rather, Madelaine Albright, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman) were featured twice as frequently in the 15 weeks after the attacks as in the 15 weeks prior to them (10 percent of all guests compared to 5 percent). THAT VOTER PURGE IN FLORIDA Not as funny about US politics is BBC reporter Greg Palasts latest report on the voter purge in Florida that targeted thousands and thousands of people thought to be felons or dead people, and turned out, surprise, surprise, not to be. For those of you who have not forgotten Florida, as I have not since I am back to directing a new investigative film called COUNTING ON DEMOCRACY, you will want to pick up the March issue of Harpers. Palast shows what the purge documents in Florida looked like and tells some stories of eligible voters who lost their votes. His reporting wll be out soon in a new book, THE BEST DEMOCRACY MONEY CAN BUY. He has been working hard on this story and writes to say: ” Harper’s, Salon, Nation all paid me record sums for my stories … and went over each fact with a fine tooth comb (the Washington Post too, don’t forget). An article he wrote for Mediachannel.org also appears in the book which will be kicked off with a national book tour. Here’s part of his piece in Harpers’s: “In November the U.S. media, lost in patriotic reverie, dressed up the Florida recount as a victory for President Bush. But however one reads the ballots, Bush’s win would certainly have been jeopardized had not some Floridians been barred from casting ballots at all. Between May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state – Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, both proteges of Governor Jeb Bush- ordered 57,700 “ex-felons,” who are prohibited from voting by state law, to be removed from voter rolls. (In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.) A portion of the list, which was compiled for Florida by DBT Online, can be seen for the first time here; DBT, a company now owned by ChoicePoint of Atlanta, was paid $4.3 million for its work, replacing a firm that charged $5,700 per year for the same service. If the hope was that DBT would enable Florida to exclude more voters, then the state appears to have spent its money wisely.” See Gregpalast.com for more. THE DANIEL PEARL INVESTIGATION The NY Times is reporting that Pakistan will turn over to the US the main suspect in the kidnapping of the murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Danny Pearl-, “but only after it concluded its investigation.”CNN reports, “Slain American journalist Daniel Pearl made propaganda statements, underapparent duress, on a roughly produced videotape that also contained violentfootage of his death.The tape included a direct threat to target otherAmericans if the demands of Pearl’s kidnappers were not met.” WHAT WAS THE WALL STEET JOURNAL’S RLE Veteran media critic and columnist Alexander Cockburn praised Pearl’s journalism while suggesting that it was the editorial policies of his won news paper that may have doomed him. (Cockburn used to have a column in the Journal.) He writes this week in New York press and elswhere: “….So if that WSJ editorial writer who invoked “evil” had been honest, he might have written, “It may well be that Danny Pearl was killed because his murderers held him responsible for positions on the Middle East conflict and on Islam oft expressed in these editorial pages. If so, then he died for principles that we honor and will always uphold.” Or something of that sort, while simultaneously emphasizing that reporters are not editorial writers and that Pearl bore no responsibility for the editorials. Might it not have occurred to Pearl’s editors, those who assigned him to South Asia, that the fact that he was an Israeli citizen might have put him in extra peril, given the fact that he was seeking to contact an extremely dangerous crowd of Muslim terrorists in Karachi? The fact of his citizenship only emerged after his death, in a report on Feb. 24 in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, by Yossi Melman: “Professor Yehuda Pearl, father of murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, has told Ha’aretz that he fears that making public his son’s Israeli citizenship could adversely affect investigative efforts by Pakistani police to apprehend the killers and track down the murdered reporter’s body. In a telephone conversation from his Los Angeles residence, Professor Pearl expressed regret and anger over the revelation by the Israeli media of his family’s ‘Israeli connection.’ The U.S. media, which was aware of the information, complied with the family’s request not to make it public.” Then Melman concluded with this minor bombshell: “The American media was asked to comply with this request after information was obtained that confirmed reports that the 38-year-old reporter was dead.” It seems to me almost certain that those Pakistani terrorists would have killed any reporter for a U.S. news organization who had the ill fortune to be seeking an interview at that particular time. Robert Fisk, of the London Independent, has probably written more pieces sympathetic to the Palestinian cause than almost any other mainstream reporter. Yet that didn’t prevent him from nearly being beaten to death by Afghans in a frontier town a few weeks ago. ” THE VIEW FROM “OUT THERE” Writing from Turkey, Adam McConnell asks:” if the US