If you want to be an Art journalist you should read through these:Taking the Tweed Out of the Arts Journalism Wardrobe
By Poynter Institute (more by author )
E-mail this item
Print this Page
Add Your Comments on this Article
At the annual convention of the American Association of Sunday and Feature Editors in St. Petersburg, Fla., this year, one of the panel discussions was titled "Taking the Tweed Out of the Arts Journalism Wardrobe." Poynter Online invited the panelists to recap their remarks about ways to defy the stereotypes about coverage of art and culture. Three of them took us up on our offer:
Diane Bacha (panel moderator)
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel , assistant managing editor/arts and entertainment:
W
e are here to talk about keeping arts coverage relevant ó keeping our wardrobe from getting too musty, if you will. But first, let's get one thing out of the way:
In most newsrooms, the word "art" scares people.
Let's face it, it just does not have enough Y chromosomes for the average newsroom crowd. It is seen as a nice but non-essential part of the daily news report.
The word "culture" is not far behind, but it's OK if you put the word "pop" in front of it. "Culture" is elitist. "Pop" is fizzy and fun and it means you are OK if you watch a lot of TV.
"Culture" is elitist. "Pop" is fizzy and fun and it means you are OK if you watch a lot of TV.
We can talk about why it has gotten that way, and what we've done to contribute to this perception. But let's not. Let's talk instead about how old-fashioned this point of view is, and how we can grab a lot of attention with arts and culture stories if we pay enough attention.
We are all sick by now of Richard Florida and his Bohemia Index , in which he made a connection (and I summarize here) between a vibrant arts and cultural scene and an economically healthy city. He believes that "culture has taken the initiative in promoting change." But let's take a page from him for a moment.
Let's assume that newsrooms get that, and they're as intrigued with a city's cultural life as Richard Florida is. Imagine that. If it were true, eyes would not be glazing over in the daily news meetings when our turn at the table comes up. And if it were true, we would be writing some different stories.
"Cue," the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 's arts and culture section.
Instead of only following institutions founded generations ago, we'd be watching what newcomers are doing, including newcomers who may speak languages other than English.
We'd be paying attention to art schools, and writing about trends emerging from them.
We'd be paying attention to artists who DON'T go to art schools.
Our visual arts writers would be talking to our tech writers about digital art.
We might be rethinking our beat structures, perhaps getting rid of the walls between "arts," "entertainment," and "pop culture."
WeÃd be watching how playwrights, poets, and painters are responding to the presidential campaign ó not just Jay and Dave.
I can see my first city editor rolling his eyes right about now. "This stuff is gonna go over real big with Betty who calls for the Lotto results," he'd say. Well, he's got a point. We have to write in accessible ways, and we still have the job of telling interesting stories.
Arts editors are often pushed to justify the relevance of what they do. That's not necessarily a bad thing. But it's better to push ourselves, and we would like to use this opportunity to do just that.
Steven Winn, Arts and Culture Critic, San Francisco Chronicle :
I
 spent the first 21 years of my career at the San Francisco Chronicle covering theater, as a critic and reporter. Devoting that time to a focused arts beat was a source of pleasure and gratification in too many ways to count. Depth is not something newspapers always foster; concentrating on theater freed me to pursue it.
The risk of depth is tunnel vision. Over the years, I felt a kind of creeping alienation. No one but a critic attends the theater 150 times a year. I was becoming, gradually and inexorably, self referential. I wrote about theater in terms of other theater, because that was what I was living.
No one but a critic attends the theater 150 times a year.
Real people, which is to say readers, experience the arts in an altogether different way. They go to movies, read books, visit art museums, go to work and the beach as well as the theater, argue about politics, listen to the radio, watch television, fall in love, love (or despise) ballet. I wanted to write about that, about the way that the arts and the world we live in every day are woven together in intricate, overlapping ways. I wanted to write critically and analytically about those things without being dutybound to review, rank, and finely calibrate my responses to a series of stage productions.
Last year, in a staff reorganization following the merger of San Francisco's two papers, I proposed a position as Arts and Culture Critic. More or less on faith, my editors acquiesced.
"Datebook," the San Francisco Chronicle 's arts and culture section.
Since then I've written about the nature of beauty, an epidemic of lying, why people cry in the presence of art, talk radio, theater lobbies, arts funding, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Paul Klee, protest art, the risks and rewards of performing alone, the Bob Dylan plagiarism case, interactive museums, the comparable effects of sound design in Cirque du Soleil and "Medea," the primacy of the body in various arts, artistic revision, originality, and amusement parks.
Some of these ideas have turned out well; others fell flat. I'm a little fearful of computing my batting average. What I do know, and what has been consistent throughout my 18 arts and culture months, is a kind of reader response I rarely had as a beat critic. People truly want to engage with ideas and ways of synthesizing their arts experience and their lives.
It took me two decades to figure out how deeply curious, thoughtful, and creative the readers are. After years of conditioned responses to letters, phone calls, and e-mails that either agreed with or carped at my reviews, I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I'm finally getting to know my readers.
None of this is meant to denigrate or disparage the art of reviewing. I still write straight reviews from time to time -- of theater, music, dance, film -- and realize each time how elegant and challenging a form it is.
Vital as they are, reviews need not be the start and end point of a newspaper's critical attention to the arts. Without a set review schedule, I'm never sure where my next piece might come from and where it might lead. That's the scary part of my new job. And the very best part of it, too.
Christopher Blank, performing arts writer, The Commercial Appeal :
I
n every city outside New York and Los Angeles, the performing arts writer will NOT add one of the following stories to his newspaper's entertainment budget this year:
REVIEW - Encore Dinner Theater's "Guys and Dolls" bedazzles with Keanu Reeves as a peculiar Sky Masterson.
NEW - After a lengthy search, Meredith Monk is named artistic director of Shelby Heights Community Arts Ensemble. Says she'll "focus on quality."
PREVIEW - Newly discovered Mozart Choral Cantata gets world premiere at St. Mary's Episcopal Church. Simon Rattle to conduct.
If only the prospects were so alluring! Most of us get by on interviews with B-list celebrities. The work is plentiful, but also expendable. A paper's need for a sole authority on theater, dance, or classical music is diminishing along with readership. You can hear the newsroom budget ax grinding.
During this panel discussion, we talked about ways to keep the subject matter and the writing relevant and, in theory, help a paper's circulation. Not coincidentally, arts organizations across the country are facing the same problems with regard to attendance. How do they target a younger demographic and not alienate older, reliable fans?
As a young arts writer, I feel proudly bohemian knowing that the struggling artist and I have job insecurity in common.
As a young arts writer, I feel proudly bohemian knowing that the struggling artist and I have job insecurity in common. We both depend on a small but loyal group of arts consumers. As often as I've been told that my job is independent of the arts ó the detached "voice of the paper," so to speak ó I'm beginning to see that we're all pretty much in the entertainment business.
Arts organizations can teach us a few things about entertaining readers. After all, they have to re-market their product ó often a tired old play or an unknown ballet ó year after year.
Let's start by rethinking the tone of our "voice."
I'd like to say I'm no longer pompous or stodgy. Or that teenagers across the city are addicted to my edgy hip-hop patois. Not. Still, editors and writers can make some attitude changes that could help coverage in the long run. Here are a few:
1. Try fanaticism for a change. In the sports section of the paper, they write with bullhorns. In the arts section, they write with mops and buckets. What makes the sports section so exciting to read?
Well, for one, these guys are the ultimate cheerleaders for their subject matter. Can a dance review be as action-packed and emotionally exciting as a big game? I say yes! I propose fanatical enthusiasm for the beat, which should come across on the page. It should grab you, engage you, and make you want to know more.
Sports writers want you to feel that every game is earth-shatteringly IMPORTANT. I feel this way about the arts in my community. I'm not saying we should treat the subject matter with a velvet glove or go easy on a bad play. But there's a subtle difference in a review that calls a bad show an affront to all art and a review that chalks it up as a loss for the team.
2. Expand the repertoire. Performing arts writers ó me included ó easily get bogged down in a routine of reviewing and previewing traditional art forms. However, more people are experiencing a wide variety of arts that pass under the radar, such as through church concerts or at sporting events. Look at shows like Blast! on Broadway, which turned Drum and Bugle Corps into a theatrical experience. I was surprised to discover that the cheerleaders for our professional basketball team had to take classical ballet lessons as a job requirement.
Find stories that tell people, "Hey, you may not know it, but the thing you've been watching is art."
3. Speak the gospel, hear the gospel. Being receptive to feedback and open to change is essential. Arts reporters should adapt to the tastes of the community, not the other way around.
To some extent, that means being accessible, not sitting in the critics' box like Statler or Waldorf ó you know, the vulturine theater critics from The Muppet Show. I make it a point to sit next to actors at plays, sneak backstage after a classical music concert and ask the musicians about their performance, bum a cigarette off a ballerina I've just reviewed.
I've learned a lot about how the "voice of the paper" is perceived. For instance, several who've met me in person have said that they expected someone "much older" judging by the writing. Ouch. I'm still working on that.
From the other side, arts editors should regularly attend performances (and in cases where papers don't accept comps, those papers should pay for tickets). In this way, the whole department is involved in promoting arts coverage, not just a gung-ho reporter.
For arts groups, constant shapeshifting is a crucial means for survival. Applying it to arts coverage isn't far behind.
Tuesday, December 23, 2003
Friday, December 19, 2003
CLUSTER BUSTER
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm
In Weapons of Mass Deception, we showed how the U.S. news media
virtually ignored the use in Iraq of cluster bombs --
anti-personnel devices like land mines that leave behind a deadly
litter of unexploded "bomblets." Now Paul Wiseman has written a
major report in which he concludes, "The Pentagon presented a
misleading picture during the war of the extent to which cluster
weapons were being used and of the civilian casualties they were
causing. Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
told reporters on April 25, six days before President Bush declared
major combat operations over, that the United States had used 1,500
cluster weapons and caused one civilian casualty. ... In fact, the
United States used 10,782 cluster weapons, according to the
declassified executive summary of a report compiled by U.S. Central
Command."
SOURCE: USA Today, December 11, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/December_2003.html#1071118801
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1071118801
13. RADIO FRAUDCASTING
http://www.texasobserver.org/showArticle.asp?ArticleID=1514
Radio listeners tuning into disk jockey Jeff Kovarsky on Dallas,
Texas radio station KKMR in late 2000 could hear him extolling a
magical weight-loss remedy. iIt helped me lose 36 pounds,î Kovarsky
said. iI ate so much over Thanksgiving, I still have turkey burps.
But thanks to Body Solutions, I keep the weight off and now I'm
ready for Christmas. So, bring it on, Grandma. The honey-baked ham,
the apple pie, the Christmas cookies. I'm not afraid because I've
got Body Solutions Evening Weight Loss Formula.î Kovarsky was one
of the radio personalities at 755 stations across the country who
received millions of dollars in undisclosed payments to hawk the
products of Mark Nutritionals, which was shut down finally for
fraud by the Federal Trade Commission in 2002. "Devoid of pictures
or fine print, radio was the ideal medium," observes Andrew Wheat.
"Millions of faithful listeners heard personal pitches from
familiar voices, yet they could not see if the announcer plugging
the product really had lost weight."
SOURCE: Texas Observer, December 5, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1070600402
14. INDUSTRY HOPES TO CENSOR ADS ON HAZARDS OF INFANT FORMULA
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/04/business/media/04adcol.html
"Federal officials have softened a national advertising campaign to
promote breastfeeding after complaints from two companies that make
infant formula, according to several doctors and nurses who are
helping the government with the effort. After the two companies
[Mead Johnson and Abbott] and the top officials of the American
Academy of Pediatrics complained to federal health officials, the
government decided to eliminate spots discussing the risk of
leukemia and diabetes in babies not breastfed, said Amy Spangler,
the chairwoman of the United States Breastfeeding Committee, a
group that promotes breastfeeding. According to the Ad Council
newsletter, those ads said that babies not breastfed had a 30
percent increased risk of developing leukemia and up to a 40
percent increased risk of developing diabetes. ... Marsha Walker,
who sits on the leadership team of the United States Breastfeeding
Committee with Ms. Spangler, said that the information on leukemia
and diabetes should be left in the ads. ... 'This is being shot
down by an industry that has no business interfering. Ultimately it
hurts the health of our babies and our moms.' "
SOURCE: New York Times, December 4, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1070514002
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm
In Weapons of Mass Deception, we showed how the U.S. news media
virtually ignored the use in Iraq of cluster bombs --
anti-personnel devices like land mines that leave behind a deadly
litter of unexploded "bomblets." Now Paul Wiseman has written a
major report in which he concludes, "The Pentagon presented a
misleading picture during the war of the extent to which cluster
weapons were being used and of the civilian casualties they were
causing. Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
told reporters on April 25, six days before President Bush declared
major combat operations over, that the United States had used 1,500
cluster weapons and caused one civilian casualty. ... In fact, the
United States used 10,782 cluster weapons, according to the
declassified executive summary of a report compiled by U.S. Central
Command."
SOURCE: USA Today, December 11, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/December_2003.html#1071118801
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1071118801
13. RADIO FRAUDCASTING
http://www.texasobserver.org/showArticle.asp?ArticleID=1514
Radio listeners tuning into disk jockey Jeff Kovarsky on Dallas,
Texas radio station KKMR in late 2000 could hear him extolling a
magical weight-loss remedy. iIt helped me lose 36 pounds,î Kovarsky
said. iI ate so much over Thanksgiving, I still have turkey burps.
But thanks to Body Solutions, I keep the weight off and now I'm
ready for Christmas. So, bring it on, Grandma. The honey-baked ham,
the apple pie, the Christmas cookies. I'm not afraid because I've
got Body Solutions Evening Weight Loss Formula.î Kovarsky was one
of the radio personalities at 755 stations across the country who
received millions of dollars in undisclosed payments to hawk the
products of Mark Nutritionals, which was shut down finally for
fraud by the Federal Trade Commission in 2002. "Devoid of pictures
or fine print, radio was the ideal medium," observes Andrew Wheat.
"Millions of faithful listeners heard personal pitches from
familiar voices, yet they could not see if the announcer plugging
the product really had lost weight."
SOURCE: Texas Observer, December 5, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1070600402
14. INDUSTRY HOPES TO CENSOR ADS ON HAZARDS OF INFANT FORMULA
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/04/business/media/04adcol.html
"Federal officials have softened a national advertising campaign to
promote breastfeeding after complaints from two companies that make
infant formula, according to several doctors and nurses who are
helping the government with the effort. After the two companies
[Mead Johnson and Abbott] and the top officials of the American
Academy of Pediatrics complained to federal health officials, the
government decided to eliminate spots discussing the risk of
leukemia and diabetes in babies not breastfed, said Amy Spangler,
the chairwoman of the United States Breastfeeding Committee, a
group that promotes breastfeeding. According to the Ad Council
newsletter, those ads said that babies not breastfed had a 30
percent increased risk of developing leukemia and up to a 40
percent increased risk of developing diabetes. ... Marsha Walker,
who sits on the leadership team of the United States Breastfeeding
Committee with Ms. Spangler, said that the information on leukemia
and diabetes should be left in the ads. ... 'This is being shot
down by an industry that has no business interfering. Ultimately it
hurts the health of our babies and our moms.' "
SOURCE: New York Times, December 4, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1070514002
MEDIA SILENT ON PROSECUTION OF WHISTLEBLOWER KATHARINE GUN
http://www.accuracy.org/NS121403.htm
Norman Solomon writes that "few Americans have heard of Katharine
Gun, a former British intelligence employee facing charges that she
violated the Official Secrets Act. So far, the American press has
ignored her. But the case raises profound questions about democracy
and the public's right to know on both sides of the Atlantic. Ms.
