*ERRANT SMART BOMB NOT SO SMART*

*FRENCH TOAST*

*KATHERINE HARRIS FLAP IN FLORI-DUH*

Planes are crashing over Germany, water company executives are crashing in France, public education may be crashing in Washington thanks to the Supreme Court’s ruling on vouchers (”Just as historic” as the civil rights desegregartion ruling, Brown v Board of Education, says our EDUCATOR in Chief) and the war on terror continues to terrorize Afghan citizens including 40 members of a wedding party who were killed by what the Pentagon admits was an “errant bomb.”

“STRAYING OFF COURSE”

This “errant” bomb was a biggie, a 2000 pounder, with a pricey satellite guidance system, which “strayed off course” according the New York Times. Strayed into the lives of “scores of civilians” who were wounded or killed. The Canadian wires were a bit more graphic:

“Afghans said people in the village of Kakarak were firing weapons in the air to celebrate a wedding - as is common in rural Afghanistan - when U.S. planes attacked in the early hours Monday. Estimates of the number killed ranged from dozens to more than 100. ”

The US response?: “In Florida, the U.S. Central Command, which is responsible for U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, said a coalition operation in Uruzgan province “may have resulted in civilian casualties.” Notice the word “may have.” (DS)

“Close air support from U.S. Air Force B-52 and AC-130 aircraft struck several ground targets, including anti-aircraft artillery sites that were engaging the aircraft,” the brief statement said, and acknowledged that there may have been civilian casualties.

“Later on Monday, Central Command issued a statement saying that officials from the U.S. military, the Afghan government and the U.S. Embassy in Kabul would investigate the bombing. Journalists will be allowed to accompany the team.

INCIDENT “COULD BE” THE WORST

The New York Post, a booster of the war says this incident “could be one of the worst accidents of the war.” Washington seems most concerned about the impact that its “errant” “smart bomb” deadly impact could have in worsening US Afghan relations.

Meanwhile, inside Afghanistan, there is mucho internal conflict still simmering as Radio Free Europe reports:

“A four-man delegation from the Afghan central government left Kabul today to visit northern provinces that have been plagued by recent factional fighting. The UnitedNations has evacuated its international staff from some parts of the north. There are also reports that hundreds of families have been burned out of their homes.”

In short, folks, this war ain’t over yet and, judging by the past will continue on its bloody trajectory, “errant bombs,” and “factional fighting” and all.

SANITIZING LANGUAGE

Sanitizing language in media reporting of war is nothing new. The very term “collateral damage” is perhaps the best known example. Academic studies of conflicts tend to lag behind the news, but John Pilger, the outspoken British based TV journalist tells us about a new report straight out of Glasgow worth thinking about: ZNET carries it:

“If you got your news only from the television, you would have no idea of the roots of the Middle East conflict, or that the Palestinians are victims of an illegal military occupation.

“In May, the Glasgow University Media Group, distinguished for its pioneering media analysis, published a study of the reporting of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. It ought to be required reading in newsrooms and media schools. The research showed that the public’s lack of understanding of the conflict and its origins was compounded by news reporting, especially on television.

“Viewers, says the study, are rarely told that the Palestinians are victims of an illegal military occupation. The term “occupied territories” is almost never explained. Indeed, only 9 per cent of young people interviewed knew that the Israelis were the occupiers and the “settlers” were Israeli. The selective use of language is important.

“The study found that words such as “murder”, “atrocity”, “lynching” and “savage, cold-blooded killing” were used only to describe Israeli deaths. “The extent to which some journalism assumes the Israeli perspective,” wrote Professor Greg Philo, “can be seen if the statements are ‘reversed’ and presented as Palestinian actions. [We] did not find any [news] reports stating that ‘The Palestinian attacks were in retaliation for the murder of those resisting the illegal Israeli occupation’.”

PARTY HARDY AND STICK IT TO THE TERRORISTS

Now after weeks of warnings about a possible July 4th terror attack, officials are reversing themselves, at least in New York, where Mayor Bloomberg is telling the public that “celebrating July 4th” is the best way to stick it to the terrorists.” Huh? The Mayor has thus “shrugged off” vague warnings. Meanwhile, the Post reports quoting unnamed US officials citing unspecific “intercepted communications” that Al Qaeda is keeping bin Laden off of TV because “his frail condition could harm morale.” Now these sources, if they do exist, are saying that bin Laden is still alive but in a “weakened condition.” Got that?

DOUBLE STANDARDS

In Europe, the alliance with the US is under new strains by US maneuvers at the UN to kill peacekeeping support for Bosnia to protect US peace keepers from possible persecution by the new International Criminal Court which the US opposes. Headline in the Guardian:

“America’s European allies expressed “deep regret” yesterday over US threats to pull out of UN peacekeeping operations, the latest in a string of disputes shaking the transatlantic alliance. The Bush administration said it would not budge in its opposition to the new international criminal court, which was created yesterday. Threatening to block a renewed mandate for the Bosnian peacekeeping force… Per Stig Moeller, foreign minister of Denmark - which has just taken over the EU presidency - angrily condemned the American stance. “I deeply regret this dramatic step that threatens UN peace operations in general,” he said as high-level Nato and EU committees convened in emergency session to discuss the crisis.”

BOSNIAN REACTION

BBC reports on the media reaction in Bosnia: “The US decision to veto the renewal of the UN mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina has caused consternation among Bosnian media. TheSarajevo-daily “Dnevni Avaz” says the stand-off over the future of the UN police training mission is set to have serious repercussions for the whole region, even if the separate Nato-led Stabilisation Force (S-For) peacekeeping mission continues uninterrupted.

