Month: September 2006

General Motors’ Great American Idiot

Posted by on September 30, 2006 at 1:05 am. NO Comments :

In a stunning display of marketing ineptidude, General Motors has tagged Sean Hannity as its spokesman for a campaign/contest to give away 5 new cars. The “You’re A Great American Car Give-Away”, was conceived as a means to promote GM’s American-made vehicles. But the “great” American they chose as the public face of the promotion is a controversial and contentious figure who routinely disparages the patriotism of other Americans. He is a divisive and hostile partisan that recently declared that control of the Congress in the next election is a life and death struggle:

“there are things in life worth fighting and dying for and one of ‘em is making sure Nancy Pelosi doesn’t become the speaker.”

GM, like other automakers, has fallen on hard times. So has Hannity, whose program’s ratings have declined 21% year-over-year. So the selection of Hannity as their spokesman may just be a case of two withering dinosaurs huddling together waiting for extinction.

Newsweek Covers Cover-Up News

Posted by on September 28, 2006 at 10:58 am. NO Comments :

The segregation of Americans from the rest of the world is graphically illustrated with this week’s issue of Newsweek. International readers of the magazine will see a cover that features a menacing jihadi and the headline: Losing Afghanistan. But U.S. readers will get a far more comforting cover featuring celebrity photographer Annie Liebowitz and her, “Life In Pictures.” (Liebowitz cover is at the top left at the link above. Scroll down for the International cover).

Since we know that magazine covers have a profound impact on sales, the message delivered by Newsweek’s editorial staff reveals their rather disturbing preconceptions about their readers.

  • International readers are compelled by substantive news that challenges and informs them with honest and relevant reporting.
  • U.S. readers prefer gossipy tabloid material that shelters them from woe and preserves a blissful ignorance.

Whether or not the Newsweek editors are correct, they are irresponsible. Their job is to publish news, not pacify the perceived tender sensitivities of their customers. The American people deserve better than the insulting insinuation that they are too fragile to be exposed to the messy reality of truthful reporting.

But coddling like this has even more serious consequences. The gap between how the world perceives international affairs and how Americans do, is an ever-widening chasm. Americans are frequently surprised by the actions and opinions of other nations and fail to grasp why they so often disagree with us. Maybe it’s because our media does us the disservice of sanitizing our news. Like children at the dinner table, they slice it up and feed it to us in digestible bits. The result is that we don’t get the full story.

As a democracy, our foreign policy is executed by representatives that we elect. If our choices are made on the basis of incomplete, and even inaccurate, information, then our policies will reflect that deficiency. That’s why so many Americans initially supported the Iraq invasion while most of the world opposed it. That’s why universal healthcare is provided by most economically stable nations but not here. That’s why over 160 countries have signed the Kyoto environmental accords, but not the U.S. That’s why the death penalty is outlawed in every western industrialized nation except for ours.

The impression that America is out of touch with the rest of the world is inescapable and the blame lies with Newsweek and it’s peers in the American media. This cover controversy is not an isolated example. It is merely a graphically expository one. And if we do not demand more from our media, we will continue to be shortchanged and misinformed. And we will continue to misunderstand the world and they will misunderstand us. That is a dangerous brew that foreshadows escalating differences and risks for Americans and all the world’s people.

(Hat tip to Truthout and Eat The Press)

Propaganda Is Its Own Reward

Posted by on September 27, 2006 at 3:05 pm. NO Comments :

Last year, a PR firm called the Lincoln Group, was hired by the Pentagon to bribe Iraqi newspapers to carry pre-packaged stories that put the U.S. and the war effort in a positive light. But two unrelated articles published today demonstrate that their effort was less than successful, and for that they are being rewarded with a new $12 million dollar contract.

The Washington Post is reporting that, “Most Iraqis Favor Immediate U.S. Pullout, Polls Show.”

“A strong majority of Iraqis want U.S.-led military forces to immediately withdraw from the country, saying their swift departure would make Iraq more secure and decrease sectarian violence, according to new polls by the State Department and independent researchers.”