Gun's legal peril began in Britain on March 2, when the Observer
newspaper exposed a highly secret memorandum by a top U.S. National
Security Agency official. ... The NSA memo said that the agency had
started a 'surge' of spying on diplomats at the United Nations in
New York. ... In this case, Ms. Gun's conscience fully intersected
with the needs of democracy and a free press. The British and
American people had every right to know that their governments were
involved in a high-stakes dirty tricks campaign at the United
Nations. For democratic societies, a timely flow of information is
the lifeblood of the body politic."
SOURCE: Baltimore Sun, December 14, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1071378000
http://www.accuracy.org/NS121403.htm
Norman Solomon writes that "few Americans have heard of Katharine
Gun, a former British intelligence employee facing charges that she
violated the Official Secrets Act. So far, the American press has
ignored her. But the case raises profound questions about democracy
and the public's right to know on both sides of the Atlantic. Ms.
Gun's legal peril began in Britain on March 2, when the Observer
newspaper exposed a highly secret memorandum by a top U.S. National
Security Agency official. ... The NSA memo said that the agency had
started a 'surge' of spying on diplomats at the United Nations in
New York. ... In this case, Ms. Gun's conscience fully intersected
with the needs of democracy and a free press. The British and
American people had every right to know that their governments were
involved in a high-stakes dirty tricks campaign at the United
Nations. For democratic societies, a timely flow of information is
the lifeblood of the body politic."
SOURCE: Baltimore Sun, December 14, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1071378000
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
Problems in Paradise? Check it out. See you on Thur. Clark
EU attack on press club rebuffed
The Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association on Wednesday rebuffed the European Union's calls for the abolition of the press club system, claiming it plays an important role in disseminating news among the public.
"Each country has different systems and rules for covering news based on each country's historical background," the association said in a statement.
The association said the EU's proposals were "based on misunderstanding, biases and misperception of facts."
It added, however, that it would strive to make the press clubs more open to all reporters.
In October 2002 and again this year, the EU lambasted the "kisha club" system for restricting access to official news conferences to reporters from mostly mainstream domestic media organizations.
This practice leaves foreign reporters and freelance journalists at a disadvantage when covering national and local government offices, as well as police headquarters, the EU said.
As part of a drive to promote regulatory reform in Japan, the EU called on Tokyo to grant foreign news media better access to information at government offices.
The Japanese association claimed, however, that on the basis of discussions held by a subcommittee set up in November 2002 in response to the EU claims, the system is an important means of pressing reluctant public officials to disclose information.
It also said the system allows the media to obtain vital public information, such as information about natural disasters, quickly and accurately.
The Japan Times: Dec. 11, 2003
EU attack on press club rebuffed
The Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association on Wednesday rebuffed the European Union's calls for the abolition of the press club system, claiming it plays an important role in disseminating news among the public.
"Each country has different systems and rules for covering news based on each country's historical background," the association said in a statement.
The association said the EU's proposals were "based on misunderstanding, biases and misperception of facts."
It added, however, that it would strive to make the press clubs more open to all reporters.
In October 2002 and again this year, the EU lambasted the "kisha club" system for restricting access to official news conferences to reporters from mostly mainstream domestic media organizations.
This practice leaves foreign reporters and freelance journalists at a disadvantage when covering national and local government offices, as well as police headquarters, the EU said.
As part of a drive to promote regulatory reform in Japan, the EU called on Tokyo to grant foreign news media better access to information at government offices.
The Japanese association claimed, however, that on the basis of discussions held by a subcommittee set up in November 2002 in response to the EU claims, the system is an important means of pressing reluctant public officials to disclose information.
It also said the system allows the media to obtain vital public information, such as information about natural disasters, quickly and accurately.
The Japan Times: Dec. 11, 2003
Monday, December 08, 2003
Sunday, December 07, 2003
Take a look at the notice below. These guys are really doing a good job. They produce a weekly e- newsletter called spin which is very good:
Never before have PR and propaganda been so pervasive and
deceptive. Academics find that 40 percent or more of "the
news" is PR-driven. Here at the Center for Media and
Democracy, we debunk, analyze and expose this steady barrage
of spin.
A couple of years ago, we started this free Weekly Spin
listserve to make the information we uncover as accessible
as possible. Today, I'm writing to ask what this service
means to you.
What does it mean to you to know that Lauri Fitz-Pegado,
the PR executive in charge of the 1990 campaign that sold
the first Gulf War, is now promoting a book about the
Jessica Lynch rescue?
What does it mean to you to know that the international
pharmaceutical industry spends twice what it devotes to
research on PR and hidden marketing (including forming fake
patient advocacy groups)?
What does it mean to you to know the details of the Bush
administration's selling of the Iraq war? That the
CIA-funded Iraqi National Congress was a PR creation,
as were the tightly controlled official statements and
deceptive claims leading to the war, crafted as part
of a million "PR blitz against Saddam Hussein"
under the White House Office of Global Communications?
What does it mean to you to know that British American
Tobacco is trying to reinvent itself as a "socially
responsible company," and Coca-Cola is giving money to
pediatric dentists and parent/teacher organizations?
What does it mean to you that our books, website, PR Watch
magazine, and countless interviews, presentations and
articles constitute the frontline in exposing and debunking
corporate and government deception?
The non-profit Center for Media and Democracy remains the
only organization in the world whose unique mission is
rooting out deceptive and dangerous special interest
propaganda campaigns. And now, in our second decade,
we need to do an even bigger and better job. We are
expanding our programs and staff to take our work and
expertise directly to grassroots groups, activists,
students and investigative journalists.
I'm proud that we've created and launched the Disinfopedia,
a unique web-based project to document and track government
and industry disinformation campaigns. Now if you want to
know which industry funded groups say climate change is a
phony scare tactic, or who said there were weapons of mass
destruction, you can do it in a click. Check it out and
contribute your own information at the Disinfopedia site:
http://www.disinfopedia.org
John Stauber
Founder and Executive Director,
Center for Media and Democracy
Never before have PR and propaganda been so pervasive and
deceptive. Academics find that 40 percent or more of "the
news" is PR-driven. Here at the Center for Media and
Democracy, we debunk, analyze and expose this steady barrage
of spin.
A couple of years ago, we started this free Weekly Spin
listserve to make the information we uncover as accessible
as possible. Today, I'm writing to ask what this service
means to you.
What does it mean to you to know that Lauri Fitz-Pegado,
the PR executive in charge of the 1990 campaign that sold
the first Gulf War, is now promoting a book about the
Jessica Lynch rescue?
What does it mean to you to know that the international
pharmaceutical industry spends twice what it devotes to
research on PR and hidden marketing (including forming fake
patient advocacy groups)?
What does it mean to you to know the details of the Bush
administration's selling of the Iraq war? That the
CIA-funded Iraqi National Congress was a PR creation,
as were the tightly controlled official statements and
deceptive claims leading to the war, crafted as part
of a million "PR blitz against Saddam Hussein"
under the White House Office of Global Communications?
What does it mean to you to know that British American
Tobacco is trying to reinvent itself as a "socially
responsible company," and Coca-Cola is giving money to
pediatric dentists and parent/teacher organizations?
What does it mean to you that our books, website, PR Watch
magazine, and countless interviews, presentations and
articles constitute the frontline in exposing and debunking
corporate and government deception?
The non-profit Center for Media and Democracy remains the
only organization in the world whose unique mission is
rooting out deceptive and dangerous special interest
propaganda campaigns. And now, in our second decade,
we need to do an even bigger and better job. We are
expanding our programs and staff to take our work and
expertise directly to grassroots groups, activists,
students and investigative journalists.
I'm proud that we've created and launched the Disinfopedia,
a unique web-based project to document and track government
and industry disinformation campaigns. Now if you want to
know which industry funded groups say climate change is a
phony scare tactic, or who said there were weapons of mass
destruction, you can do it in a click. Check it out and
contribute your own information at the Disinfopedia site:
http://www.disinfopedia.org
John Stauber
Founder and Executive Director,
Center for Media and Democracy
Friday, December 05, 2003
Hi as some of you have been doing your interview assignment I thought you might like to look at this interview, which in itself is an interesting interview, were the interviewer talks about his worries and difficulties with the interview and some of his solutions to the problems he encounters. It's very well done.
Noam Chomsky Interview
http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,6000,1096132,00.html
'He recognises little distinction between conspiracy and cock-up.'
Noam Chomsky Interview
http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,6000,1096132,00.html
'He recognises little distinction between conspiracy and cock-up.'
Tuesday, December 02, 2003
Politicians often say sounds which really don't have any real meaning, or the meaning is so debatable that what they say would be better of not said. Clark
Rum remark wins Rumsfeld an award
Rumsfeld tries to make a point...
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has won a "Foot in Mouth" award for one of his now legendary bizarre remarks.
Mr Rumsfeld won the prize for comments made at a news conference in February last year which left observers baffled.
"There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns," he said.
The British Plain English Campaign annually hands out the prize for the most nonsensical remark made by a public figure.
Stiff competition
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know
Donald Rumsfeld's winning comment
A spokesman for the organisation, which tries to ensure public information is delivered in a clear manner, said Mr Rumsfeld's remarks were typical of the kind of comments they were trying to prevent.
"We think we know what he means," he told Reuters news agency.
"But we don't know if we really know."
Mr Rumsfeld fought off stiff competition for the award from actor turned California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger among others.
Mr Schwarzenegger weighed in on the gay marriage debate with the comment "I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman."
I believe what I said yesterday. I don't know what I said, but I know what I think... and I assume it's what I said
Donald Rumsfeld
And European Commissioner Chris Patten came close with his remark that the British Conservative Party had committed political suicide and was now living to regret it.
Previous winners of the award have included US actress Alicia Silverstone and actor Richard Gere.
But despite Mr Rumsfeld's rather outlandish mode of speaking, fans of the tough-talking US defence secretary argue he is misunderstood.
There are dozens of websites dedicated to the "poetry" of Mr Rumsfeld and there is even a book, entitled Pieces of Intelligence, dedicated to interpreting his statements as a form of existential writing.
Rum remark wins Rumsfeld an award
Rumsfeld tries to make a point...
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has won a "Foot in Mouth" award for one of his now legendary bizarre remarks.
Mr Rumsfeld won the prize for comments made at a news conference in February last year which left observers baffled.
"There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns," he said.
The British Plain English Campaign annually hands out the prize for the most nonsensical remark made by a public figure.
Stiff competition
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know
Donald Rumsfeld's winning comment
A spokesman for the organisation, which tries to ensure public information is delivered in a clear manner, said Mr Rumsfeld's remarks were typical of the kind of comments they were trying to prevent.
"We think we know what he means," he told Reuters news agency.
"But we don't know if we really know."
Mr Rumsfeld fought off stiff competition for the award from actor turned California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger among others.
Mr Schwarzenegger weighed in on the gay marriage debate with the comment "I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman."
I believe what I said yesterday. I don't know what I said, but I know what I think... and I assume it's what I said
Donald Rumsfeld
And European Commissioner Chris Patten came close with his remark that the British Conservative Party had committed political suicide and was now living to regret it.
Previous winners of the award have included US actress Alicia Silverstone and actor Richard Gere.
But despite Mr Rumsfeld's rather outlandish mode of speaking, fans of the tough-talking US defence secretary argue he is misunderstood.
There are dozens of websites dedicated to the "poetry" of Mr Rumsfeld and there is even a book, entitled Pieces of Intelligence, dedicated to interpreting his statements as a form of existential writing.
Saturday, November 29, 2003
Sensational reporting puts media in spotlight: panelists
By ERIC JOHNSTON
Staff writer
OSAKA -- As profits and audiences shrink, the media are under increasing pressure to compete for readers and viewers, which has led to a growing number of human rights abuses that have fueled a public backlash.
At a symposium in Osaka on Saturday titled "Human Rights and Reporting," about 40 media insiders, lawyers, university professors and students gathered to discuss the backlash and other problems related to journalistic practices in Japan, as well as steps the media itself is taking to prevent human rights abuses.
Much of the discussion focused on the way television journalists report the news.
Shiro Matsuda, a former Yomiuri Television reporter who is now with the Broadcasting Ethics & Program Improvement Organization, which was created in July to monitor television programs, said broadcast journalism faces a number of issues that are different from print media when considering human rights issues.
"A recent trend among private broadcasters has been to buy 'packaged news' reports from outside producers," Matsuda said. "This saves the broadcasters money, because they don't have to pay the expenses of their own reporters and editors.
"But they only see the final product and have no idea how the news piece was filmed and edited. Thus, they can't defend themselves as easily if somebody charges that the news program violated somebody's human rights."
Panelists were divided on the issue of whether or not the Japanese media reports fairly on crimes committed by foreigners, or incidents abroad involving Japanese.
When it was pointed out that many view Japanese media reports of a rising foreign crime rate as sensationalized, Tsutomu Nomura, a local lawyer, agreed there are problems.
The Japan Times: Nov. 30, 2003
By ERIC JOHNSTON
Staff writer
OSAKA -- As profits and audiences shrink, the media are under increasing pressure to compete for readers and viewers, which has led to a growing number of human rights abuses that have fueled a public backlash.
At a symposium in Osaka on Saturday titled "Human Rights and Reporting," about 40 media insiders, lawyers, university professors and students gathered to discuss the backlash and other problems related to journalistic practices in Japan, as well as steps the media itself is taking to prevent human rights abuses.
Much of the discussion focused on the way television journalists report the news.
Shiro Matsuda, a former Yomiuri Television reporter who is now with the Broadcasting Ethics & Program Improvement Organization, which was created in July to monitor television programs, said broadcast journalism faces a number of issues that are different from print media when considering human rights issues.
"A recent trend among private broadcasters has been to buy 'packaged news' reports from outside producers," Matsuda said. "This saves the broadcasters money, because they don't have to pay the expenses of their own reporters and editors.
"But they only see the final product and have no idea how the news piece was filmed and edited. Thus, they can't defend themselves as easily if somebody charges that the news program violated somebody's human rights."
Panelists were divided on the issue of whether or not the Japanese media reports fairly on crimes committed by foreigners, or incidents abroad involving Japanese.
When it was pointed out that many view Japanese media reports of a rising foreign crime rate as sensationalized, Tsutomu Nomura, a local lawyer, agreed there are problems.
The Japan Times: Nov. 30, 2003
Friday, November 28, 2003
Thought you should all talk a look at this great story from Kai:
Hong Kong Trip Kai Futami
Last week (November 6th), I was absent from class because I had to go on a trip to Hong Kong to help out a friend pick out some accessories to sell in a flee market going to be held in Yoyogi park November 29th and 30th. So I will write about my trip.
I left Narita Airport on the 3rd of November. I went on China Airlines for the first time. It was exciting and a nervous experience because I thought the airline was famous for crashing. We had to stop in Taiwan and then transfer onto another plane to Hong Kong. Taiwans airport had nothing. There was a big enormous soy sauce bottle object spinning in the aiport. It was rare to see such a thing. A beer bottle, I can understand, but why a soy sauce bottle? Anyways, we got to Hong Kong around 12midnight. The first meal?I ate there was wantanmen. Noodles with wantan. Another dish came along. It was fried snake skin. How Yummy, NOT! After eating the noodles, I was told that the meat of the wantan was dog meat. But eventually, that was a lie.