“The paper warns that the decision could soon lead to the withdrawal of around 3,000 US soldiers from the 17,000-strong NATO-led peace-keeping force in Bosnia.

“The Bosnian independent daily “Oslobodjenje” is also pessimistic, but takes a more cautious approach, saying the US at least has not threatened to withdraw its soldiers from the NATO-led mission. “The Balkans have become the theatre of previously unseen diplomatic confrontations,” the daily said.

“It added that, ‘despite continuous efforts on all sides, Washington, London and Paris have failed to produce a joint solution not only for the major problems surrounding this mission but also for other peace-keeping missions in the world.’

“In the Bosnian Serb Republic, the “Nezavisne Novine” daily warns that the US withdrawal from the NATO force could have “catastrophic consequences”.

MEDIA COMPANY DECLINES

In our media news today, which is often news about media and communications companies, we have reports that World Com may been rigging its books for years, underscoring once again, the inept regulatory environment in which auditors who are there to keep the finances on the up and up are responsible in part for concealing the truth.

Writing in Salon, Anthony York notes:

“After the shock of two more multibillion-dollar corporate fraud cases last week, WorldCom and Xerox, President George W. Bush has taken up the mantle of corporate responsibility. “Corporate leaders who violate the public’s trust should never be given that trust again,” he told listeners to his radio address on Saturday. But even to the most objective observer, this pitch, from this White House, is one tough sell. Although Bush evaded most of the political fallout from the Enron debacle despite his administration’s close ties to that company, the growing scandal of corporate irresponsibility is threatening to engulf the business-friendly White House.”

“FRENCH TOAST”

The big focus this morning is on the resignation of Jean Marie Messier, the CEO of Vivendi-Universal who managed to alienate his board, his employees and his key patrons as he attempted to modernize and “Americanize” the media conglomerate he ran. As for the shareholders, they were more than alienated having lost 60% of the stock price in a company that has said to be doing better than rivals like AOL Time Warner. This is the kind of occasion that you love the headline writers at Variety who just let it rip with stories like this:

“VIV TOPPER IS FRENCH TOAST Embattled Messier to step down

“Vivendi Universal topper Jean-Marie Messier has met his Waterloo.Days after the embattled chief exec fought off a coup engineered by several Viv U board members and backed by major shareholder the Bronfman family, Messier has agreed to step down as president-CEO of the French conglom” and this:

“THE CRASHING OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

Investors couldn’t see Messier’s bold visions

“The decline and fall of Jean Marie Messier resonates on manylevels, both economic and cultural. Messier liked to present himself as the most Americanized of any major Euro business leader, yet was brought down by a cadre of opponents led by the North American Bronfmans.”

CLOSER TO HOME

Here, in the media covering US media, we have two stories to share. The first is from Oregon where Edward Monls, writing in the Register-Guard, has discovered that right wing talk shows dominate the radio airwaves: “The end of fairness: Right-wing commentators have a virtual monopoly when it comes to talk radio programming:”

“Once upon a time, in a country that now seems far away, radio and television broadcasters had an obligation to operate in the public interest. That generally accepted principle was reflected in a rule known as the FairnessDoctrine…

The FCC is mandated by federal law to grant broadcasting licenses in such a way that the airwaves are used in the “public convenience, interest or necessity.” The U.S. Supreme Court in 1969 unanimously upheld the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine, expressing the view that the airwaves were a “public trust” and that “fairness” required that the public trust accurately reflect opposing views.

“However, by 1987 the Fairness Doctrine was gone - repealed by the FCC, to which President Reagan had appointed the majority of commissioners…”

KATHERINE HARRIS IS BAAACK

Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post reports:

“Deriding Katherine Harris Costs Editor’s Job”

“The Sarasota (Fla.) Herald-Tribune recently ran a 4,400-word, 2 1/2-page spread on Republican congressional candidate Katherine Harris. And when one reader complained that Democratic candidates were getting short shrift,Managing Editor Rosemary Armao responded with a remarkably candid e-mail — one that wound up costing her her job.

“Katherine Harris is an international figure, like her or not,” Armao wrote of the woman who became a central player in the presidential recount in Florida. “She’s going to be the next congresswoman from this area, like it or not. . . . I have no intentions of covering each of the Democratic candidates to the same extent.”

“Armao added: “I do not intend to vote for Harris. . . . I blame the Democrats for not finding a better candidate . . . and I blame our culture for craving as its public figures, women like Katherine who are very pretty, hard-working and without original ideas that I can find.”

“Armao resigned yesterday rather than be fired. “I have to accept that I did something that could have hurt the paper, and I’m trying to set that right.” (Washington Post, June 28)

And the beat goes on in Florida USA where a degraded media environment contributes to a degraded political environment.

PLEDGES

Finally today, we go back to the controversy over the Pledge of Allegiance. I have noticed a variety of proposals on the web to scrap the current pledge all together and replace it with another. Here’s Robin Goodrow’s suggestion. What’s yours?

“I pledge allegiance to the Earth

“On which I stand

“And to all living things

“One world

“One people

“Undivided

“With food, shelter, and justice for all”

And so we move here in the Big Apple from over overheated day to the next. I am off to speak to some high school students learning about media in an innovative effort called “The Producers Project.” The kids dropped by last week and their energy and enthusiasm prompts me to catch up with them again. Where’s your energy and enthusiasm? Input from readers has dropped off somewhat. I hope that doesn’t mean I am boring. Let me hear from you at dissector@medichannel.org