It has become commonplace for Iraqis to theorize that the U.S. is intentionally fomenting chaos. Typical is the view of this unemployed Iraqi construction worker:

“Do you really think it’s possible that America — the greatest country in the world — cannot manage a small country like this? No! They have not made any mistakes. They brought people here to destroy Iraq, not to build Iraq.”

If this is a demonstration of the success we can expect from the Lincoln Group, it makes one wonder how they got a new contract to monitor the media in Iraq and the U.S.

“The idea is to use the information to ‘build support’ in Iraqi, Arabic, international and U.S. audiences for what the military describes as its goals in Iraq, such as destroying the insurgency and helping Iraqis build a democracy…The list of media outlets to be watched includes the New York Times, Fox Television and the satellite channel, Al-Arabiya.”

I’m not sure which is more disturbing – The fact that this unethical and incompetent firm is getting a new federal contract, or that this new contract was offered to anyone. Do the American people really need a government-run media watchdog pouring over what the press is publishing? What do they intend to do with the data they compile? The potential for the punitive use of this kind of information is obvious, and this administration has proven that it is capable of such extra-Constitutional behavior.

Our only hope for unfettered press freedom is that the combined ineptitude of the Lincoln Group and BushCo will lead to the failure of their devious plots.

Stalking Points Memo – Bush Haters

Posted by on September 27, 2006 at 12:25 am. NO Comments :

Bush Haters

In this Memo, Bill tackles a subject of which he is exceedingly knowledgable: Hurting America. The only problem is that, as usual, he gets all the facts wrong and arrives at the wrong conclusions. At least he’s consistent.


(Click the pic here to go to Stalking Points Memo page, then click the pic there to start the Flash movie)

Fox Pulls Clinton Video From YouTube

Posted by on September 25, 2006 at 3:51 pm. NO Comments :

This weekend’s big interview was the Chris Wallace ambush of Bill Clinton. After promising to divide the time between Clinton’s Global Initiative and everything else, Wallace sandbags Clinton by asking why he didn’t do more to get bin Laden. Clinton wouldn’t take the bait, but did lay into the Fox correspondent, calling it a “conservative hit.”

Ever since, the piece has been replayed and talked about throughout the TV, radio and Internet universe. So, predictably, it ended up on YouTube where its various submissions received more than a million views.

That was until Fox got jealous and insisted that it be removed. This is a perfect demonstration of a corporate media megalith misunderstanding the new media playing field. And it also underscores the necessity of keeping Internet media independent. Just imagine the kind of censorship that would prevail if Fox owned YouTube (or if Viacom, who is currently sniffing around it, did).

T-Warrior In The House

Posted by on September 25, 2006 at 3:15 pm. NO Comments :

Bill O’Reilly’s new book, Culture Warrior, comes out today. OK, just sit your butt back down. There’s plenty of copies for everyone.

I tried desperately to get a pre-release copy, but they had the distribution pretty locked-up. That didn’t stop Media Matters, who did get a copy and have published a comprehensive debunking. Here’s some appetizers:

“My goal is to expose and defeat people who have the power to do you great harm. My weapons will be facts and superior analysis based on those facts”

If his weapons are facts and superior analysis, he is entering the battlefield unarmed.

“If you are on the traditionalist side, the S-Ps [Secular-Progressives] will reject you and perhaps try to inflict pain upon your person.”

“…inflict pain upon your person?” Who talks like that? No wonder Bill feels rejected. He even told Newsweek that he doesn’t get invited to parties and that, “Nobody Wants Me.”

“I don’t have to be a culture warrior. I could make millions doing straight anchor work or just writing books. But I’m on a mission.”

He’s on a mission to make millions of dollars as a mercenary in his invented war on culture.

The Media Matters article goes into great depth citing the falsehoods, mischaracterizations, slanders, and delusions in this book. They have carefully documented every assertion they put forth while pointing out that O’Reilly seems to have an aversion to doing so. For those of you who don’t have the stomach to read the book itself, Media Matters is providing a valuable public service.

Ted Turner’s Smackdown

Posted by on September 22, 2006 at 2:43 am. NO Comments :

The former CNN founder and reformed media mogul, Ted Turner, made some interesting remarks in a recent interview:

“[The decision to invade Iraq] will go down in history — it already is going down in history — as one of the dumbest moves that was ever made by anybody,” Turner said, citing the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor and the German invasion of Russia during the Second World War as other “dumb” moves.