The next day I had yumcha for breakfast and went to a town where they sale wholesale goods. There were many interesting things and very cheap too. I wanted to shop, but I was on a business trip so I could only shop for acessories. We shopped and thenm went horse racing. It was fun. I couldn`t read the horse racing paper so I just looked at the kanji and bet on good names. We won the first bet but lost the other two. It was an exciting experience for me.
The next day we again ate yumcha and we again went shopping for acessories. At night we went to the night market, and there I was able to shop?finally. I had a good time. I didn`t shop much though. Then we went to the famous mango dessert parlor. This was the most delicious meal I had in Hong Kong. Mango with fresh coconut icecream and fruit on the side. YUMMY!! Then we went to Victoria Peak, the famous night sight seeing place. Unfortunately it was cloudy so I couldn`t see much but I was amazed.
The final day came and it was time to go back to Japan. I was again a little bit nervous about the flight. Luckily you can see it turned out all right because I am still here.
It was my first trip to Hong Kong and I found it quite interesting. Before I used to think I Hong Kong is not a very amusing place. Now I think I love it. There are few things in Hong Kong I noticed that are different from Japan. 1-The chopsticks are way longer and thicker than Japan. 2- The escalators move very quickly and people stand on the left hand side of the escalator. 3-The weather was still a bit hot. I could still walk around without a jacket. Etc... I will leave the rest for you to find out. I recommend Hong Kong a cheap and fantastic place to travel.
A picture of me at Taiwan Airport with the big enormous soy sauce bottle.
Hong Kong Trip Kai Futami
Last week (November 6th), I was absent from class because I had to go on a trip to Hong Kong to help out a friend pick out some accessories to sell in a flee market going to be held in Yoyogi park November 29th and 30th. So I will write about my trip.
I left Narita Airport on the 3rd of November. I went on China Airlines for the first time. It was exciting and a nervous experience because I thought the airline was famous for crashing. We had to stop in Taiwan and then transfer onto another plane to Hong Kong. Taiwans airport had nothing. There was a big enormous soy sauce bottle object spinning in the aiport. It was rare to see such a thing. A beer bottle, I can understand, but why a soy sauce bottle? Anyways, we got to Hong Kong around 12midnight. The first meal?I ate there was wantanmen. Noodles with wantan. Another dish came along. It was fried snake skin. How Yummy, NOT! After eating the noodles, I was told that the meat of the wantan was dog meat. But eventually, that was a lie.
The next day I had yumcha for breakfast and went to a town where they sale wholesale goods. There were many interesting things and very cheap too. I wanted to shop, but I was on a business trip so I could only shop for acessories. We shopped and thenm went horse racing. It was fun. I couldn`t read the horse racing paper so I just looked at the kanji and bet on good names. We won the first bet but lost the other two. It was an exciting experience for me.
The next day we again ate yumcha and we again went shopping for acessories. At night we went to the night market, and there I was able to shop?finally. I had a good time. I didn`t shop much though. Then we went to the famous mango dessert parlor. This was the most delicious meal I had in Hong Kong. Mango with fresh coconut icecream and fruit on the side. YUMMY!! Then we went to Victoria Peak, the famous night sight seeing place. Unfortunately it was cloudy so I couldn`t see much but I was amazed.
The final day came and it was time to go back to Japan. I was again a little bit nervous about the flight. Luckily you can see it turned out all right because I am still here.
It was my first trip to Hong Kong and I found it quite interesting. Before I used to think I Hong Kong is not a very amusing place. Now I think I love it. There are few things in Hong Kong I noticed that are different from Japan. 1-The chopsticks are way longer and thicker than Japan. 2- The escalators move very quickly and people stand on the left hand side of the escalator. 3-The weather was still a bit hot. I could still walk around without a jacket. Etc... I will leave the rest for you to find out. I recommend Hong Kong a cheap and fantastic place to travel.
A picture of me at Taiwan Airport with the big enormous soy sauce bottle.
Tuesday, November 25, 2003
Thought some of you might be interested in this:Fellowships
USC Arts Journalism Fellowships: The USC Annenberg/Getty Arts Journalism Program offers six to nine competitive fellowships to mid-career arts & culture writers and editors from print, broadcast, and online journalism to attend a three-week enrichment program in Los Angeles, March 7 to 28, 2004. The expense-paid fellowships cover lodging, meals, travel and a $450 stipend. The intensive multi-disciplinary program is designed to bring the fellows into direct contact with known and unknown artists and arts professionals who work in LA. Highlights of this year's program include New York Times critic John Rockwell as Speaker-in-Residence. Conversations are also planned with such artists + curators + directors as Amalia Mesa-Bains, Osvaldo Golijov, Dawn Upshaw, Peter Sellars, Michael Maltzan, Eric Owen Moss, Deborah Gribbon, John Malpede, Michael Ritchie and Ramaa Bharadvaj. The USC Annenberg/Getty Arts Journalism Program, based at USC's School of Journalism, is funded in part by a grant from the J. Paul Getty Trust. To apply, see http://annenberg.usc.edu/getty .
Deadline : December 8, 2
USC Arts Journalism Fellowships: The USC Annenberg/Getty Arts Journalism Program offers six to nine competitive fellowships to mid-career arts & culture writers and editors from print, broadcast, and online journalism to attend a three-week enrichment program in Los Angeles, March 7 to 28, 2004. The expense-paid fellowships cover lodging, meals, travel and a $450 stipend. The intensive multi-disciplinary program is designed to bring the fellows into direct contact with known and unknown artists and arts professionals who work in LA. Highlights of this year's program include New York Times critic John Rockwell as Speaker-in-Residence. Conversations are also planned with such artists + curators + directors as Amalia Mesa-Bains, Osvaldo Golijov, Dawn Upshaw, Peter Sellars, Michael Maltzan, Eric Owen Moss, Deborah Gribbon, John Malpede, Michael Ritchie and Ramaa Bharadvaj. The USC Annenberg/Getty Arts Journalism Program, based at USC's School of Journalism, is funded in part by a grant from the J. Paul Getty Trust. To apply, see http://annenberg.usc.edu/getty .
Deadline : December 8, 2
Wednesday, November 19, 2003
Monday, November 17, 2003
Hi I'd like you to take a look at the home page of the Toledo Blade a rather small great American newspaper. There is a banner at the top of their home page featuring a series of stories that the paper did. This is investigative reporting at it's very best. Try and read and or listen to as much of it as you can. It's called Hidden Graves. You can find the paper through Google. See you Thur. Clark
Saturday, November 15, 2003
Hi I hope those of you that went to see the play on Saturday enjoyed it. I actually saw four of you there or after. I thought that the play was really well done. A great experience. Remember next week an interview is due. There is one more thing and that is a very interesting investigating by an American newspaper the Toledo Blade about a terrrible event during the Vietnam war. The story is called Buried Secrets,Brutal Truths and is a brillant example of really good investigative reporting. The web site for the paper has audio as well as visual images and the regular reading material that a paper is expected to have. I'd like you all to look at it and try and read as much of it as you can. Good Luck. Clark
Here's the URL>http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
Here's the URL>http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
Friday, November 14, 2003
Thursday, November 13, 2003
Note that the play will start at 5:00 PM -- not at 4:00 PM, as was previously announced. Please inform students of this. Here are the _correct_ details: The International Theatre Company (London) will be performing Paul Stebbings' adaptation of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" at Koudou Hall/ Shibuya Campus on Nov. 15 from 5:00 PM. The doors will open at 4:30 PM. The performance is free for all.
bless us every one,
Note that the play will start at 5:00 PM -- not at 4:00 PM, as was previously announced. Please inform students of this. Here are the _correct_ details: The International Theatre Company (London) will be performing Paul Stebbings' adaptation of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" at Koudou Hall/ Shibuya Campus on Nov. 15 from 5:00 PM. The doors will open at 4:30 PM. The performance is free for all.
bless us every one,
Wednesday, November 12, 2003
Spy Chips' Tested on the Sly
The Chicago Sun Times reports that P&G and Wal-Mart did a secret test of RFID chips in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, where Max Factor Lipfinity lipstick containers were equipped with RFID chips. "The shelves and Webcam images were viewed 750 miles away by Procter & Gamble researchers in Cincinnati who could tell when lipsticks were removed from the shelves and could even watch consumers in action," the article says.
This latest report "proves what we've been saying all along," says Katherine Albrecht, founder and director of Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN). "Wal-Mart, Procter & Gamble and others have experimented on shoppers with controversial spy chip technology and tried to cover it up," Albrecht says. "Consumers and members of the press should be upset to learn that they've been lied to."
The Chicago Sun Times reports that P&G and Wal-Mart did a secret test of RFID chips in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, where Max Factor Lipfinity lipstick containers were equipped with RFID chips. "The shelves and Webcam images were viewed 750 miles away by Procter & Gamble researchers in Cincinnati who could tell when lipsticks were removed from the shelves and could even watch consumers in action," the article says.
This latest report "proves what we've been saying all along," says Katherine Albrecht, founder and director of Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN). "Wal-Mart, Procter & Gamble and others have experimented on shoppers with controversial spy chip technology and tried to cover it up," Albrecht says. "Consumers and members of the press should be upset to learn that they've been lied to."
- FORUMS -
Questions for . . . John Noble Wilford
To mark the 25th anniversary of the section, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/readersopinions/questions-wilford.html?th
Here are some expamples of questions and answers in an interview from the above:
QUESTIONS FOR . . .
John Noble Wilford
This week, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
November 11
When you first covered the 1996 Mars meteorite story, were you more skeptical or more excited? Can you describe the arc of your own take on the likelihood that it provided evidence for real life on Mars, from Aug. 1996 until now? -- Dr. James Strick, Lancaster, Pa.
A. Dear Dr. Strick:
A very interesting question. For two or three days, as I tried to learn details about the rumored "life on Mars" rock, I was quite excited. Late one afternoon, when the embargo on the journal report was lifted, I read the paper and spoke with some of the authors and others familiar with the work. I was still excited. But I could see that the conclusion of a possible discovery of signs of past life on Mars was highly qualified at several turns. My story began by saying what the researchers thought they had discovered, but quickly raised questions and noted that the scientists would be defending their announced results at a news conference the following day. The story out of that conference was somewhat more skeptical, though one had to repeat what the researchers said they were claiming.
Two or three weeks later, I wrote a story that took a reverse tack. The skeptics and critics described their misgivings and reservations, and the original research team responded to their best defense. Four months later, I wrote a story that appeared on page one of The Times that cast strong doubt that the Mars meteoritic rock contained evidence of past life on Mars.
My view of Martian life (microbial or some such) has risen and fallen several times since the Viking landings in 1976. Martian life then looked extremely doubtful. Then in the 1980s, geologists studying the Viking orbital pictures saw so much evidence of erosion (water perhaps) that they developed scenarios in which Mars in its earlier history was warmer and wetter and life could have emerged, perhaps about the same time (3.6 billion years ago) that it apparently did on Earth and then it vanished as Martian conditions worsened. Or life emerged and still exists in some forms, presumably in subsurface watery layers or near the polar ice caps. To be honest, I hope that there is some simple form of life on Mars and that we detect it; it would make a great news story and stunning revelation in scientific and philosophical terms. We will have all the more reason to keep searching for the planets and moons of other stars, looking for cosmic companionship.
Best regards,
John Noble Wilford
Q. In your perception of the responses of readers to your journalistic work on science, have there been any significant changes regarding the attitudes and perceptions about science over the time?-- Rainer Kamber, Basel, Switzerland
A. Dear Rainer Kamber:
For the most part, readers of Science Times over the years tend to be eager to savor and learn about what is happening in science and medicine. A few occasionally object to the emphasis we give one line of research over another, or one scientific group over another. A few call our attention to omissions and mistakes on our part. But mostly they write in appreciation and with suggestions for other stories they would like to read.
But we do have some who write in with complaints that we misrepresent or overlook other theories and points of view. There are a few who reject the Big Bang, or the overall Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Science has certainly not resolved all issues regarding these two pillars of research, but a strong case has been made and repeatedly tested that the theories are the most reasonable explanations for cosmology and biological evolution.
For more observations on public perceptions of science today, you should take a close look at the lead article by Bill Broad and Jim Glanz in today's 25th anniversary issue of Science Times. Several polls and observations by specialists indicate a growing unease over science. The prestige of scientists has apparently slipped, though it remains relatively high. Irrational beliefs like miracles, ghosts and astrology are strong. And there's a nagging feeling that science is failing to solve social ills. Give the article a read; it goes to the heart of your question.
Regards,
John Noble Wilford
Questions for . . . John Noble Wilford
To mark the 25th anniversary of the section, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/readersopinions/questions-wilford.html?th
Here are some expamples of questions and answers in an interview from the above:
QUESTIONS FOR . . .
John Noble Wilford
This week, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
November 11
When you first covered the 1996 Mars meteorite story, were you more skeptical or more excited? Can you describe the arc of your own take on the likelihood that it provided evidence for real life on Mars, from Aug. 1996 until now? -- Dr. James Strick, Lancaster, Pa.
A. Dear Dr. Strick:
A very interesting question. For two or three days, as I tried to learn details about the rumored "life on Mars" rock, I was quite excited. Late one afternoon, when the embargo on the journal report was lifted, I read the paper and spoke with some of the authors and others familiar with the work. I was still excited. But I could see that the conclusion of a possible discovery of signs of past life on Mars was highly qualified at several turns. My story began by saying what the researchers thought they had discovered, but quickly raised questions and noted that the scientists would be defending their announced results at a news conference the following day. The story out of that conference was somewhat more skeptical, though one had to repeat what the researchers said they were claiming.
Two or three weeks later, I wrote a story that took a reverse tack. The skeptics and critics described their misgivings and reservations, and the original research team responded to their best defense. Four months later, I wrote a story that appeared on page one of The Times that cast strong doubt that the Mars meteoritic rock contained evidence of past life on Mars.
My view of Martian life (microbial or some such) has risen and fallen several times since the Viking landings in 1976. Martian life then looked extremely doubtful. Then in the 1980s, geologists studying the Viking orbital pictures saw so much evidence of erosion (water perhaps) that they developed scenarios in which Mars in its earlier history was warmer and wetter and life could have emerged, perhaps about the same time (3.6 billion years ago) that it apparently did on Earth and then it vanished as Martian conditions worsened. Or life emerged and still exists in some forms, presumably in subsurface watery layers or near the polar ice caps. To be honest, I hope that there is some simple form of life on Mars and that we detect it; it would make a great news story and stunning revelation in scientific and philosophical terms. We will have all the more reason to keep searching for the planets and moons of other stars, looking for cosmic companionship.
Best regards,
John Noble Wilford
Q. In your perception of the responses of readers to your journalistic work on science, have there been any significant changes regarding the attitudes and perceptions about science over the time?-- Rainer Kamber, Basel, Switzerland
A. Dear Rainer Kamber:
For the most part, readers of Science Times over the years tend to be eager to savor and learn about what is happening in science and medicine. A few occasionally object to the emphasis we give one line of research over another, or one scientific group over another. A few call our attention to omissions and mistakes on our part. But mostly they write in appreciation and with suggestions for other stories they would like to read.