government can demand that the perpetrators of Mr. Pearl’s gruesome murder be handed over into their custody, can Afghan citizens demand that various members of the US government be deported to Afghanistan for trial over the thousands of civilian deaths in the bombing campaign?” (From Afghanistan today, the Times reports that US soldiers who killed 16 people in a raid on two compounds in Hazam Qadam January 24 may have been “duped” according to local witnesses who put he death toll at 21, insisting that US soldiers fired first. The Pentagon says they fired in self-defense.”) McConnel also sends along A Reuters story that shows the renormous gap between what people who rely on western news sources believe and those living in the Arab world. “Despite news reports that 15 of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudis, only 18 percent of those polled in six countries said they believed that Arabs carried out the attacks, USA Today quoted the Gallup poll as showing. “Many blamed Israel or the United States, the paper said, buttressing anecdotal evidence of a huge gulf between the West and Islamic countries over the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. “Just nine percent said U.S. military action in Afghanistan was morally justified, while 77 percent said it was morally unjustified. The United States targeted Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network, which it accuses of masterminding the attacks, and the Taliban militia, their erstwhile Afghan hosts…. UPDATE ON BUSH’S SPEECH IN CHINA: TRNSCRIPT CENSORED The Chicago Tribune reports: ” The Chinese government responded to President Bush’s call for religious tolerance Friday by promptly editing out his remarks on freedom and faith in its transcript of a speech that Bush delivered on live national television. “Before the president had boarded Air Force One to return to the U.S., China’s state-controlled media put out their version of the address he had given Friday morning at Beijing’s Tsinghua University. “Almost half the speech was simply hacked out in the transcript released by the official Xinhua news agency…” AOL TIME WARNER KNOCKED IN AN AOL TIME WARNER MAG Aaron Barnhart of the Kansas City Star whose TV Barn is a mediachannel.org affiliate senda long a story about AOL Time Warner. It knocks the company’s law suit in coinnection with Netwsape and has been published in an AOLTimeWarner Magazine: Fortune. Here are some excerpts from Stuart Alsop’s column:. (Check out the full column in the mag’s website, Fortune.com: “A few weeks ago, AOL Time Warner’s Netscape division sued Microsoft “to seek redress for Microsoft’s anticompetitive conduct against Netscape.” The whole Microsoft-AOL thing is intriguing and slightly terrifying to me, since my venture firm backs companies that want to do business with both. But what motivates me to write about it is that the suit has convinced me that a hunch I’ve had for the past few months is right: AOL Time Warner is no longer the company I once admired and invested in… “Such is the nonsense of a big media company trying to be technologically smart. I have had trouble with FORTUNE’s Website for years, and for that I blame FORTUNE. For the Netscape bar, I blame some nameless corporate executive, who must have decreed that it would be synergistic between the Time Inc. brands (FORTUNE, Time, Sports Illustrated, etc.) and Netscape. Every Time Inc. publication has the same irrelevant bar atop its Website. Let me tell you, there is not one iota of synergy here. What there is, instead, is a complete ignorance of the basic rule of serving customers on the Web–give users their information fast… “Couldn’t these AOL Time Warner execs just bury Netscape and get on with their lives? Couldn’t they focus on the future and on competing aggressively in today’s landscape, rather than trying to extract a pound of flesh from Microsoft through the court system? Instead of fighting back with great products and technological genius, this company is choosing to fight in the courts. And that bodes ill for the future of AOL Time Warner…” MURDOCH GOES TO THE BARBIE Free Press , the Journal of the Campaign for Press and Broadcast Freedom in Britain shows how Murdoch newspapers pander to their audiences. It shows two mostly identical front pages of the SUN on the same day, both featuring the Page 3 Girl of The Year.” The one targeted at Britain knocks the Euro. The one aimed for Ireland praises it. Meanwhile here in New York, Cynthia Cotts writes in this week’s Village Voice about the New York Post, now led by editors from the Murdoch stable in Britain and Australia: ” “Everyone knows the New York Post can be a great read, and we hear it’s a fun place to work these days, especially if you’re from Australia or the U.K. But staffers at the titillating tabloid also know that anyone can be fired for any reason at any time. In early February, the Voice can now reveal, Post editor in chief Col Allan abruptly fired Sunday editor and longtime Post veteran Marilyn Matlick, apparently because she was too feisty and butted heads with the boss. The acting Sunday editor is now Geoff Stead, who hails from the Daily Telegraph in Sydney, Australia, where Allan previously ran the show. Indeed, the Aussie mentality is now so entrenched at the Post that the standard newsroom greeting is “G’day, mate!” ALERT FROM IRAN: FREE SIAMACK POURZAND The latest reports regarding