*THERE IS POWER IN BLOOD

*PROTESTS AGAINST MEDIA COVERAGE

*IS PBS CENSORING ANOTHER FILM?

OFFICE SPACE NEEDED.

In New York City, reality is spelled realty. MediaChannel and Globalvision are being forced to relocate as the corporatization and Disneyfication of Times Square marches on. We urgently need leads on about 2500-3)00 square feet of affordable office space on the Island of Manhattan. Help! Write Dissector@medichannel.org

I have blood on my mind this morning. And all the stories about the faith that powers George W. Bush. The blood comes from a hymn, reminds Fritz Fitsch in the Washington Post (more about that paper below), a hymn cited in the State of the Union message aimed at the growing evangelical movement in America but missed by those of us of a lesser theological orientation. Fritz explains: “The president used the words of a hymn, �There’s Power in the Blood,’ to strengthen the religious rhetoric of his State of the Union speech. He spoke of the �power, wonder-working power,’ of �the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people.’ The original words of the hymn refer to the �wonder-working power’ of �the precious blood of the lamb’ — Jesus Christ. The unspoken but apparently deliberate parallel between Americans and Jesus is disturbing, to say the least The implication is that Americans are generous — like Jesus. And that we are innocent victims — like the lamb of God.”

“MY UTMOST FOR THE HIGHEST”

Howard Fineman of Newsweek’s School of Divinity tells us this week that the Commander in Chief rises every morning before dawn, just like your news dissector. But as I scramble to get to this computer, gulping coffee and short doses of CNN, FOX and BBC, he curls up with a book of evangelical mini-sermons called “My utmost for his highest.” My sleep clogged eyes find this hard to decipher but, yes it is true, that forms his first morning briefing, his utmost for his highest. Does he hum, “Onward Christian Soldiers” or just the song about the blood?

As I thought about those other servants of the mighty One God, his adversaries with the Koran on their laps, I was reminded that we may never have left the Middle Ages. Maureen Dowd’s column on Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s fascination with the rise and the fall of the Mongol Empire drove me back into the Never-Never Land of cable news where the theft of Cher’s wig and Latoya’s admission that brother Michael did have his nose “done” competed for our attention with the war is on its way and the pronoucements of those in power. Even the great musical satirist of the 1960s, Tom Lehrer, is paralyzed by the bizarreness of it all. Says Tom:

“I’m not tempted to write a song about George W. Bush. I couldn’t figure out what sort of song I would write. That’s the problem: I don’t want to satirize George Bush and his puppeteers, I want to vaporize them.”

CAN WAR BE STOPPED?

As for vaporization, it seems as if the great weapons hunt in Iraq is not coming up with much, but that doesn’t much matter since the absence of evidence is evidence in our Alice in Wonderland world. Are we all resigned to war? Yes, says Fidel Castro on a trip through Canada: “Ninety-nine people out of 100, when you ask them, believe that this will happen,” Castro said during a refueling stopover en route to Cuba from Japanfollowing an 11-day Asian tour.

“However, nothing is impossible and perhaps there is still the remotest possibility that it would not happen.” While some diplomats and many activists scramble to stop the war, some PR people are taking the “let’s get it over with” line that seems to be echoed everywhere.

People like Doug Dowie, a senior vice president at the Fleishman-Hillard PR firm.”Let’s have this damn war and get it over with,” he said at a Los Angeles meeting of the Public Relations Society of America. PRWatch reports:

“Dowie complained that uncertainty connected with the Iraq war has paralyzed client spending.”The sooner we get there the better off most of us are going to be,” he predicted.”

“Can you profit from the war? Yes according to this recent ad in the Wall Street Journal for Ecommerce: “When bombs start dropping on Baghdad - will you be on the right side of the market?”

“Friends, let’s face it. This market is volatile, frustrating - and loaded with HUGE profit opportunities. You’ll have a chance to learn about the very best opportunities for the next 6-12 months, by attending Wall Street Reporters Spring 2003 Investment Forum on March 27, in New York City.”