But we do have some who write in with complaints that we misrepresent or overlook other theories and points of view. There are a few who reject the Big Bang, or the overall Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Science has certainly not resolved all issues regarding these two pillars of research, but a strong case has been made and repeatedly tested that the theories are the most reasonable explanations for cosmology and biological evolution.
For more observations on public perceptions of science today, you should take a close look at the lead article by Bill Broad and Jim Glanz in today's 25th anniversary issue of Science Times. Several polls and observations by specialists indicate a growing unease over science. The prestige of scientists has apparently slipped, though it remains relatively high. Irrational beliefs like miracles, ghosts and astrology are strong. And there's a nagging feeling that science is failing to solve social ills. Give the article a read; it goes to the heart of your question.
Regards,
John Noble Wilford
- FORUMS -
Questions for . . . John Noble Wilford
To mark the 25th anniversary of the section, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/readersopinions/questions-wilford.html?th
Here are some expamples of questions and answers in an interview from the above:
QUESTIONS FOR . . .
John Noble Wilford
John Noble Wilford.
Submit a Question
Related Articles by John Noble Wilford
The Birth of Science Times (November 11, 2003)
U.S. And Soviet Astronauts Unite Ships And Then Join In Historic Handshakes (July 17, 1975)
Power Failure Imperils Astronauts (April 13, 1970)
Men Walk On Moon (July 20, 1969)
Astronauts Carry Out Early Maneuvers on 163-Orbit Journey (October 11, 1968)
TIMES NEWS TRACKER
ÊÊTopics
Alerts
Science and Technology
Archaeology and Anthropology
Space
News and News Media
This week, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
November 11
When you first covered the 1996 Mars meteorite story, were you more skeptical or more excited? Can you describe the arc of your own take on the likelihood that it provided evidence for real life on Mars, from Aug. 1996 until now? -- Dr. James Strick, Lancaster, Pa.
A. Dear Dr. Strick:
A very interesting question. For two or three days, as I tried to learn details about the rumored "life on Mars" rock, I was quite excited. Late one afternoon, when the embargo on the journal report was lifted, I read the paper and spoke with some of the authors and others familiar with the work. I was still excited. But I could see that the conclusion of a possible discovery of signs of past life on Mars was highly qualified at several turns. My story began by saying what the researchers thought they had discovered, but quickly raised questions and noted that the scientists would be defending their announced results at a news conference the following day. The story out of that conference was somewhat more skeptical, though one had to repeat what the researchers said they were claiming.
Two or three weeks later, I wrote a story that took a reverse tack. The skeptics and critics described their misgivings and reservations, and the original research team responded to their best defense. Four months later, I wrote a story that appeared on page one of The Times that cast strong doubt that the Mars meteoritic rock contained evidence of past life on Mars.
My view of Martian life (microbial or some such) has risen and fallen several times since the Viking landings in 1976. Martian life then looked extremely doubtful. Then in the 1980s, geologists studying the Viking orbital pictures saw so much evidence of erosion (water perhaps) that they developed scenarios in which Mars in its earlier history was warmer and wetter and life could have emerged, perhaps about the same time (3.6 billion years ago) that it apparently did on Earth and then it vanished as Martian conditions worsened. Or life emerged and still exists in some forms, presumably in subsurface watery layers or near the polar ice caps. To be honest, I hope that there is some simple form of life on Mars and that we detect it; it would make a great news story and stunning revelation in scientific and philosophical terms. We will have all the more reason to keep searching for the planets and moons of other stars, looking for cosmic companionship.
Best regards,
John Noble Wilford
Q. In your perception of the responses of readers to your journalistic work on science, have there been any significant changes regarding the attitudes and perceptions about science over the time?-- Rainer Kamber, Basel, Switzerland
A. Dear Rainer Kamber:
For the most part, readers of Science Times over the years tend to be eager to savor and learn about what is happening in science and medicine. A few occasionally object to the emphasis we give one line of research over another, or one scientific group over another. A few call our attention to omissions and mistakes on our part. But mostly they write in appreciation and with suggestions for other stories they would like to read.
But we do have some who write in with complaints that we misrepresent or overlook other theories and points of view. There are a few who reject the Big Bang, or the overall Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Science has certainly not resolved all issues regarding these two pillars of research, but a strong case has been made and repeatedly tested that the theories are the most reasonable explanations for cosmology and biological evolution.
For more observations on public perceptions of science today, you should take a close look at the lead article by Bill Broad and Jim Glanz in today's 25th anniversary issue of Science Times. Several polls and observations by specialists indicate a growing unease over science. The prestige of scientists has apparently slipped, though it remains relatively high. Irrational beliefs like miracles, ghosts and astrology are strong. And there's a nagging feeling that science is failing to solve social ills. Give the article a read; it goes to the heart of your question.
Regards,
John Noble Wilford
Questions for . . . John Noble Wilford
To mark the 25th anniversary of the section, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/readersopinions/questions-wilford.html?th
Here are some expamples of questions and answers in an interview from the above:
QUESTIONS FOR . . .
John Noble Wilford
John Noble Wilford.
Submit a Question
Related Articles by John Noble Wilford
The Birth of Science Times (November 11, 2003)
U.S. And Soviet Astronauts Unite Ships And Then Join In Historic Handshakes (July 17, 1975)
Power Failure Imperils Astronauts (April 13, 1970)
Men Walk On Moon (July 20, 1969)
Astronauts Carry Out Early Maneuvers on 163-Orbit Journey (October 11, 1968)
TIMES NEWS TRACKER
ÊÊTopics
Alerts
Science and Technology
Archaeology and Anthropology
Space
News and News Media
This week, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
November 11
When you first covered the 1996 Mars meteorite story, were you more skeptical or more excited? Can you describe the arc of your own take on the likelihood that it provided evidence for real life on Mars, from Aug. 1996 until now? -- Dr. James Strick, Lancaster, Pa.
A. Dear Dr. Strick:
A very interesting question. For two or three days, as I tried to learn details about the rumored "life on Mars" rock, I was quite excited. Late one afternoon, when the embargo on the journal report was lifted, I read the paper and spoke with some of the authors and others familiar with the work. I was still excited. But I could see that the conclusion of a possible discovery of signs of past life on Mars was highly qualified at several turns. My story began by saying what the researchers thought they had discovered, but quickly raised questions and noted that the scientists would be defending their announced results at a news conference the following day. The story out of that conference was somewhat more skeptical, though one had to repeat what the researchers said they were claiming.
Two or three weeks later, I wrote a story that took a reverse tack. The skeptics and critics described their misgivings and reservations, and the original research team responded to their best defense. Four months later, I wrote a story that appeared on page one of The Times that cast strong doubt that the Mars meteoritic rock contained evidence of past life on Mars.
My view of Martian life (microbial or some such) has risen and fallen several times since the Viking landings in 1976. Martian life then looked extremely doubtful. Then in the 1980s, geologists studying the Viking orbital pictures saw so much evidence of erosion (water perhaps) that they developed scenarios in which Mars in its earlier history was warmer and wetter and life could have emerged, perhaps about the same time (3.6 billion years ago) that it apparently did on Earth and then it vanished as Martian conditions worsened. Or life emerged and still exists in some forms, presumably in subsurface watery layers or near the polar ice caps. To be honest, I hope that there is some simple form of life on Mars and that we detect it; it would make a great news story and stunning revelation in scientific and philosophical terms. We will have all the more reason to keep searching for the planets and moons of other stars, looking for cosmic companionship.
Best regards,
John Noble Wilford
Q. In your perception of the responses of readers to your journalistic work on science, have there been any significant changes regarding the attitudes and perceptions about science over the time?-- Rainer Kamber, Basel, Switzerland
A. Dear Rainer Kamber:
For the most part, readers of Science Times over the years tend to be eager to savor and learn about what is happening in science and medicine. A few occasionally object to the emphasis we give one line of research over another, or one scientific group over another. A few call our attention to omissions and mistakes on our part. But mostly they write in appreciation and with suggestions for other stories they would like to read.
But we do have some who write in with complaints that we misrepresent or overlook other theories and points of view. There are a few who reject the Big Bang, or the overall Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Science has certainly not resolved all issues regarding these two pillars of research, but a strong case has been made and repeatedly tested that the theories are the most reasonable explanations for cosmology and biological evolution.
For more observations on public perceptions of science today, you should take a close look at the lead article by Bill Broad and Jim Glanz in today's 25th anniversary issue of Science Times. Several polls and observations by specialists indicate a growing unease over science. The prestige of scientists has apparently slipped, though it remains relatively high. Irrational beliefs like miracles, ghosts and astrology are strong. And there's a nagging feeling that science is failing to solve social ills. Give the article a read; it goes to the heart of your question.
Regards,
John Noble Wilford
- FORUMS -
Questions for . . . John Noble Wilford
To mark the 25th anniversary of the section, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/readersopinions/questions-wilford.html?th
Here are some expamples of questions and answers in an interview from the above:
QUESTIONS FOR . . .
John Noble Wilford
John Noble Wilford.
Submit a Question
Related Articles by John Noble Wilford
The Birth of Science Times (November 11, 2003)
U.S. And Soviet Astronauts Unite Ships And Then Join In Historic Handshakes (July 17, 1975)
Power Failure Imperils Astronauts (April 13, 1970)
Men Walk On Moon (July 20, 1969)
Astronauts Carry Out Early Maneuvers on 163-Orbit Journey (October 11, 1968)
TIMES NEWS TRACKER
Topics
Alerts
Science and Technology
Archaeology and Anthropology
Space
News and News Media
This week, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
November 11
When you first covered the 1996 Mars meteorite story, were you more skeptical or more excited? Can you describe the arc of your own take on the likelihood that it provided evidence for real life on Mars, from Aug. 1996 until now? -- Dr. James Strick, Lancaster, Pa.
A. Dear Dr. Strick:
A very interesting question. For two or three days, as I tried to learn details about the rumored "life on Mars" rock, I was quite excited. Late one afternoon, when the embargo on the journal report was lifted, I read the paper and spoke with some of the authors and others familiar with the work. I was still excited. But I could see that the conclusion of a possible discovery of signs of past life on Mars was highly qualified at several turns. My story began by saying what the researchers thought they had discovered, but quickly raised questions and noted that the scientists would be defending their announced results at a news conference the following day. The story out of that conference was somewhat more skeptical, though one had to repeat what the researchers said they were claiming.
Two or three weeks later, I wrote a story that took a reverse tack. The skeptics and critics described their misgivings and reservations, and the original research team responded to their best defense. Four months later, I wrote a story that appeared on page one of The Times that cast strong doubt that the Mars meteoritic rock contained evidence of past life on Mars.
My view of Martian life (microbial or some such) has risen and fallen several times since the Viking landings in 1976. Martian life then looked extremely doubtful. Then in the 1980s, geologists studying the Viking orbital pictures saw so much evidence of erosion (water perhaps) that they developed scenarios in which Mars in its earlier history was warmer and wetter and life could have emerged, perhaps about the same time (3.6 billion years ago) that it apparently did on Earth and then it vanished as Martian conditions worsened. Or life emerged and still exists in some forms, presumably in subsurface watery layers or near the polar ice caps. To be honest, I hope that there is some simple form of life on Mars and that we detect it; it would make a great news story and stunning revelation in scientific and philosophical terms. We will have all the more reason to keep searching for the planets and moons of other stars, looking for cosmic companionship.
Best regards,
John Noble Wilford
Q. In your perception of the responses of readers to your journalistic work on science, have there been any significant changes regarding the attitudes and perceptions about science over the time?-- Rainer Kamber, Basel, Switzerland
A. Dear Rainer Kamber:
For the most part, readers of Science Times over the years tend to be eager to savor and learn about what is happening in science and medicine. A few occasionally object to the emphasis we give one line of research over another, or one scientific group over another. A few call our attention to omissions and mistakes on our part. But mostly they write in appreciation and with suggestions for other stories they would like to read.
But we do have some who write in with complaints that we misrepresent or overlook other theories and points of view. There are a few who reject the Big Bang, or the overall Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Science has certainly not resolved all issues regarding these two pillars of research, but a strong case has been made and repeatedly tested that the theories are the most reasonable explanations for cosmology and biological evolution.
For more observations on public perceptions of science today, you should take a close look at the lead article by Bill Broad and Jim Glanz in today's 25th anniversary issue of Science Times. Several polls and observations by specialists indicate a growing unease over science. The prestige of scientists has apparently slipped, though it remains relatively high. Irrational beliefs like miracles, ghosts and astrology are strong. And there's a nagging feeling that science is failing to solve social ills. Give the article a read; it goes to the heart of your question.
Regards,
John Noble Wilford
Questions for . . . John Noble Wilford
To mark the 25th anniversary of the section, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/readersopinions/questions-wilford.html?th
Here are some expamples of questions and answers in an interview from the above:
QUESTIONS FOR . . .
John Noble Wilford
John Noble Wilford.
Submit a Question
Related Articles by John Noble Wilford
The Birth of Science Times (November 11, 2003)
U.S. And Soviet Astronauts Unite Ships And Then Join In Historic Handshakes (July 17, 1975)
Power Failure Imperils Astronauts (April 13, 1970)
Men Walk On Moon (July 20, 1969)
Astronauts Carry Out Early Maneuvers on 163-Orbit Journey (October 11, 1968)
TIMES NEWS TRACKER
Topics
Alerts
Science and Technology
Archaeology and Anthropology
Space
News and News Media
This week, the reporter and former Science Times editor will answer questions about covering science over the years.
November 11
When you first covered the 1996 Mars meteorite story, were you more skeptical or more excited? Can you describe the arc of your own take on the likelihood that it provided evidence for real life on Mars, from Aug. 1996 until now? -- Dr. James Strick, Lancaster, Pa.
A. Dear Dr. Strick:
A very interesting question. For two or three days, as I tried to learn details about the rumored "life on Mars" rock, I was quite excited. Late one afternoon, when the embargo on the journal report was lifted, I read the paper and spoke with some of the authors and others familiar with the work. I was still excited. But I could see that the conclusion of a possible discovery of signs of past life on Mars was highly qualified at several turns. My story began by saying what the researchers thought they had discovered, but quickly raised questions and noted that the scientists would be defending their announced results at a news conference the following day. The story out of that conference was somewhat more skeptical, though one had to repeat what the researchers said they were claiming.
Two or three weeks later, I wrote a story that took a reverse tack. The skeptics and critics described their misgivings and reservations, and the original research team responded to their best defense. Four months later, I wrote a story that appeared on page one of The Times that cast strong doubt that the Mars meteoritic rock contained evidence of past life on Mars.
My view of Martian life (microbial or some such) has risen and fallen several times since the Viking landings in 1976. Martian life then looked extremely doubtful. Then in the 1980s, geologists studying the Viking orbital pictures saw so much evidence of erosion (water perhaps) that they developed scenarios in which Mars in its earlier history was warmer and wetter and life could have emerged, perhaps about the same time (3.6 billion years ago) that it apparently did on Earth and then it vanished as Martian conditions worsened. Or life emerged and still exists in some forms, presumably in subsurface watery layers or near the polar ice caps. To be honest, I hope that there is some simple form of life on Mars and that we detect it; it would make a great news story and stunning revelation in scientific and philosophical terms. We will have all the more reason to keep searching for the planets and moons of other stars, looking for cosmic companionship.