Siamack Pourzand state the detained Iranian journalist has meet his sister in the government administrative office on the 22nd of February for last time. Mr. Pourzand has requested that his sister disconnect all ties with Persian radio programs overseas and discontinue all telephone ties. Mr. Pourzand revealed that these communication lines are being strictly monitored, thus endangering his survival. Furthermore, Mr. Pourzand also notified his sister that is no more hope of meeting one another. Siamack Pourzand was detained on the 24th of November by plainclothes men affiliated with the Islamic regime under unknown conditions. The International Alliance of Iranian Students condemns the Islamic Republic in their violation of human rights. We call on all human rights organizations worldwide for their immediate and unconditional attention to the conditions of Mr. Pourzand.” MEDIACHANNEL BACKED CIVIL LIBERTIES FORUM TONIGHT As we express concern about the lack of freedom elswhee, we here in New York have an opprtunity tonight to attend a panel on Civil Liberties after 9/11 co-sponsored by Mediachannel.org at the Ethical Culture Society 2 W 64 at 7PM. See the Mediachannel.org from page for more info, Please continue to share your ideas and items with me. Write dissector@mediachannel.org
See the whole Post / →
The Sleaze Is Back In The News
February 26th, 2002 - by: danny
*SCAMS*
*WHO WON IN AFGHANISTAN?*
*REJOINDER ON MIDDLE EAST*
Last night, at a meeting with my neighbors, I learned that the taxes assessed on our building had skyrocketed. The city had decided to punish us for upgrading the elevator and making other improvements. What an incentive program for encouraging urban renewal! Then, this morning, the headlines in the local press revealed a one billion dollar city tax scam with some of New York’s biggest landlords exposed as having paid off corrupt building inspectors and avoided paying proper taxes. Now this sort of thing has gone on forever, in this case, allegedly for 35 years. Headline in the Post: “Sleazy industry once again into deed greed.”
With stories like this back, the war on terror and other great tales of our times seem to be receding importance. Last night’s local news was a cavalcade of shootings, killings and perp walks. A former basketball player and NBC sports host Jayson Williams has been charged in the fatal shooting of a chaueffer. And, as only the New York Times would report, six bankers in London ran up a wine bill for $62,700 at one dinner and tried to charge some of it off on clients. Five were sacked.
AL QUAEDA SCAMMED TOO
It gets better. It now appears that fears that Al Quaeda had aquired nuclear bombs for its terror arsenal were excessive. It turns out that they too — -Osama and the whole gang — -were duped by black market racketeers. You can’t even buy a bomb these days without someone passing off bogus substances. In some instances, these clowns bought “crude containers with skulls and crossbones and dipped, perhaps in medical waste to fool a geiger counter,” according to a front page account in the paper of record.
Here’s the summary: “A search in Afghanistan has not uncovered evidence that Osama bin Laden acquired nuclear materials, but does show he may have been duped.”
As for the war on the war they were waging, I spent some last night with General Tommy Franks, in pressed uniform, speaking to reporters in Tampa and Washington in a press briefing. Whenever he was asked a question, he always took the last part first, rattling off statistics like a football coach, which is what he reminded me of. He quaintly spoke of reporting to his boss, and dropped military terms the way priests sprinkle holy water. The headline: No, no mistakes were made in the killing of civilians in a widely publciized recent incident. No, there were no intelligence failures. And yes, the only mistake was the decision by some Afghans to shoot at US military personnel in the course of duty.
He sounded like his predecessor General “STONEWALL” Jackson. He has become quite adept at handling the media, often praising reporters for asking “good questions” before choosing not to answer them fully. Also fascinating about the briefing was Franks continually characterizing the internal situation in Afghanistan as “murky.”
I could the same the same about his press briefing, but I won’t.
WAS AFGHAN WAR A “FAILURE?”
In the region, meanwhile, skepticism about US war aims continues to grow, even as local elites grovel before US demands, and let us never forget, for US funds. Vir Sanghvi writes in the Hindustan Times in India: “So, where is Osama bin Laden? The Daily Telegraph (London) tells us that they’re looking for him in Kashmir. Nonsense, says the Indian government.
And as for the US, its position is unchanged: Osama Who?
“The stubborn refusal of the Americans to even mention bin Laden is curious because the rationale behind the war in Afghanistan was supposed to be thesearch for bin Laden. US intelligence believed that he was hiding in Kandahar and the Taliban were asked to hand him over or face the consequences. It was only when Mullah Omar, the Taliban’s one-eyed leader, refused to yield to the American ultimatum that Afghanistan was attacked.
Well, that attack is over. The Taliban are no longer in charge. A new government, headed by a well-known American stooge, is in place.
“And guess what? There’s still no sign of Osama bin Laden.