“We lost so much,” he said of the U.S. invasion. “It literally broke my heart, it was so dumb. … If you started wars with everyone you don’t like, well good God, we would all be at war with everybody.”

That kind of honesty is all too rare from Turner’s social set. And as welcome as it is to hear, I like even better his statement that he has no interest in being at war with anyone — even Rupert Murdoch:

“I’d fight [Murdoch] in the ring, with gloves on, but I wouldn’t bomb News Corp.”

Well I guess that’s one less imaginary threat Bill O’Reilly has to worry about. The funny thing is, if Turner and Murdoch met in the ring, Murdoch’s network would probably snap up the broadcast license for the match. Turner would kick Murdoch’s ass, and then Fox would go back to celebrating the war that Turner so insightfully dubbed as stupid. Turner has also said that ceding control of CNN was one of the stupidest things that he’s ever done. On that I’m going to have to agree with him again.

This seems like a good time to remind everyone to read Turner’s inspired essay, “My Beef With Big Media.” If you’ve never read it, then drop everything and read it now. If you have read it, you’d be surprised how stimulating it is to read again. I make a point to read it at least annually.

Net Neutrality Foes Rig Survey

Posted by on September 21, 2006 at 1:51 am. NO Comments :
Anyone that doesn’t have a flat EEG can recognize the deceipt built into this survey.

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Verizon), is gleefully hawking a poll that claims that the public is opposed to Net Neutrality. The poll was conducted jointly by GOP pollsters, Public Opinion Strategies, and Dem lobbyists, Glover Park Group. This partnership has some touting this as a bipartisan effort, but the truth is that Glover Park has long been working with Verizon to push for passage of Stevens’ anti-Net legislation. Verizon paid $60,000 to commission this poll. Unfortunately, the false assertions of bipartisanship and the hidden corporate biases are the least of the problems with this survey.

The questions, and the manner in which they were posed, were transparently manipulative. You could not have produced a more predictable outcome if you had asked: “Which would you prefer, a pony or a poke in the eye with a sharp stick? See for yourself:

In your opinion, which of the following is the MOST important reason for your Senator to vote for this legislation?

Create state of the art communications networks to enhance public safety and improve government emergency response efforts in future. 23
Provide funding to help deploy broadband in rural and underserved communities, schools and libraries. 19
Streamlined process to deliver more choice and greater competition for new TV and video services. 16
Give Americans with disabilities the opportunity to participate more fully in the modern information economy. 13
Consumer bill of rights to guarantee full access to legal content on the Internet. 10

Note that only reasons to vote FOR the legislation are offered. This is important because the very next question asks:

“Based on what you know now, would you want the Senators from your State to vote for or against this legislation?”

Not surprisingly, 80% responded affirmatively. Since only 7% said that they had even heard of Net Neutrality, the question above was the only explanation most respondents were exposed to. They were never presented with reasons to oppose it.

The final question descends into hilarity:

Which of the following two items do you think is the most important to you:

Delivering the benefits of new TV and video choice so consumers will see increased competition and lower prices for cable TV. 66
Enhancing Internet neutrality by barring high speed internet providers from offering specialized services like faster speed and increased security for a fee. 19

There’s a revelation. People prefer the benefits of new TV and lower prices to banning faster service and security.

Anyone that doesn’t have a flat EEG can recognize the deceipt built into this survey. Obviously the results were not meant to persuade readers that the public is yearning to abandon Net Neutrality. Instead, the purpose was to inform legislators that 91% of their constituents had never heard of Net Neutrality and, if it was properly misrepresented, the legislators could safely vote to kill it. It’s shenanigans like these that have produced some other recent survey results: Only 25% in poll approve of U.S. Congress

The one bit of useful information in this poll is that there is still a lot of work to do to inform the public about this issue. We had better get to it before Stevens and the lobbyists poison the well.