Best regards,
John Noble Wilford
Q. In your perception of the responses of readers to your journalistic work on science, have there been any significant changes regarding the attitudes and perceptions about science over the time?-- Rainer Kamber, Basel, Switzerland
A. Dear Rainer Kamber:
For the most part, readers of Science Times over the years tend to be eager to savor and learn about what is happening in science and medicine. A few occasionally object to the emphasis we give one line of research over another, or one scientific group over another. A few call our attention to omissions and mistakes on our part. But mostly they write in appreciation and with suggestions for other stories they would like to read.
But we do have some who write in with complaints that we misrepresent or overlook other theories and points of view. There are a few who reject the Big Bang, or the overall Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Science has certainly not resolved all issues regarding these two pillars of research, but a strong case has been made and repeatedly tested that the theories are the most reasonable explanations for cosmology and biological evolution.
For more observations on public perceptions of science today, you should take a close look at the lead article by Bill Broad and Jim Glanz in today's 25th anniversary issue of Science Times. Several polls and observations by specialists indicate a growing unease over science. The prestige of scientists has apparently slipped, though it remains relatively high. Irrational beliefs like miracles, ghosts and astrology are strong. And there's a nagging feeling that science is failing to solve social ills. Give the article a read; it goes to the heart of your question.
Regards,
John Noble Wilford
Sunday, November 09, 2003
Saturday, November 08, 2003
WORTH THINKING ABOUT: TERRA INCOGNITA
Travel writer Paul Theroux thinks there's too much "connectedness"
these days:
"'Connected' is the triumphant cry these days. Connection has made
people arrogant, impatient, hasty, and presumptuous. I am old enough to
have witnessed the rise of the telephone, the apotheosis of TV and the
videocassette, the cellular phone, the pager, the fax machine, and e-mail.
I don't doubt that instant communication has been good for business, even
for the publishing business, but it has done nothing for literature, and
might even have harmed it. In many ways connection has been disastrous. We
have confused information (of which there is too much) with ideas (of which
there are too few). I found out much more about the world and myself by
being unconnected.
"And what does connection really mean? What can the archivist --
relishing detail, boasting of the information age -- possibly do about all
those private phone calls, e-mails, and electronic messages. Lost! A
president is impeached, and in spite of all the phone calls and all the
investigations, almost the only evidence that exists of his assignations
are a few cheap gifts, a signed photograph, and obscure stains. So much for
the age of information. My detractors may say, 'You can print e-mails,' but
who commits that yackety-yak to paper?
"The most aberrant aspect of the delusional concept of globalization
is the smug belief that the world is connected and that everyone and every
place is instantly accessible. This is merely a harmful conceit. The
colorful advertisement for cellular phones or computers showing Chinese
speaking to Zulus, and Italians speaking to Tongans, is inaccurate, not to
say mendacious. There are still places on earth that are inaccessible,
because of their geography or their politics or their religion. Parts of
China are off the map, and for that matter parts of Italy are too -- there
are villages in the hinterland of Basilicata, in southern Italy, that are
as isolated as they have ever been.
"For the past ten years, since the disputed and disallowed election
of 1991, the entire Republic of Algeria has been a no-go area where between
eighty and one hundred thousand people have been massacred. Algeria -- a
sunny Mediterranean country, the most dangerous place in the world, with
the worst human rights record on earth -- is right next to jolly Morocco
and colorful Tunisia, the haunts of package tourists and rug collectors.
This bizarre proximity highlights the paradox, which is an old one, that
close by there are areas of the world that are still forbidden, or terra
incognita, where no outsider dares to venture. In spite of all our
connectedness we have little idea of what passes for daily life in Algeria."
***
See
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618126937/newsscancom/ref=nosim
for Theroux's "Fresh Air Fiend: Travel Writings"
Travel writer Paul Theroux thinks there's too much "connectedness"
these days:
"'Connected' is the triumphant cry these days. Connection has made
people arrogant, impatient, hasty, and presumptuous. I am old enough to
have witnessed the rise of the telephone, the apotheosis of TV and the
videocassette, the cellular phone, the pager, the fax machine, and e-mail.
I don't doubt that instant communication has been good for business, even
for the publishing business, but it has done nothing for literature, and
might even have harmed it. In many ways connection has been disastrous. We
have confused information (of which there is too much) with ideas (of which
there are too few). I found out much more about the world and myself by
being unconnected.
"And what does connection really mean? What can the archivist --
relishing detail, boasting of the information age -- possibly do about all
those private phone calls, e-mails, and electronic messages. Lost! A
president is impeached, and in spite of all the phone calls and all the
investigations, almost the only evidence that exists of his assignations
are a few cheap gifts, a signed photograph, and obscure stains. So much for
the age of information. My detractors may say, 'You can print e-mails,' but
who commits that yackety-yak to paper?
"The most aberrant aspect of the delusional concept of globalization
is the smug belief that the world is connected and that everyone and every
place is instantly accessible. This is merely a harmful conceit. The
colorful advertisement for cellular phones or computers showing Chinese
speaking to Zulus, and Italians speaking to Tongans, is inaccurate, not to
say mendacious. There are still places on earth that are inaccessible,
because of their geography or their politics or their religion. Parts of
China are off the map, and for that matter parts of Italy are too -- there
are villages in the hinterland of Basilicata, in southern Italy, that are
as isolated as they have ever been.
"For the past ten years, since the disputed and disallowed election
of 1991, the entire Republic of Algeria has been a no-go area where between
eighty and one hundred thousand people have been massacred. Algeria -- a
sunny Mediterranean country, the most dangerous place in the world, with
the worst human rights record on earth -- is right next to jolly Morocco
and colorful Tunisia, the haunts of package tourists and rug collectors.
This bizarre proximity highlights the paradox, which is an old one, that
close by there are areas of the world that are still forbidden, or terra
incognita, where no outsider dares to venture. In spite of all our
connectedness we have little idea of what passes for daily life in Algeria."
***
See
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618126937/newsscancom/ref=nosim
for Theroux's "Fresh Air Fiend: Travel Writings"
Thursday, November 06, 2003
THE WEEKLY SPIN, Wednesday, November 5, 2003
---------------------------------------------------------------------
sponsored by PR WATCH (www.prwatch.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Weekly Spin features selected news summaries with links to
further information about current public relations campaigns.
It is emailed free each Wednesday to subscribers.
SHARE US WITH A FRIEND (OR FIFTY FRIENDS)
Who do you know who might want to receive Spin of the Week?
Help us grow our subscriber list! Just forward this message to
people you know, encouraging them to sign up at this link:
http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS WEEK'S NEWS
1. CBS Caves to Pressure, Dumps Reagan Movie
2. Media Reform Conference Begins Friday in Madison
3. Private Sector Takes On Public Diplomacy
4. Copyright vs. Democracy
5. Sheep's Clothing
6. 'By-Passing the Media Filter' on the Iraq War
7. Media Blackout on Local Issues
8. Raped By the Globe
9. Gay-Bashing Provocateurs
10. Chemical Industry PR to Counter Health Activists
11. Puffery for Puff Daddy
12. Arson Attack on Peace Activists
13. Fox Gets the Memo
14. Bush Seeks Scapegoats for 'Mission Accomplished' Stunt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CBS CAVES TO PRESSURE, DUMPS REAGAN MOVIE
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/05/business/media/05TUBE.html?ex=1069002888&ei=1&en=2163c6474be84cfb
TV docu-dramas, such as this Sunday's red, white and blue Iraqi war
mythology Saving Private Lynch, always play fast and loose with the
facts, twisting reality into fiction for entertainment's sake. But
a much hyped CBS miniseries on Ronald Reagan drew the wrath of the
Right, and CBS has dumped the show. The New York Times reports that
"CBS executives ... denied they were capitulating to pressure from
Republicans and conservative groups in moving the 'The Reagans' to
the pay cable channel Showtime, a sister network at Viacom. The
decision, they argued, was instead 'a moral call,' reached after
concluding that the four-hour television movie carried a liberal
political agenda and treated the Reagans unfairly. ... On Oct. 28,
the Media Research Center ... wrote a letter to a list of 100 top
television sponsors urging them to 'refuse to associate your
products with this movie.' At around the same time Michael
Paranzino, a former Republican Congressional staff member from
Betheseda Md., decided to start a Web site called BoycottCBS.com.
... Last Friday, the Republican National Committee entered the
fray."
SOURCE: New York Times, November 5, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1068008401
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1068008401
2. MEDIA REFORM CONFERENCE BEGINS FRIDAY IN MADISON
http://www.mediareform.net/conference.php
Some 1,500 journalists, political reformers and citizens at large
are convening in our home town of Madison, Wisconsin, November 7th
- 9th for the National Conference on Media Reform. The conference
begins Friday with a 2pm panel featuring professor Nancy Snow,
Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and our own John Stauber, co-author
of Weapons of Mass Deception. The dozens of speakers and performing
artists include Bill Moyers, Al Franken, members of the US House
and Senate, FCC Commissioners, John Sweeney of the AFL-CIO, Ralph
Nader, Janine Jackson of FAIR, Billy Bragg and many more.
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1068008400
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1068008400
3. PRIVATE SECTOR TAKES ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY
http://www.prweek.com/news/news_story.cfm?ID=194146&site=3
As the US slips in international opinion polls, some private sector
imagemakers think its time to bolster Washington's public diplomacy
efforts, PR Week's Douglas Quenqua reports. "Keith Reinhard,
chairman of Omnicom ad firm DDB Worldwide, announced the formation
of the Task Force to Mobilize American Business for Public
Diplomacy, a collection of marketing and PR experts who've come
together to help American corporations improve America's image in
foreign lands." Reinhard's initial research showed that "the world
overwhelmingly shares the same four negative perceptions about US
companies: they exploit workers; they're a corrupting influence,
promoting values that are in conflict with local customs; they're
grossly insensitive and arrogant; and the practice
hyper-consumerism, increasing profits it the only priority." "I
looked at the data and I said, 'They're talking about companies and
brands that mean business to me. ... All these big multinational
companies, these are our clients,'" Reinhard told PR Week. "Our own
company gets 61% of our revenue from outside the US. So I thought
we could organize and address some of these perceptions."
SOURCE: PR Week, November 3, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835603
4. COPYRIGHT VS. DEMOCRACY
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1103-04.htm
"Diebold Election Systems, which makes voting machines, is waging
legal war against grass-roots advocates, including dozens of
college students, who are posting on the Internet copies of the
company's internal communications about its electronic voting
machines," reports John Schwartz. The company's attorneys have sent
letters threatening legal action against the students, who are
circulating "thousands of e-mail messages and memorandums dating to
March 2003 from January 1999 that include discussions of bugs in
Diebold's software and warnings that its computer network are
poorly protected against hackers." Questions are also being raised
about whether Diebold's voting machines can be trusted to deliver
an honest result. "Diebold has become a favorite target of
advocates who accuse it of partisanship," Schwartz states. "Company
executives have made large contributions to the Republican Party
and the chief executive, Walden W. O'Dell, said in an invitation to
a fund-raiser that he was 'committed to helping Ohio deliver its
electoral votes to the president next year.'"
SOURCE: New York Times, November 3, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835602
5. SHEEP'S CLOTHING
http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9286
A group calling itself Partnership for the West (PFTW) was formally
unveiled in late October and aims to influence environmental
legislation in Washington. "The group plans to work on 'restoring a
common sense balance to economic growth and conservation in the
West,'" notes Bill Berkowitz, adding that this "sounds nice, until
you see who's behind it. Claiming to be a grassroots lobby group,
PFTW actually represents a kinder, gentler and more politically
savvy brand of anti-environmentalism. ... The group's members
number over a hundred, and include large interests in fossil fuel,
logging and mining industries. ... Partnership for the West grew
out of summit in Denver, Colorado, attended by elected officials,
corporate representatives and long-standing anti-environmental
organizations like the American Land Rights Association, the Blue
Ribbon Coalition, the Mountain States Legal Foundation, and People
for the USA. Its president, Jim Sims, is the former communications
director for the National Energy Policy Task Force - also known as
Cheney's secret panel - and helped craft the administration's
energy policy." According to Scott Silver, who heads a real
environmental group called Wild Wilderness, "These people are paid
lobbyists and public relations consultants serving the needs of
every imaginable sort of polluter, developer, resource extractor or
despoiler of the environment."
SOURCE: TomPaine.com, November 3, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1067835601
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835601
6. 'BY-PASSING THE MEDIA FILTER' ON THE IRAQ WAR
http://www.truthuncovered.com/index.cfm?ms=alternet
As part of its PR strategy to 'by-pass the media filter' that it
claims is distorting public perception of the Iraq war with too
much negative reporting, the Bush administration has been granting
interviews to smaller, more friendly media. A 'media by-pass'
tactic of a different sort is being used by critics of the war who,
as we've documented in our book Weapons of Mass Deception, have
been locked out of mainstream media coverage. Alternet has
announced that "A provocative new DVD that documents how the Bush
Administration exaggerated the threat of Iraq, debuts today.
Produced and directed by award-winning filmmaker Robert Greenwald,
"Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War" takes you behind
the scenes, as CIA, Pentagon and foreign service experts speak out
and reveal the lies, misstatements and exaggerations that the Bush
administration used to deceive the public." Word of the DVD is
"going to millions of MoveOn members, Nation subscribers, Working
Assets customers, and others as part of an unprecedented,
simultaneous effort to bypass the film and media gatekeepers and
take the information directly to the people."
SOURCE: Alternet, November 3, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1067835600
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835600
7. MEDIA BLACKOUT ON LOCAL ISSUES
http://www.bettercampaigns.org/press/release.php?ReleaseID=50
Local public affairs shows account for less than one half of one
percent of all programming on local television stations, according
to a study released by the Alliance for Better Campaigns.
"Broadcasters have relegated local public-affairs programming to
the very bottom of the heap - behind cartoons, kitchenware
specials, reruns, courtroom dramas, dating shows and late-night
talk shows," reports Jennifer Harper. "The analysis found, for
example, that there were three times as many 'Seinfeld' reruns as
local public-affairs shows on TV stations nationwide. There were
four times as many cartoon shows, seven times as many pro football
games, nine times as many dating shows, 19 times as many late-night
talk shows, 20 times as many courtroom dramas and 23 times as many
soap operas."
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067830733
8. RAPED BY THE GLOBE
http://salon.com/mwt/feature/2003/10/31/kobe/index.html
The Globe, a tabloid newspaper, is running a titillating photograph
of alleged rapist Kobe Bryant's accuser at her high school prom.
"In it, the woman is lifting up her prom dress to reveal a garter
belt," notes Rebecca Traister. "The headline reads: 'Kobe Bryant's
Accuser: Did she really say no?' Next to the photo, in half-inch
type, is the 19-year-old woman's name." Traister interviewed
journalism professors and magazine editors who are shocked by the
Globe's decision. "It is misogynistic and truly exploitative to try
to get big sales off of identifying an alleged rape victim," said
Us Weekly's editor in chief Janice Min. "Was a woman dressed
inappropriately? Did she ask for it? Is a sexy woman more likely to
get raped than a non-sexy woman? These are the anachronistic,
horrible ideas that come up because of a cover like that. Morally,
it's wrong."