“But here’s the funny thing: nobody seems to have noticed!”
Here are some of Shiv’s conclusions, which show that many in the world seem to be feeling sorry for us as in the USA, rather than just hating “us.”
“If you examine all the evidence and give the Americans as much of the benefit of the doubt as possible, there are still some conclusions that seem inevitable.
“One: The Afghanistan operation was a failure. They went in to find bin Laden and they’ve failed to do this successfully.
“Two: To allow themselves to claim victory, they’ve now changed the rules of the game–moved the goalposts, so to speak–and declared that the purpose of the operation was to overthrow the Taliban.
“Three: The moral basis for this operation is now beginning to seem extremely dubious……
Four: The Americans cannot talk publicly about their failure to capture almost all the important Taliban leaders, including Mullah Omar. Or about the fact that not only has bin Laden disappeared but that they haven’t found a single member of his family or his personal protection squad. To drawattention to this would be to admit failure…”
OPIUM WARS
When we think of Afghanistan, we often forget its chief export, the cash crop that has kept governments in power, paid for weapons, and provided what economic infrastructure there is: opium. This just in from CNN.com:
“BUSH EXCUSES AFGHANISTAN, HAITI OVER DRUGS
The Bush administration waived penalties against Afghanistan and Haiti in the annual United States counternarcotics determinations–despite finding that both countries had “failed demonstrably” in combating the drug trade in the past year.”
WHAT IF THERE WAS AN OFFICE OF STRATEGIC INFLUENCE?
We have been reporting on the proposed new Office of Strategic Influence which seems to be going going gone, as a result of its premature disclosure, and its stated intention to disseminate lies. President Bush is signalling that it will not see the light of day, perhaps because of all the scorn with which it was greeted in the press. Alternet.org’s David Turnley, their house satirist claims to have received an anonymous fax listing some of the OSI’s proposed headlines and subhead along with their targeted publications. Like Dark Matter, the headlines exist only in theory and can never be verified.
“Office of Strategic Influence Does Not Exist
“Heart aglow, Rumsfeld promises to be honest forever and ever and ever as Orwell does triple toe/double flip combo in his grave (New York Times)
“New Study Finds Americans Not As Bad As They Seem
“Great Satan” now refers to delicious tofu-like product (Tehran Tattler) ___”President Bush Eager To Learn Intricacies Of Our Culture ___”American leader’s thirst for knowledge leaves everyone impressed, exhausted (all newspapers)
“Loud Explosion Heard Last Night Was Not American Bomb
‘Dead civilians later found to just be real sleepy (Baghdad Times)
“Afghan Body Count Remains Low
“New super-smart bombs kill only bad people (Washington Post)
“THE BEER TEAM REVISITED
“Not as funny, but probably just as true is this report which refers to a story that I also highlighted: the gold medal performance of the Winter Olympics Beer Team. Here’s Alternet’s more serious take:”THE INVISIBLE WHITENESS OF THE OLYMPIC BEER RIOT: When white folks rioted over beer at the Olympics, it waslaughed off in a “gee, don’t they have anything better to do”way. What if blacks or latinos had done the same?”http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12479
“WE GET MAIL: (l) Comment on Middle East Media Bias
“Larry Houghteling discussed media coverage of Israel/Palestine: “Note to your associate JF: you must be living in a different world from the rest of us. In the world in which I live the media to which I have access are overwhelmingly bending over backwards to be nice tothe Israelis. On Friday the NY Times finally had astatistical breakdown on who has been killed in the so-called “Intifada II” since September 2000.As we might expect, many, many more Palestinians have died than have Israelis.
“But, ONE: the Times ran the graphic in such a way that it was very hard to compare the little lines representing Israeli deaths with the slightly larger lines representing Palestinian deaths.
“TWO: there were no totals listed; nowhere did thelittle lines get added up to whatever the totals are:Israel, 350 deaths, Palestinians, 800 deaths (or whatever it is – I just invented those numbers). Andthere was no breakdown into any sort of categories: “terrorists”, settlers, soldiers, women and children–whatever.
“And THREE: nowhere is there a media context. Here’s a grim game I propose to keep a graduate student busy for a weekend: Go through all the Timeses sinceSharon’s visit to the Temple Mount in 9/00; record each number of Israeli and Palestinian deathsmentioned in headlines; give each a weight. (Each first page mention gets 3 points, each 3rd page mention gets 2 points, anywhere else in the papers equals 1 point.) Then multiply the number in the headline times the weight. And then total up the weighted numbers.