OH CANADA

The Canadians obviously believe the war can be delayed because they are pushing to give Saddam a thirty day last chance ultimatum resolution. Later today, we will find out if the French and Russians will veto the new British-US resolution. If they say they will, the US won’t submit the resolution. Which probably makes war more unilaterally possible. And if it comes, the US military will get to try out some new weapons and strategies.

Reports the NY TIMES “Military officials have said the plan calls for unleashing3,000 precision bombs. And what will happen then:

“VOILA.’ Explains the Guardian: “At the Pentagon they call it the Voila Moment. That’s when Iraqi soldiers and civilians, with bombs raining down on Baghdad, suddenly scratch their heads and say to themselves: “These bombs aren’t really meant to kill me and my family, they are meant to free us from an evil dictator!” At that point, they thank Uncle Sam, lower their weapons, abandon their posts, and rise up against Saddam Hussein. Voila!”

THE MEDIA TILT

How is the media doing in covering all this? USA quotes mediachannel affiliate, The Tyndall Report, to show the institutionalized tilt in the coverage towards the war option. “Of 414 stories on the Iraqi question that aired on NBC, ABC and CBS from Sept. 14 to Feb. 7, [Andrew] Tyndall says that the vast majority originated from the White House, Pentagon and State Department. Only 34 stories originated from elsewhere in the country, he says.

“Similarly, a check of major newspapers around the country from September to February found only 268 stories devoted to peace initiatives or to opposition to the war, a small fraction of the total number. Most editors and reporters think the diplomatic story — the great power narrative — is more real,’ NYU’s [Jay] Rosen says. ‘And people who move into the White House know how to dominate the news agenda.’”

Media watcher Cynthia Cotts in the Village Voice this week says the media is echoing Administration claims that war is inevitable: “Last week, journalists were still using phrases like “a possible war,” “in the event of war,” “if war breaks out,” and “assuming there is a war.” Events were unfolding so quickly behind the scenes that results were impossible to predict. But by press time, the subtext that was previously embedded in every newspaper, Internet, and TV war story had become the main thesis: The U.S. is going to attack Iraq. Case closed.”

PROTESTING THE MEDIA TILT

This pattern of pro-war journalism marches into March. Novelist-essayist Gore Vidal, never lost for an evocative phrase says “The media [have] never been more disgusting�Every lie out of Washington — they’re out there doing war dances.” Finally, as we have been urging, more critical voices are speaking out. A Ralph Nader backed group has organized a letter from more than two dozen journalism school deans and professors, independent editors, journalists and authors sent to major media editors, publishers, producers and reporters.

“The letter highlights six patterns of poor media coverage which have characterized war-time reporting during Gulf War I and the present run-up to war in Iraq:

“1. The Horserace Syndrome & Highlighting Tactics Over PoliticalAnalysis: Endlessly repeated news features with titles like Showdownwith Saddam present a grave matter as though it were a high-stakessports contest,” the letter says. It goes on to highlight major newsstories the media has failed to cover adequately as they obsess overmilitary tactics.

“2. Failing to Protest Government Control of Information: The government has frozen out the media and carefully controlled their access to information. Newspapers and TV news have underreported this freeze out, and failed to contest it aggressively.

“3. Failing to Maintain an Arms-Length Relationship with Government: State-controlled media comes in many garbs,” warns the letter, noting the over-reliance of TV news in particular on government-approved retired military and intelligence consultants.

“4. Failing to Question the Official Story: The media should never confuse patriotism with obeisance and a rubber-stamp mentality,” the letter states.

“5. Failing to Present a Diversity of Viewpoints: There is a duty to seek out and quote the many experts who express skepticism about claims by the state, rather than simply to rely on the same pundits repeatedly,” the letter states. It calls as well on “editors, publishers and producers to see that their op-ed pages, letters-to-the-editor sections and talk shows are open to a vigorous diversity of viewpoints.”

“6. Radio: Years ago, radio actually acknowledged the concept of orderly debates with widely varying viewpoints,” the letter states. “It shoulddo so again.”