SOURCE: Salon.com, October 31, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067576400
9. GAY-BASHING PROVOCATEURS
http://www.splc.org/newsflash.asp?id=702
A gay-bashing, right wing student newspaper at Roger Williams
University in Rhode Island offers a fresh example of the
conservative media's strategy of "publicizing censorship of their
papers" so they can "cast themselves as the little guy up against
the leftist establishment." The Hawk's Right Eye provoked the
university administration into clamping down by running nasty
attacks on Judy Shepard, whose son was beaten to death in Texas for
being gay. After Shepard spoke on campus, HRE accused her of
"preying on students' emotions and naivety" [sic] so that she could
become "a mascot for the homosexual agenda." Now that the
university has established a "publications and broadcast review
committee" and is considering revoking HRE's funding, national
conservative groups have swarmed to its defense, complaining of
"harassment" and "a heavy-handed approach to silencing ideas that
oppose the leftist orthodoxy so prevalent on college campuses."
SOURCE: Student Press Law Center, October 30, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067490002
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067490002
10. CHEMICAL INDUSTRY PR TO COUNTER HEALTH ACTIVISTS
http://www.rachel.org/bulletin/index.cfm?St=1
Monique Harden and Nathalie Walker, two public interest lawyers,
report that they attended "the recent conference of the American
Chemistry Council (ACC), called 'Communicating in a Volatile
World.' ACC is the trade association for the 180 largest
manufacturers of chemicals in the U.S. Until recently, ACC was
known as the Chemical Manufacturers Association. The ACC conference
was a real eye-opener. It revealed the ACC's genuine fears about
the accomplishments of environmental health activists. In
particular, ACC communications staff and presenters at the
conference conceded that the work of coalitions like the
Collaborative on Health and the Environment and Health Care Without
Harm has effectively raised public awareness about the health
dangers of toxic chemicals in the environment and in consumer
products. They also concluded that the success of these coalitions
is due to their diversity of members and supporters who include
community groups, environmental justice organizations, health
professionals, and researchers who focus on body burden and
low-dose chemical exposures, shareholder/investment institutions,
and consumers. Here are the salient details of the various
presentations at the conference..."
SOURCE: Rachel's Environment & Health News, October 30, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067490001
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067490001
11. PUFFERY FOR PUFF DADDY
http://www.odwyerpr.com/members/1030klores.htm
Dan Klores Communications, a PR firm that specializes in "crisis
communications" for clients embroiled in scandals, is representing
Sean ("P. Diddy") Combs, the artist formerly known as "Puff Daddy,"
as he faces criticism for the use of sweatshop labor to manufacture
his clothing line. "The National Labor Committee, the organization
which targeted Kathy Lee Gifford with similar charges eight years
ago, this week released a report detailing forced overtime without
pay, mandatory pregnancy tests and other 'systematic human and
worker rights violations' at a factory which producesarticles for
Combs' 'Sean John' line," reports O'Dwyer's PR Daily. Combs has
been a long-time client of Klores, which encouraged him to carry a
Bible to court during his 2001 trial for illegal gun possession in
connection with a nightclub shooting. The PR firm has also
represented Combs at other embarrassing moments such as his 2002
legal battle with an ex-girlfriend over child support for their
infant son. Other Klores clients have included Britney Spears, Mike
Tyson and Lizzie Grubman.
SOURCE: O'Dwyer's PR Daily, October 30, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067490000
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067490000
12. ARSON ATTACK ON PEACE ACTIVISTS
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch03/mc102903.html
Cindy Hunter and her husband, Sam Nickels, opposed Bush's war
against Iraq and put a sign on their front porch showing the number
of Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers who have been wounded or
killed thus far in the war. An anonymous arson responded by setting
fire to the sign, endangering their lives and causing an estimated
$50,000 in damages to their home. This incident is only one of
dozens that the Progressive magazine lists on its "McCarthyism
Watch," which monitors "the New McCarthyism that is sweeping the
country."
SOURCE: Progressive, October 29, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067403602
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067403602
13. FOX GETS THE MEMO
http://poynter.org/forum/?id=letters#foxnews
Charlie Reina, a former producer for Fox News, has posted a letter
to the Poynter Institute's online journalism forum, explaining how
the network deliberately slants the news. "Editorially, the FNC
newsroom is under the constant control and vigilance of
management," he writes.†"The pressure ranges from subtle to
direct.† First of all, it's a news network run by one of the most
high-profile political operatives of recent times. ... The roots of
FNC's day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct. They come in
the form of an executive memo distributed electronically each
morning, addressing what stories will be covered and, often,
suggesting how they should be covered. To the newsroom personnel
responsible for the channel's daytime programming, The Memo is the
bible. If, on any given day, you notice that the Fox anchors seem
to be trying to drive a particular point home, you can bet The Memo
is behind it."
SOURCE: Poynter Online Forums, October 29, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067403601
14. BUSH SEEKS SCAPEGOATS FOR 'MISSION ACCOMPLISHED' STUNT
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/29/politics/29BANN.html?ex=1068435851&ei=1&en=a3423473eff9af7f
As the propaganda that led America to attack Iraq continues to fall
apart, President Bush is looking for scapegoats for his own PR
stunts. "The triumphal 'Mission Accomplished' banner was the pride
of the White House advance team, the image makers who set the stage
for the president's close-ups. On May 1, on a golden Pacific
evening aboard the carrier Abraham Lincoln, they made sure that the
banner was perfectly captured in the camera shots of President
Bush's speech declaring major combat in Iraq at an end. But on
Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Mr. Bush publicly disavowed the
banner... 'I know it was attributed somehow to some ingenious
advance man from my staff. They weren't that ingenious, by the
way.' ... The banner 'was suggested by those on the ship,' [Bush
press secretary Scotty McClellan] said. 'They asked us to do the
production of the banner, and we did. They're the ones who put it
up.' The man responsible for the banner, Scott Sforza, a former ABC
producer now with the White House communications office, was
traveling overseas on Tuesday and declined to answer questions. He
is known for the production of the sophisticated backdrops that
appear behind Mr. Bush with the White House message of the day,
like 'Helping Small Business,' repeated over and over." On May 16th
the New York Times reported that "White House officials say that a
variety of people, including the president" came up with the
carrier landing stunt. We wonder, is that super-sexy flight suit
President Bush wore on its way to the Smithsonian, or the shredder?
SOURCE: New York Times, October 22, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067403600
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067403600
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Weekly Spin is compiled by staff and volunteers at PR Watch.
To subscribe or unsubcribe, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
Daily updates and news from past weeks can be found at the
Spin of the Day" section of the PR Watch website:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/index.html
Archives of our quarterly publication, PR Watch, are at:
http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues
PR Watch, Spin of the Day and the Weekly Spin are projects
of the Center for Media & Democracy, a nonprofit organization
that offers investigative reporting on the public relations
industry. We help the public recognize manipulative and
misleading PR practices by exposing the activities of
secretive, little-known propaganda-for-hire firms that
work to control political debates and public opinion.
Please send any questions or suggestions about our
publications to:
editor@prwatch.org
Contributions to the Center for Media & Democracy
are tax-deductible. Send checks to:
CMD
520 University Ave. #310
Madison, WI 53703
To donate now online, visit:
https://www.egrants.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2344-0|1118-0
_______________________________________________
Weekly-Spin mailing list
Weekly-Spin@prwatch.org
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/weekly-spin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
sponsored by PR WATCH (www.prwatch.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Weekly Spin features selected news summaries with links to
further information about current public relations campaigns.
It is emailed free each Wednesday to subscribers.
SHARE US WITH A FRIEND (OR FIFTY FRIENDS)
Who do you know who might want to receive Spin of the Week?
Help us grow our subscriber list! Just forward this message to
people you know, encouraging them to sign up at this link:
http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS WEEK'S NEWS
1. CBS Caves to Pressure, Dumps Reagan Movie
2. Media Reform Conference Begins Friday in Madison
3. Private Sector Takes On Public Diplomacy
4. Copyright vs. Democracy
5. Sheep's Clothing
6. 'By-Passing the Media Filter' on the Iraq War
7. Media Blackout on Local Issues
8. Raped By the Globe
9. Gay-Bashing Provocateurs
10. Chemical Industry PR to Counter Health Activists
11. Puffery for Puff Daddy
12. Arson Attack on Peace Activists
13. Fox Gets the Memo
14. Bush Seeks Scapegoats for 'Mission Accomplished' Stunt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CBS CAVES TO PRESSURE, DUMPS REAGAN MOVIE
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/05/business/media/05TUBE.html?ex=1069002888&ei=1&en=2163c6474be84cfb
TV docu-dramas, such as this Sunday's red, white and blue Iraqi war
mythology Saving Private Lynch, always play fast and loose with the
facts, twisting reality into fiction for entertainment's sake. But
a much hyped CBS miniseries on Ronald Reagan drew the wrath of the
Right, and CBS has dumped the show. The New York Times reports that
"CBS executives ... denied they were capitulating to pressure from
Republicans and conservative groups in moving the 'The Reagans' to
the pay cable channel Showtime, a sister network at Viacom. The
decision, they argued, was instead 'a moral call,' reached after
concluding that the four-hour television movie carried a liberal
political agenda and treated the Reagans unfairly. ... On Oct. 28,
the Media Research Center ... wrote a letter to a list of 100 top
television sponsors urging them to 'refuse to associate your
products with this movie.' At around the same time Michael
Paranzino, a former Republican Congressional staff member from
Betheseda Md., decided to start a Web site called BoycottCBS.com.
... Last Friday, the Republican National Committee entered the
fray."
SOURCE: New York Times, November 5, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1068008401
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1068008401
2. MEDIA REFORM CONFERENCE BEGINS FRIDAY IN MADISON
http://www.mediareform.net/conference.php
Some 1,500 journalists, political reformers and citizens at large
are convening in our home town of Madison, Wisconsin, November 7th
- 9th for the National Conference on Media Reform. The conference
begins Friday with a 2pm panel featuring professor Nancy Snow,
Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and our own John Stauber, co-author
of Weapons of Mass Deception. The dozens of speakers and performing
artists include Bill Moyers, Al Franken, members of the US House
and Senate, FCC Commissioners, John Sweeney of the AFL-CIO, Ralph
Nader, Janine Jackson of FAIR, Billy Bragg and many more.
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1068008400
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1068008400
3. PRIVATE SECTOR TAKES ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY
http://www.prweek.com/news/news_story.cfm?ID=194146&site=3
As the US slips in international opinion polls, some private sector
imagemakers think its time to bolster Washington's public diplomacy
efforts, PR Week's Douglas Quenqua reports. "Keith Reinhard,
chairman of Omnicom ad firm DDB Worldwide, announced the formation
of the Task Force to Mobilize American Business for Public
Diplomacy, a collection of marketing and PR experts who've come
together to help American corporations improve America's image in
foreign lands." Reinhard's initial research showed that "the world
overwhelmingly shares the same four negative perceptions about US
companies: they exploit workers; they're a corrupting influence,
promoting values that are in conflict with local customs; they're
grossly insensitive and arrogant; and the practice
hyper-consumerism, increasing profits it the only priority." "I
looked at the data and I said, 'They're talking about companies and
brands that mean business to me. ... All these big multinational
companies, these are our clients,'" Reinhard told PR Week. "Our own
company gets 61% of our revenue from outside the US. So I thought
we could organize and address some of these perceptions."
SOURCE: PR Week, November 3, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835603
4. COPYRIGHT VS. DEMOCRACY
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1103-04.htm
"Diebold Election Systems, which makes voting machines, is waging
legal war against grass-roots advocates, including dozens of
college students, who are posting on the Internet copies of the
company's internal communications about its electronic voting
machines," reports John Schwartz. The company's attorneys have sent
letters threatening legal action against the students, who are
circulating "thousands of e-mail messages and memorandums dating to
March 2003 from January 1999 that include discussions of bugs in
Diebold's software and warnings that its computer network are
poorly protected against hackers." Questions are also being raised
about whether Diebold's voting machines can be trusted to deliver
an honest result. "Diebold has become a favorite target of
advocates who accuse it of partisanship," Schwartz states. "Company
executives have made large contributions to the Republican Party
and the chief executive, Walden W. O'Dell, said in an invitation to
a fund-raiser that he was 'committed to helping Ohio deliver its
electoral votes to the president next year.'"
SOURCE: New York Times, November 3, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835602
5. SHEEP'S CLOTHING
http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9286
A group calling itself Partnership for the West (PFTW) was formally
unveiled in late October and aims to influence environmental
legislation in Washington. "The group plans to work on 'restoring a
common sense balance to economic growth and conservation in the
West,'" notes Bill Berkowitz, adding that this "sounds nice, until
you see who's behind it. Claiming to be a grassroots lobby group,
PFTW actually represents a kinder, gentler and more politically
savvy brand of anti-environmentalism. ... The group's members
number over a hundred, and include large interests in fossil fuel,
logging and mining industries. ... Partnership for the West grew
out of summit in Denver, Colorado, attended by elected officials,
corporate representatives and long-standing anti-environmental
organizations like the American Land Rights Association, the Blue
Ribbon Coalition, the Mountain States Legal Foundation, and People
for the USA. Its president, Jim Sims, is the former communications
director for the National Energy Policy Task Force - also known as
Cheney's secret panel - and helped craft the administration's
energy policy." According to Scott Silver, who heads a real
environmental group called Wild Wilderness, "These people are paid
lobbyists and public relations consultants serving the needs of
every imaginable sort of polluter, developer, resource extractor or
despoiler of the environment."
SOURCE: TomPaine.com, November 3, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1067835601
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835601
6. 'BY-PASSING THE MEDIA FILTER' ON THE IRAQ WAR
http://www.truthuncovered.com/index.cfm?ms=alternet
As part of its PR strategy to 'by-pass the media filter' that it
claims is distorting public perception of the Iraq war with too
much negative reporting, the Bush administration has been granting
interviews to smaller, more friendly media. A 'media by-pass'
tactic of a different sort is being used by critics of the war who,
as we've documented in our book Weapons of Mass Deception, have
been locked out of mainstream media coverage. Alternet has
announced that "A provocative new DVD that documents how the Bush
Administration exaggerated the threat of Iraq, debuts today.
Produced and directed by award-winning filmmaker Robert Greenwald,
"Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War" takes you behind
the scenes, as CIA, Pentagon and foreign service experts speak out
and reveal the lies, misstatements and exaggerations that the Bush
administration used to deceive the public." Word of the DVD is
"going to millions of MoveOn members, Nation subscribers, Working
Assets customers, and others as part of an unprecedented,
simultaneous effort to bypass the film and media gatekeepers and
take the information directly to the people."
SOURCE: Alternet, November 3, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/November_2003.html#1067835600
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067835600
7. MEDIA BLACKOUT ON LOCAL ISSUES
http://www.bettercampaigns.org/press/release.php?ReleaseID=50
Local public affairs shows account for less than one half of one
percent of all programming on local television stations, according
to a study released by the Alliance for Better Campaigns.
"Broadcasters have relegated local public-affairs programming to
the very bottom of the heap - behind cartoons, kitchenware
specials, reruns, courtroom dramas, dating shows and late-night
talk shows," reports Jennifer Harper. "The analysis found, for
example, that there were three times as many 'Seinfeld' reruns as
local public-affairs shows on TV stations nationwide. There were
four times as many cartoon shows, seven times as many pro football
games, nine times as many dating shows, 19 times as many late-night
talk shows, 20 times as many courtroom dramas and 23 times as many
soap operas."
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067830733
8. RAPED BY THE GLOBE
http://salon.com/mwt/feature/2003/10/31/kobe/index.html
The Globe, a tabloid newspaper, is running a titillating photograph
of alleged rapist Kobe Bryant's accuser at her high school prom.