” My guess is that you’d be startled by the discrepancy between the actual totals of deaths and these weighted totals. My guess is that it takes verylittle for Israeli deaths to be mentioned on the front page, whereas “Eight Palestinians Killed in Hebron Incident” is likely to be on page 10.
“In all honesty, I don’t see Reuters, and maybe Reuters is very different from the Times, in whichcase I owe JF an apology. But my guess (I seem to be doing a lot of guessing) is that as one of thespeakers in the Chomsky-Luttwak et al. discussion you reported on said, we all have our tribal blinkers on and often see what we choose to see. Thanks once again for doing such a terrific demystifying job.”
(2) FAN LETTER
“Damian Irizarry e’s from the respected alternative radio show. Making Contact: “I admire your work and we here at Making Contact have taken one of your comments to heart. We have recently been changing the production of the show, incorporating more sound, music and rythmic narration. We want our program to be as interesting as it is informational. You should give it a listen. Again I wanted to tell you that I love your work and your site, and consider you a great media role model.”
(3)REQUEST
Esther Sassaman asks for your help:I am a student at Antioch College doing a web-based survey on 9/11 related issues. The survey is here: http://threat.dumbfounded.org
(4)ON THE KIDNAPPING OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BETANCOURT IN COLOMBIA
UN Secretary General Annan as well as the US Green Party has demanded her release. The Greens as was reported suspect that she was kidnapped by the right although Al Giordano, editor of the Narco News Network that covers that country comments that Betancourt is controversial and hardly a Green in the Nader sense. He writes: “Betancourt is a head case. Daughter of a Colombian ambassador and oligarch, megalomaniac, raised in Paris, supporter of Plan Colombia and the drug war, and presidential candidate, she went to the ex-demilitarized zone the other night against the recommendation of the Colombian government as a publicity stunt.
The FARC has not yet taken credit for her kidnapping. But it makes sense, in that the FARC has proposed a “trade” of political prisoners with the government and she would up the bounty. The FARC is also reasonably (though not 100%) good about abiding by the Geneva Convention on treatment of POWs. She should hope, for her sake, that her kidnappers are with the FARC and not the paramilitaries!
“In last Thursday’s El Tiempo (in what was apparently her last or one of her last public statements) Betancourt said of Pastrana’s decision to end peace talks and declare all out war:”Esta decisión fue difÃcil de tomar y por eso le hago un llamado a la Nación para que crezca, se una y respalde al Presidente.” (“This was a difficult decision to make and that’s why I call upon the Nation to grow, to unite and to back the President.”)
“I’ll bet these Greens in NY have very little understanding of the situation in Colombia. They just see a candidate who titles herself ‘green’ and think she’s one of them.”
Here at the Mediachannel, a staffer with personal knowledge of someone held by FARC says they do not treat prisoners humanely at all. Narconews.com carries the latest FARC communique on the escalating war in Columbia
(5) OUTRAGE OF THE WEEK (so Far)
I was sent this AP story .
“GOP Comes Under Fire For ‘Heroes’ Fundraiser”
“NEW YORK, Feb. 22 – A Republican Party fundraiser honoring “America’s heroes” and featuring former mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has drawn the ire of some who believe the event seeks to capitalize on the tragedy of Sept. 11.
“The Salute to America’s Heroes dinner, scheduled March 5 in Washington, is expected to raise at least $5.5 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee. The money will be used for this year’s elections.
“Giuliani is the only scheduled speaker.
“Lt. Jack Ginty, vice president of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association, criticized the fundraiser today.
“It’s just in bad taste to run a campaign of ‘Salute the Heroes’ and use the money for political campaigns,” said Ginty, who narrowly escaped the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.
“Ginty said the dinner could have honored just Giuliani for the job he did as mayor.
“Everyone’s being called a hero,” he said. “I was in both collapses, and I’m not a hero. . . . The heroes haven’t come home.”
HAIL THE REAL HEROES
Hail to the real heroes. And to all of you for getting through today’s serving of media dissections. Share your comments with us. Remember, if you live in New York City, join Mediachannel and friends tomorrow night for a panel on civil liberties after 9/11 at the Ethical Culture Society. See the Mediachannel.org front page for more info. Your input is most welcome. Write: dissector@mediachannel.org
See the whole Post / →
The Radio Show
 | New show every Friday at 1PM ET from NYC on the internet at the Progressive Radio Network. |
Click here for the latest podcast.
About Danny Schechter
Danny Schechter is an Emmy award winning journalist, television producer and independent filmmaker who also writes, blogs and speaks about media issues.
His latest film is PLUNDER The Crime Of Our Time.
Mr. Schechter is NOT the Godfather of Soul.
read more about The News Dissector →