Signers include ex-New York Times reporter William Serrin, Ben Bagdikian former dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at University of California at Berkeley, author Studs Terkel, independent journalist and filmmaker Barbara Koeppell and author Ralph Nader.” Please add my name.

WASHING THE POST

This letter comes out of “our nation’s capital,” a town dominated by The Washington Post. Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman have surveyed Post coverage, concluding:”We would say that the Post editorial pages have become an outpost of the Defense Department — except that there is probably more dissent about the pending war in Iraq in the Pentagon than there is on the Post editorial pages.

“In February alone, the Post editorialized nine times in favor of war, the last of those a full two columns of text, arguing against the considerable critical reader response the page had received for pounding the drums of war. Over the six-month period from September through February, the leading newspaper in the nation’s capital has editorialized 26 times in favor of war. It has sometimes been critical of the Bush administration, it has sometimes commented on developments in the drive to war without offering an opinion on the case for war itself, but it has never offered a peep against military action in Iraq.

“The op-ed page, which might offer some balance, has also been heavily slanted in favor of war.

SPYING IS NOT NEWS

As for covering stories reported elsewhere, we have been telling you about the lack of pickup on that report out of England of US spying on members of the Security Council. TomDispatch has been following this too, reporting, “�the American press has finally tiptoed in two days late on the Observer NSA surveillance document. The Washington Post, Newsday, and so on all had to wait, it seems, on a government non-response (at Ari Fleischer’s news briefing yesterday) for a peg on which to hang the story.” And what did he say — that he wouldn’t say: “‘As a matter of long-standing policy, the administration never comments on anything involving any people involved in intelligence.” Now it is news.

WHO KNOWS WHAT?

If the US public can’t find out what’s happening from their media, they know even less about what is happening about the deliberations that will effect the media

“Only four percent of 1,254 adults surveyed by the Project For Excellence in Journalism in collaboration with the Pew Research Center for the People and The Press said they had heard �a lot’ about the FCC’s deliberations regarding rule changes that could redefine the shape and scope of American media’ �Protest against media coverage was one of the issues raised at the recent Global Entertainment and Media Summit in New York City as Polar Levine reports on Pop Cult media:

“http://www.popcultmedia.com/bla3403.html

MEDIA NEWS: CENSORSHIP AGAIN?

A campaign is underway protesting PBS’s refusal to air another film; John Pilger’s award-winning documentary, “Palestine is still the issue” which had a controversial reception in England where the owner of the TV network that aired it denounced it — but it was broadcast. No such luck in this country. Supporters of the film says it has been rejected “by established corporate media outlets in the US — ABC, CBS, NBC, and the cables, CNN, MSNBC, and FoxNews �.But what is disconcerting is that even PBS, the self-proclaimed network of the public, has decided to take a pass on this very important documentary.”

This is nothing new for PBS, of course which has a long and proud tradition of rejecting fare like this, especially on this issue. (There has been a new bombing in the Middle East today — an attack inside Haifa, a first within the Green Line, in the aftermath of an Israeli attack reported thusly: “Israeli Troops Kill 3 in Separate Incidents in West Bank� In separate shooting incidents and clashes, Israeli forces killed three Palestinians, as the White House issued a rare caution to Israel.”

From China, a new call for Press Freedom reports the EJC:

“A bold call for press freedom has been made on the eve of the official opening of the national people’s congress - China’s parliament � in Beijing. Senior journalists and academics have called on the government to stop trying to suppress “negative news”, and to allow the media to satisfy “the needs of society”. The congress, which begins a new five-year session will appoint new government leaders from the younger generation headed by Hu Jintao. There is a growing hope that under Mr Hu there will at least be a modest resumption of the political reform which has been blocked for the past decade. It is an encouraging sign that a leading newspaper has published an outspoken two-page debate on the relationship between the press and the government. Meanwhile Bao Tong, a senior government aide before the Tiananmen Square clamp-down, has issued a letter to the congress saying: “Freeing up the press is the most pressing matter of the moment. The choice now is between news freedom and corruption.”

The New York Times finally reports today on the Italian media situation which we have been telling you about, and which has been the subject of most protest: “Silvio Berlusconi, prime minister and billionaire media mogul, is facing new accusations of conflict of interest, brought on by a crisis at the state broadcasting network RAI�.