"In it, the woman is lifting up her prom dress to reveal a garter
belt," notes Rebecca Traister. "The headline reads: 'Kobe Bryant's
Accuser: Did she really say no?' Next to the photo, in half-inch
type, is the 19-year-old woman's name." Traister interviewed
journalism professors and magazine editors who are shocked by the
Globe's decision. "It is misogynistic and truly exploitative to try
to get big sales off of identifying an alleged rape victim," said
Us Weekly's editor in chief Janice Min. "Was a woman dressed
inappropriately? Did she ask for it? Is a sexy woman more likely to
get raped than a non-sexy woman? These are the anachronistic,
horrible ideas that come up because of a cover like that. Morally,
it's wrong."
SOURCE: Salon.com, October 31, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067576400
9. GAY-BASHING PROVOCATEURS
http://www.splc.org/newsflash.asp?id=702
A gay-bashing, right wing student newspaper at Roger Williams
University in Rhode Island offers a fresh example of the
conservative media's strategy of "publicizing censorship of their
papers" so they can "cast themselves as the little guy up against
the leftist establishment." The Hawk's Right Eye provoked the
university administration into clamping down by running nasty
attacks on Judy Shepard, whose son was beaten to death in Texas for
being gay. After Shepard spoke on campus, HRE accused her of
"preying on students' emotions and naivety" [sic] so that she could
become "a mascot for the homosexual agenda." Now that the
university has established a "publications and broadcast review
committee" and is considering revoking HRE's funding, national
conservative groups have swarmed to its defense, complaining of
"harassment" and "a heavy-handed approach to silencing ideas that
oppose the leftist orthodoxy so prevalent on college campuses."
SOURCE: Student Press Law Center, October 30, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067490002
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067490002
10. CHEMICAL INDUSTRY PR TO COUNTER HEALTH ACTIVISTS
http://www.rachel.org/bulletin/index.cfm?St=1
Monique Harden and Nathalie Walker, two public interest lawyers,
report that they attended "the recent conference of the American
Chemistry Council (ACC), called 'Communicating in a Volatile
World.' ACC is the trade association for the 180 largest
manufacturers of chemicals in the U.S. Until recently, ACC was
known as the Chemical Manufacturers Association. The ACC conference
was a real eye-opener. It revealed the ACC's genuine fears about
the accomplishments of environmental health activists. In
particular, ACC communications staff and presenters at the
conference conceded that the work of coalitions like the
Collaborative on Health and the Environment and Health Care Without
Harm has effectively raised public awareness about the health
dangers of toxic chemicals in the environment and in consumer
products. They also concluded that the success of these coalitions
is due to their diversity of members and supporters who include
community groups, environmental justice organizations, health
professionals, and researchers who focus on body burden and
low-dose chemical exposures, shareholder/investment institutions,
and consumers. Here are the salient details of the various
presentations at the conference..."
SOURCE: Rachel's Environment & Health News, October 30, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067490001
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067490001
11. PUFFERY FOR PUFF DADDY
http://www.odwyerpr.com/members/1030klores.htm
Dan Klores Communications, a PR firm that specializes in "crisis
communications" for clients embroiled in scandals, is representing
Sean ("P. Diddy") Combs, the artist formerly known as "Puff Daddy,"
as he faces criticism for the use of sweatshop labor to manufacture
his clothing line. "The National Labor Committee, the organization
which targeted Kathy Lee Gifford with similar charges eight years
ago, this week released a report detailing forced overtime without
pay, mandatory pregnancy tests and other 'systematic human and
worker rights violations' at a factory which producesarticles for
Combs' 'Sean John' line," reports O'Dwyer's PR Daily. Combs has
been a long-time client of Klores, which encouraged him to carry a
Bible to court during his 2001 trial for illegal gun possession in
connection with a nightclub shooting. The PR firm has also
represented Combs at other embarrassing moments such as his 2002
legal battle with an ex-girlfriend over child support for their
infant son. Other Klores clients have included Britney Spears, Mike
Tyson and Lizzie Grubman.
SOURCE: O'Dwyer's PR Daily, October 30, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067490000
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067490000
12. ARSON ATTACK ON PEACE ACTIVISTS
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch03/mc102903.html
Cindy Hunter and her husband, Sam Nickels, opposed Bush's war
against Iraq and put a sign on their front porch showing the number
of Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers who have been wounded or
killed thus far in the war. An anonymous arson responded by setting
fire to the sign, endangering their lives and causing an estimated
$50,000 in damages to their home. This incident is only one of
dozens that the Progressive magazine lists on its "McCarthyism
Watch," which monitors "the New McCarthyism that is sweeping the
country."
SOURCE: Progressive, October 29, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067403602
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067403602
13. FOX GETS THE MEMO
http://poynter.org/forum/?id=letters#foxnews
Charlie Reina, a former producer for Fox News, has posted a letter
to the Poynter Institute's online journalism forum, explaining how
the network deliberately slants the news. "Editorially, the FNC
newsroom is under the constant control and vigilance of
management," he writes.†"The pressure ranges from subtle to
direct.† First of all, it's a news network run by one of the most
high-profile political operatives of recent times. ... The roots of
FNC's day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct. They come in
the form of an executive memo distributed electronically each
morning, addressing what stories will be covered and, often,
suggesting how they should be covered. To the newsroom personnel
responsible for the channel's daytime programming, The Memo is the
bible. If, on any given day, you notice that the Fox anchors seem
to be trying to drive a particular point home, you can bet The Memo
is behind it."
SOURCE: Poynter Online Forums, October 29, 2003
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067403601
14. BUSH SEEKS SCAPEGOATS FOR 'MISSION ACCOMPLISHED' STUNT
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/29/politics/29BANN.html?ex=1068435851&ei=1&en=a3423473eff9af7f
As the propaganda that led America to attack Iraq continues to fall
apart, President Bush is looking for scapegoats for his own PR
stunts. "The triumphal 'Mission Accomplished' banner was the pride
of the White House advance team, the image makers who set the stage
for the president's close-ups. On May 1, on a golden Pacific
evening aboard the carrier Abraham Lincoln, they made sure that the
banner was perfectly captured in the camera shots of President
Bush's speech declaring major combat in Iraq at an end. But on
Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Mr. Bush publicly disavowed the
banner... 'I know it was attributed somehow to some ingenious
advance man from my staff. They weren't that ingenious, by the
way.' ... The banner 'was suggested by those on the ship,' [Bush
press secretary Scotty McClellan] said. 'They asked us to do the
production of the banner, and we did. They're the ones who put it
up.' The man responsible for the banner, Scott Sforza, a former ABC
producer now with the White House communications office, was
traveling overseas on Tuesday and declined to answer questions. He
is known for the production of the sophisticated backdrops that
appear behind Mr. Bush with the White House message of the day,
like 'Helping Small Business,' repeated over and over." On May 16th
the New York Times reported that "White House officials say that a
variety of people, including the president" came up with the
carrier landing stunt. We wonder, is that super-sexy flight suit
President Bush wore on its way to the Smithsonian, or the shredder?
SOURCE: New York Times, October 22, 2003
More web links related to this story are available at:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/October_2003.html#1067403600
To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1067403600
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Weekly Spin is compiled by staff and volunteers at PR Watch.
To subscribe or unsubcribe, visit:
http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
Daily updates and news from past weeks can be found at the
Spin of the Day" section of the PR Watch website:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/index.html
Archives of our quarterly publication, PR Watch, are at:
http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues
PR Watch, Spin of the Day and the Weekly Spin are projects
of the Center for Media & Democracy, a nonprofit organization
that offers investigative reporting on the public relations
industry. We help the public recognize manipulative and
misleading PR practices by exposing the activities of
secretive, little-known propaganda-for-hire firms that
work to control political debates and public opinion.
Please send any questions or suggestions about our
publications to:
editor@prwatch.org
Contributions to the Center for Media & Democracy
are tax-deductible. Send checks to:
CMD
520 University Ave. #310
Madison, WI 53703
To donate now online, visit:
https://www.egrants.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2344-0|1118-0
_______________________________________________
Weekly-Spin mailing list
Weekly-Spin@prwatch.org
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/weekly-spin
Wednesday, November 05, 2003
Sunday, November 02, 2003
FRANK RICH
So Much for 'The Front Page'
Published: November 2, 2003
PITY, though not too deeply, the American press. Once the wisecracking truth seekers of "The Front Page" and the brave gumshoes of "All the President's Men," the fourth estate has fallen into such cultural disfavor that it risks being renamed the fifth estate, if not the sixth. Hollywood no longer depicts reporters in ruthless pursuit of criminals, high and low. Now they are the criminals.
In the past month alone, television's reigning dramatic franchise, "Law and Order," has resourcefully squeezed two shows out of the Jayson Blair scandal. In one, an African-American reporter on "The New York Sentinel" (not to be confused with The New York Times because it's on East 43rd Street, not West) literally commits murder. In last Sunday's "Law and Order: Criminal Intent," it's another Sentinel reporter who gets caught up in murder, only this time it's his father who is the killer. The motive? To try to prevent the unmasking of his son as a plagiarist and fabricator who wrote a story about oyster fishermen in Louisiana without leaving Brooklyn. How did this reporter get hired by The Sentinel in the first place? He was the darling of a white, diversity-minded editor best known for his memoir about the black housekeeper of his childhood.
"You guys are rising to the top of America's most despised list," says Detective Lennie Briscoe (Jerry Orbach) to a Sentinel hack. Hey, Lennie — we're already there! For further confirmation, there is "Shattered Glass," this weekend's new movie about The New Republic's own Jayson Blair, Stephen Glass, who wrote dozens of fictionalized stories before being exposed. Anyone searching for an altruistic reporter on a movie screen had better run instead to "Veronica Guerin," a Hollywood project that had to go to Ireland to find a journalist to root for, and posthumously at that. But run fast. Though the movie's producer, Jerry Bruckheimer, has a shrewd eye for mass taste, this one proved dead on arrival at the box office. These days a film about a truth-seeking newshound strikes audiences as more ridiculous than "Gigli."
"Shattered Glass," a study in smarminess in which even the honest journalists come across as pretentious brats, is unlikely to draw crowds either. It's handsomely made and decently acted, especially by Hayden Christensen, who plays the creepy title character as if he were the smarter kid brother of Anthony Perkins's obsequiously androgynous Norman Bates in "Psycho." But the movie as a whole seems an irrelevancy. While the press deserves some of the rancor coming its way, there's a gaping disconnect between a Hollywood critique like "Shattered Glass" and the news media's more distressing ailments.
In a production note for the movie, its writer-director, Billy Ray, observes: "When people can no longer believe what they read, their only choices will be to either turn to television for their daily news or to stop seeking out news entirely. Either path, I think, is a very dangerous one for this country." Where has Mr. Ray been since "Network"? Most people have long ago turned to TV for their daily news, and many no longer believe what they read. One of the most disturbing revelations of the Blair scandal was that few subjects of his bogus stories, Jessica Lynch's family included, called The Times to complain about his fictions. They just assumed that reporters make stuff up.
The likes of a Glass and a Blair are true embarrassments to their peers. But the larger culture in which they thrived has done more longterm damage to the press than these individual transgressors, however notorious. "The standard for journalism used to be, `What's the best obtainable version of the truth?' " Carl Bernstein said when I asked him how the profession has changed since the Watergate era. "Now we're living in a celebrity culture that no longer values truth more than hype. You have to go back to what was great about the movie of `All the President's Men.' It was not about the characters of Bob and me. There's not a woman in our lives in it; it's not about us at all. It's about the process of good journalism: methodical, empirical, not very glamorous, hard-slogging reporting. Now journalism is as infected by the celebrity culture as every other institution."
"Shattered Glass" does show that its ambitious villain was less turned on by being a reporter than by being a Somebody worthy of a Pulitzer (though apparently no one told him that Pulitzers are not awarded to magazine writers). But more often the movie doesn't puncture so much as perpetuate the star-worshipping celebrity culture that attracts a Glass. "Shattered Glass" is as pompous about The New Republic as its fictionalized New Republic staffers are, portraying the publication as the biggest thing to be handed down from on high since the Ten Commandments. As one oft-repeated line of dialogue has it, The New Republic is "the in-flight magazine of Air Force One," an inflated claim to glamour that the magazine has never made for itself. The movie even opportunistically wraps itself in the tragic celebrity of the former New Republic editor Michael Kelly, by invoking his death in the war in Iraq in the final credits. Mr. Kelly was covering the war for The Atlantic; in the movie proper, his actual role in the Glass saga, while still at The New Republic in the 1990's, is substantially fictionalized and downsized.
The atmosphere that pervades high-end journalism now can be better seen in an incident that occurred while the movie was being completed than in the movie itself. When the real Stephen Glass went on "60 Minutes" this year to push his own autobiographical novel about the scandal, Charles Lane, the New Republic editor who published a number of his fictions before finally nailing him, criticized him for cashing in. "I guess that's the way America works these days," he said. He knew whereof he spoke. Days later Variety reported that Mr. Lane was working as a paid consultant to "Shattered Glass."
Funnier than "Shattered Glass," though just as indicative of how embedded the news media have become in the celebrity whirl, is "K Street," the Steven Soderbergh fiction-meets-reality series that really must be seen before HBO puts it out of its misery. It should be seen not because it succeeds in its stated purpose, which is to dramatize the Washington "process," but because with Andy Warhol-like candor it shows you a bit more than you want to know in its snapshots of the capital's players.
Though the program's most substantive story line seems to be the charting of Mary Matalin's escalating display of fashion-victim couture, Washington reporters cannot resist going on camera to play "themselves." In one installment, a character dismisses Time as a magazine that "nobody reads beyond the cover" not long before an actual Time columnist, Joe Klein, shows up in a cameo. He embraces Ms. Matalin on the street and offers her private p.r. advice — a vignette that mainly lends credence to the show's insulting characterization of Time while simultaneously reinforcing the public's impression that reporters have been co-opted by rubbing too many shoulders at the Palm.
Almost as weird was the "K Street" appearance by Howard Kurtz, the Washington Post media critic, who then invited the show's executive producer, George Clooney, to be a guest last Sunday on his own CNN show, "Reliable Sources." (Both HBO and CNN are owned by Time Warner.) In their conversation, Mr. Clooney complimented Mr. Kurtz's acting; then both men expressed their bemusement that Matt Drudge had had the audacity to refuse to appear on "K Street." I never thought I'd say this, but could Drudge be the last guy covering Washington who has any sense of dignity?
The antics on "K Street" are innocuous, heaven knows, but the show's recruitment of reputable, even distinguished journalists as actors tells us more about the news media than the case studies of the rookie malefactors in "Law and Order" and "Shattered Glass." Young con men like Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass are not the primary cause of the public's disenchantment with the news media. Their fictionalized stories, largely features, did not cause any lasting damage to the world beyond that inflicted on the credibility of the publications for which they worked.
If anything, history may judge that a far bigger blot on The Times's reputation than Mr. Blair is Walter Duranty, who won a 1932 Pulitzer Prize as a foreign correspondent in the Soviet Union. His willful shilling for Stalin went uncorrected for years. (He is also a blot on the history of the Pulitzer Board itself, which, in keeping with journalism's new haste to rectify even its old sins, is now weighing a belated revocation of Duranty's prize.) By all accounts, Duranty, like Mr. Glass and Mr. Blair, was an ambitious self-promoter infatuated with the limelight. But his capital journalistic crime, hiding the truth about a Ukraine famine that killed millions, offers a much darker picture of where this corruption can lead than the relative misdemeanors of his successors.