Bill O’Reilly On Al Qaeda Death List

Posted by on September 20, 2006 at 6:12 pm. 1 Comments :

Bill O’Reilly will be interviewed french kissed by Barbara Walters on Friday’s episode of 20/20. In the course of the cooing, O’Reilly reveals that al Qaeda has issued a death threat against him.

Personally, I think al Qaeda is just using this as a fundraising ploy. They may be evil, but they know a profitable appeal when they see one. I predict their receipts will skyrocket, and they will tap donors from the west that previously would have nothing to do with them.

If true, al Qaeda is merely replicating the stategery of the Bush administration: conflating unrelated emotionally charged issues. Bush is doing it with 9/11 and Iraq; bin Laden with infidels and douchebag TV bloviators. Bin Laden comes a little closer to articulating a plausible relationship. Douchebag TV bloviators are statistically more likely to be infidels than Iraqis are to be terrorists.

The disclosure of this threat might just possibly be promotional for O’Reilly, too. He has just releast his book, “Culture Warrior.” He’s in a very hostile state of mind these days. In the interview, O’Reilly also refers to himself as a “T-Warrior,” short for “traditional warrior.” What he apparently means is that he is a warrior for traditional values, opposing the forces of the dreaded Secular-Progressives. Obviously, this chickenhawk has never been what is traditionally referred to as a traditional warrior.

He also believes that were it not for the media, there would be no ongoing debates over gay marriage or references to God in the Pledge of Allegiance. He intends that to be criticism of the media. He is therefore arguing against open and democratic discourse and is incensed should the media happen to facilitate it once in a while.

He refuses to criticize Don Rumsfeld even though he says that:

“war is a performance business. And Iraq is a mess. Now, I think he is a patriot. And I think he did the best he could. It’s not working.”

Right. Tell that to the families of the 2,600 American casualties; or to the thousands more who were injured and maimed; or to the tens of thousands more Iraqi civilians. Sorry, it’s not working.

I’m glad I saw this preview of the 20/20 program so that I don’t accidently tune in thinking something worthwhile would be on.

Update: Radar Magazine is reporting that the FBI has denied that any notification of an al Qaeda threat was given to O’Reilly or anyone else at Fox. Could O’Reilly lying? And Fox’ Media relations director, Leah Yoon, made this astonishing comment:

“We shouldn’t be shouldering the burden of something he said on someone else’s network.”

You know rock-bottom is near when the Fox PR department won’t even back up its most-watched personality.

Deep In The Heart Of Dixie Chicks

Posted by on September 19, 2006 at 1:26 am. NO Comments :

The Toronto International Film Festival recently screened the documentary, Shut Up and Sing, chronicling the travails of the Dixie Chicks after their righteous slap at Crawford’s Lost Idiot. In remarks at a post-screening news conference, the Chicks demonstrate their grasp of the hazards of institutional media:

…the Chicks say they have absolutely no regrets about speaking their mind. If anything, the experience made them realize just how vulnerable to censorship we are in the world of consolidated media ownership and nationally uniform radio playlists.

“Consolidation means one guy at the top decides everything and I don’t think the media has been successful in pointing out why it’s so dangerous,” [Emily] Robison says.

Of course “the media has been [un]successful in pointing out why it’s so dangerous.” The handful of corporations that control the media are the architects and beneficiaries of consolidation. That the Dixies recognize the significance of this issue speaks to the fact that they are well informed and aware of the forces that they have learned, the hard way, are dangerously encroaching on press and creative freedom.

Since the media cannot be depended on to act in the interests of the public, it is up to all of us to act in our own interests. Visit Stop Big Media, bookmark it, and email the link to your friends and family. Contact the FCC and tell them that more consolidation does not create competition. It is critically important that people realize that we cannot solve any of our society’s problems without solving the problem of the media first. No matter what your pet issue is, you need access to communication channels to produce movement. Without a free, diverse and independent media, those channels will be denied to us.

The Dixie Chicks get it. They continue to be impressive, both artistically and socially. Their honesty and courage shines through the mud that is hurled at them. And throughout the ordeal they’ve refused to back down as evidenced by their hit single “Not Ready To Make Nice” and by the audacious declaration in the documentary that Bush is a “dumbfuck“.

Ah…the simplicity of truth.