�”It’s very clear that there is a very heavy conflict of interest here,” said an opposition senator, Franco Bassanini, who added that many television journalists refused to criticize Mr. Berlusconi for fear of losing their jobs. “They have no alternative,” he said. “If they are excluded from RAI, they cannot go to the other major stations, because they are owned by Mr. Berlusconi.” But Mr. Berlusconi has survived similar attacks, and he assures Italians that he is keeping his public and private interests separate.”

EMAIL IN — ON CTV, AOL, AND MC

Three interesting letters this morning:Major Skillz writes: “Just a note. Watching CTV news here in Canada yesterday and they were saying that if the war happens in Iraq that the first wave of attack would be with US B52’s that carry bombs capable of �major destruction’.How funny is that? I wrote to them mentioning the interesting usage of words and their obvious avoidance of the words �mass destruction.’”They wouldn’t want the poor public to get confused as to who’s the bad guy here, eh? Here’s a headline lifted from TheOnion - “Blix finds Weapons of Mass Destruction in North Dakota”. Have a great day. Peace.”

Bob Easton sends along this from New Mexico: “An interesting poll on AOL’s front page today: readers are asked to evaluate interrogation methods. The results: sleep deprivation (38%); prolonged painful positions (32%); physical force (23%); starvation (6%).

“Then we are asked “Does any of the above go too far? About 26,000 people answered this question who hadn’t selected a preference for a method of interrogation. I assume that, like myself, these people weren’t ready to accept any of the methods as appropriate or humane and chose to vote “NO!” to torture in any form, physical or psychological.

“AOL’s polls are almost invariably written to produce a hawkish result, most often by giving a single option (e.g. “attack Iraq now”) on the side of the Bushistas and two choices (e.g. “wait for UN support” or “war is inappropriate”) on the anti-war side. It’s obvious which choice will win, but if you total the votes for the latter two choices, war loses every time.

Shebar Windstone, a frequent correspondent, is concerned about our future, thank you:

“I’m referring to your plea for tips on office space in today’s weblog, hard on the heels of your benefactor’s death (I was hoping he’d leave you a few million Euros in his will) & staff cutbacks… Anyway, if there’s any way possible, I’d like to suggest that you team up with whoever you can team up with — if there is anyone, you probably know them — & lease or, preferably, buy a building that could be an alternative media building. NYC certainly needs one, & if any appropriate & affordable properties can be found & modified, everyone involved could save by sharing recording studios, conference rooms, auditorium, library etc. & owning a building is the only way of assuring longevity. �”

TAKE OFF THAT T-SHIRT

Your News Disector’s courage in communications award goes today to Mr. Stephen Downs of Albany, New York who would rather go to jail than take off an anti-war T-shirt. AP reports “A man was charged with trespassing in a mall after he refused to take off a T-shirt that said “Peace on Earth'’ and “Give peace a chance.'’

Mall security approached Stephen Downs, 61, and his 31-year-old son, Roger, on Monday night after they were spotted wearing the T-shirts at Crossgates Mall in a suburb of Albany, the men said.

The two said they were asked to remove the shirts made at a store there, or leave the mall. They refused. The guards returned with a police officer who repeated the ultimatum. The son took his T-shirt off, but the father refused. “I said, ‘All right then, arrest me if you have to,”’ Downs said. “So that’s what they did. They put the handcuffs on and took me away.'’ I guess Downs didn’t know he was supposed to shut up and shop. Apologies to all of you who received two copies of this blog via email yesterday. We screwed up. I hope it won’t happen again. In the mean time, tell us what else we got wrong — or write. Also, to those who post on the site, of course I read the comments. In this case, we had covered suggested that the Shaekh allegedly busted in Pakistan was the wrong man — or dead. I had seen the earlier reports — and the Globalvision News Network had carried them. But as Mark Twain once said; �news of my death have been exaggerated.’ Let us follow this story closely. In the meantime, share your comments: Write: Dissector@mediachannel.org