The public, like Lennie Briscoe on "Law and Order," gets the drift. It sees too many reporters showboating Geraldo-style on camera, whether on "K Street" or in the middle of hurricanes, catastrophic fires and wars. They see a famous columnist reveal the name of a C.I.A. agent and never say he's sorry. They see news media less preoccupied with the news than with boosting their own status in the entertainment firmament that now literally owns most of them.
In this vein, CNN's Christiane Amanpour recently criticized the wartime press, her own network included, for muzzling itself during the war in Iraq and not asking "enough questions, for instance, about weapons of mass destruction." She attributes this lapse in part to the need to compete with the ostentatiously gung-ho Fox in a more important war — for ratings. In the book "Embedded," a new oral history of journalists in Iraq, the Times correspondent John Burns talks about the "corruption in our business" when describing how fellow reporters cozied up to Saddam Hussein, minimizing his regime's atrocities before the war much as Duranty did Stalin's. Next to these real-life scenarios, an exposé of journalistic sins like "Shattered Glass" seems like a valentine. No wonder The New Republic itself co-sponsored a celebrity screening last week to promote it in Washington.
So Much for 'The Front Page'
Published: November 2, 2003
PITY, though not too deeply, the American press. Once the wisecracking truth seekers of "The Front Page" and the brave gumshoes of "All the President's Men," the fourth estate has fallen into such cultural disfavor that it risks being renamed the fifth estate, if not the sixth. Hollywood no longer depicts reporters in ruthless pursuit of criminals, high and low. Now they are the criminals.
In the past month alone, television's reigning dramatic franchise, "Law and Order," has resourcefully squeezed two shows out of the Jayson Blair scandal. In one, an African-American reporter on "The New York Sentinel" (not to be confused with The New York Times because it's on East 43rd Street, not West) literally commits murder. In last Sunday's "Law and Order: Criminal Intent," it's another Sentinel reporter who gets caught up in murder, only this time it's his father who is the killer. The motive? To try to prevent the unmasking of his son as a plagiarist and fabricator who wrote a story about oyster fishermen in Louisiana without leaving Brooklyn. How did this reporter get hired by The Sentinel in the first place? He was the darling of a white, diversity-minded editor best known for his memoir about the black housekeeper of his childhood.
"You guys are rising to the top of America's most despised list," says Detective Lennie Briscoe (Jerry Orbach) to a Sentinel hack. Hey, Lennie — we're already there! For further confirmation, there is "Shattered Glass," this weekend's new movie about The New Republic's own Jayson Blair, Stephen Glass, who wrote dozens of fictionalized stories before being exposed. Anyone searching for an altruistic reporter on a movie screen had better run instead to "Veronica Guerin," a Hollywood project that had to go to Ireland to find a journalist to root for, and posthumously at that. But run fast. Though the movie's producer, Jerry Bruckheimer, has a shrewd eye for mass taste, this one proved dead on arrival at the box office. These days a film about a truth-seeking newshound strikes audiences as more ridiculous than "Gigli."
"Shattered Glass," a study in smarminess in which even the honest journalists come across as pretentious brats, is unlikely to draw crowds either. It's handsomely made and decently acted, especially by Hayden Christensen, who plays the creepy title character as if he were the smarter kid brother of Anthony Perkins's obsequiously androgynous Norman Bates in "Psycho." But the movie as a whole seems an irrelevancy. While the press deserves some of the rancor coming its way, there's a gaping disconnect between a Hollywood critique like "Shattered Glass" and the news media's more distressing ailments.
In a production note for the movie, its writer-director, Billy Ray, observes: "When people can no longer believe what they read, their only choices will be to either turn to television for their daily news or to stop seeking out news entirely. Either path, I think, is a very dangerous one for this country." Where has Mr. Ray been since "Network"? Most people have long ago turned to TV for their daily news, and many no longer believe what they read. One of the most disturbing revelations of the Blair scandal was that few subjects of his bogus stories, Jessica Lynch's family included, called The Times to complain about his fictions. They just assumed that reporters make stuff up.
The likes of a Glass and a Blair are true embarrassments to their peers. But the larger culture in which they thrived has done more longterm damage to the press than these individual transgressors, however notorious. "The standard for journalism used to be, `What's the best obtainable version of the truth?' " Carl Bernstein said when I asked him how the profession has changed since the Watergate era. "Now we're living in a celebrity culture that no longer values truth more than hype. You have to go back to what was great about the movie of `All the President's Men.' It was not about the characters of Bob and me. There's not a woman in our lives in it; it's not about us at all. It's about the process of good journalism: methodical, empirical, not very glamorous, hard-slogging reporting. Now journalism is as infected by the celebrity culture as every other institution."
"Shattered Glass" does show that its ambitious villain was less turned on by being a reporter than by being a Somebody worthy of a Pulitzer (though apparently no one told him that Pulitzers are not awarded to magazine writers). But more often the movie doesn't puncture so much as perpetuate the star-worshipping celebrity culture that attracts a Glass. "Shattered Glass" is as pompous about The New Republic as its fictionalized New Republic staffers are, portraying the publication as the biggest thing to be handed down from on high since the Ten Commandments. As one oft-repeated line of dialogue has it, The New Republic is "the in-flight magazine of Air Force One," an inflated claim to glamour that the magazine has never made for itself. The movie even opportunistically wraps itself in the tragic celebrity of the former New Republic editor Michael Kelly, by invoking his death in the war in Iraq in the final credits. Mr. Kelly was covering the war for The Atlantic; in the movie proper, his actual role in the Glass saga, while still at The New Republic in the 1990's, is substantially fictionalized and downsized.
The atmosphere that pervades high-end journalism now can be better seen in an incident that occurred while the movie was being completed than in the movie itself. When the real Stephen Glass went on "60 Minutes" this year to push his own autobiographical novel about the scandal, Charles Lane, the New Republic editor who published a number of his fictions before finally nailing him, criticized him for cashing in. "I guess that's the way America works these days," he said. He knew whereof he spoke. Days later Variety reported that Mr. Lane was working as a paid consultant to "Shattered Glass."
Funnier than "Shattered Glass," though just as indicative of how embedded the news media have become in the celebrity whirl, is "K Street," the Steven Soderbergh fiction-meets-reality series that really must be seen before HBO puts it out of its misery. It should be seen not because it succeeds in its stated purpose, which is to dramatize the Washington "process," but because with Andy Warhol-like candor it shows you a bit more than you want to know in its snapshots of the capital's players.
Though the program's most substantive story line seems to be the charting of Mary Matalin's escalating display of fashion-victim couture, Washington reporters cannot resist going on camera to play "themselves." In one installment, a character dismisses Time as a magazine that "nobody reads beyond the cover" not long before an actual Time columnist, Joe Klein, shows up in a cameo. He embraces Ms. Matalin on the street and offers her private p.r. advice — a vignette that mainly lends credence to the show's insulting characterization of Time while simultaneously reinforcing the public's impression that reporters have been co-opted by rubbing too many shoulders at the Palm.
Almost as weird was the "K Street" appearance by Howard Kurtz, the Washington Post media critic, who then invited the show's executive producer, George Clooney, to be a guest last Sunday on his own CNN show, "Reliable Sources." (Both HBO and CNN are owned by Time Warner.) In their conversation, Mr. Clooney complimented Mr. Kurtz's acting; then both men expressed their bemusement that Matt Drudge had had the audacity to refuse to appear on "K Street." I never thought I'd say this, but could Drudge be the last guy covering Washington who has any sense of dignity?
The antics on "K Street" are innocuous, heaven knows, but the show's recruitment of reputable, even distinguished journalists as actors tells us more about the news media than the case studies of the rookie malefactors in "Law and Order" and "Shattered Glass." Young con men like Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass are not the primary cause of the public's disenchantment with the news media. Their fictionalized stories, largely features, did not cause any lasting damage to the world beyond that inflicted on the credibility of the publications for which they worked.
If anything, history may judge that a far bigger blot on The Times's reputation than Mr. Blair is Walter Duranty, who won a 1932 Pulitzer Prize as a foreign correspondent in the Soviet Union. His willful shilling for Stalin went uncorrected for years. (He is also a blot on the history of the Pulitzer Board itself, which, in keeping with journalism's new haste to rectify even its old sins, is now weighing a belated revocation of Duranty's prize.) By all accounts, Duranty, like Mr. Glass and Mr. Blair, was an ambitious self-promoter infatuated with the limelight. But his capital journalistic crime, hiding the truth about a Ukraine famine that killed millions, offers a much darker picture of where this corruption can lead than the relative misdemeanors of his successors.
The public, like Lennie Briscoe on "Law and Order," gets the drift. It sees too many reporters showboating Geraldo-style on camera, whether on "K Street" or in the middle of hurricanes, catastrophic fires and wars. They see a famous columnist reveal the name of a C.I.A. agent and never say he's sorry. They see news media less preoccupied with the news than with boosting their own status in the entertainment firmament that now literally owns most of them.
In this vein, CNN's Christiane Amanpour recently criticized the wartime press, her own network included, for muzzling itself during the war in Iraq and not asking "enough questions, for instance, about weapons of mass destruction." She attributes this lapse in part to the need to compete with the ostentatiously gung-ho Fox in a more important war — for ratings. In the book "Embedded," a new oral history of journalists in Iraq, the Times correspondent John Burns talks about the "corruption in our business" when describing how fellow reporters cozied up to Saddam Hussein, minimizing his regime's atrocities before the war much as Duranty did Stalin's. Next to these real-life scenarios, an exposé of journalistic sins like "Shattered Glass" seems like a valentine. No wonder The New Republic itself co-sponsored a celebrity screening last week to promote it in Washington.
Saturday, November 01, 2003
Did Bonnie Fuller really betray women?
Female editors condemn the Globe for running a tawdry photograph of Kobe Bryant's accuser.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Rebecca Traister
Oct. 31, 2003 | The ugliest celebrity spectacle of the year -- the sexual assault prosecution of NBA star Kobe Bryant -- took a notable turn Thursday, when the supermarket tabloid the Globe published a salacious high school photograph of the accuser on its cover. In it, the woman is lifting up her prom dress to reveal a garter belt. The headline reads: "Kobe Bryant's Accuser: Did She Really Say No?" Next to the photo, in half-inch type, is the 19-year-old woman's name.
The world -- particularly the journalism world -- does not usually pay close attention to the scandal sheets. But there is good reason to this time. For one: the Globe's behavior has been followed in the past by the mainstream media. Back in 1991, it was the Globe that broke with the journalistic tradition of protecting the identity of possible rape victims and revealed the name of the woman accusing Kennedy scion William Kennedy Smith of raping her. NBC and the New York Times eventually followed suit.
The other reason, though, is because the influence of the tabloid press has undeniably increased in recent years. And a main reason for that is the woman -- and lightning rod -- editorially in charge of the Globe: Bonnie Fuller.
Fuller, a veteran editor (Glamour, Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire and YM), spent the past two years revamping the weekly celebrity gossip magazine Us Weekly with enormous success. At a time when circulation and advertising sales were on the skids for magazines, Fuller raised Us' newsstand sales a whopping 55 percent. This summer, she left Us to take on the editorial directorship of American Media, the company that publishes the Sun, the Globe and the National Enquirer, for a package reported to be worth more than $1 million. Though she has focused most directly on the rejuvenation of the company's flagship magazine, the Star, Fuller technically presides over the editorial decisions for each of American Media's titles, including the Globe.
Premium Benefits
Salon's latest music mix
Listen to 16 tracks from artists like June Carter Cash, Warren Zevon and Steve Earle.
Get Premium on your PDA or Wireless device
One year subscription to Wired, National Geographic Adventure and U.S. News and World Report magazines
Give the gift of Premium for only $20
$25 discount on your next ticket purchase from RazorGator.com
Get a free month of Premium when you refer a friend
Choose one of six best selling audio books like Jonathan Franzen's " How to Be Alone "
Get Salon's headlines delivered to your e-mail address
Download Salon as plain text or PDF
Fuller told the New York Post that she knew of the Globe's plans to publish the name and photo of the woman but said that she "would not have interjected" herself into the magazine's editorial structure by killing the story. "The Globe did what was within their mission," she told the Post.
"Bonnie did not make the decision to put that [image, name, and headline] on the cover. Candace Trunzo, the editor of the Globe, did," said Richard Valvo, vice president of corporate communications for American Media, adding, "Bonnie made the decision not to pull it." (Fuller was out of town and unavailable for comment; Trunzo did not return calls.)
One, however, could easily argue that deciding "not to pull" a story is the same thing as deciding to run with one.
"She's the editorial director of the company," said Barbara O'Dair, editor at large at Time Inc., and the former editor in chief of Teen People and Us Weekly. "She obviously gave her tacit approval."
And if the Globe's big reveal on the identity of Bryant's accuser gets picked up by other publications reporting stories like this one, the arm of the tabloid press will have extended even further into the legitimate press.
"The tabloidization of the American media is horrid and unstoppable," said Stephen Isaacs, a professor of journalism at the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University, who teaches a class on ethics. Mr. Isaacs, who is somewhat unorthodox in his view that journalists should publish the names of accusers in rape cases, went on, "I think naming her is cool, but running a picture of her with a garter belt -- that's mawkish and obviously meant to sell papers. That is the tabloidization of the American press."
For many people, the line between the tabloid press and the legitimate press is already indistinguishable, said Geneva Overholser, a professor of journalism at the Washington bureau of the University of Missouri School of Journalism and the former ombudsman of the Washington Post. Overholser had not seen the cover of the Globe, but after hearing a description of the layout, she called it "the worst kind of journalistic voyeurism." She, like Isaacs, believes that situations like the Kobe Bryant case serve as an argument for making the identification of alleged rape victims standard.
"If we named them in the mainstream media, it wouldn't be such a catch for the tabloids," she said. "There wouldn't be such a forbidden, look-at-me thing."
But to magazine editors in New York, particularly women editors, the ethics involved in naming a possible rape victim took a back seat to the look-at-me nature of the Globe's cover.
"I think every female editor who woke up this morning and saw that in the paper probably had their breath taken away," said Us Weekly's editor in chief Janice Min. "I just looked at it and thought, Oh my God, that's so wrong."
Min was not critical of Fuller, her predecessor, saying only, "I think it probably got additional attention because Bonnie is there and she came from the mainstream press and that is why it came across as an unusual decision."
But Min did not hold her fire when it came to the Globe's editorial decisions.
"It is misogynistic and truly exploitative to try to get big sales off of identifying an alleged rape victim," said Min. "Was a woman dressed inappropriately? Did she ask for it? Is a sexy woman more likely to get raped than a non-sexy woman? These are the anachronistic, horrible ideas that come up because of a cover like that. Morally, it's wrong."
Min's objections were strongest when it came to the cover-photo choice.
"I would imagine that they probably have plenty of photos to choose from," she said. "I don't think any of them would have been right to run. The fact that they chose to run one of her in lingerie is galling.
"It is clearly implied on the cover that maybe she deserved it," Min continued. "This is someone's worst nightmare. This is why a lot of sexual assault victims don't come forward."
"I think it's one thing to show a face, and we can all debate that for a really long time," said Lucky editor in chief Kim France, trailing off momentarily. "Personally I'm against it, but I think it's a valid debate. But taking a photograph of a girl at her prom, having fun with her femininity, at a moment when everybody's allowed to feel free and sexual, and using it with the headline 'Did she really say no?' in the context of a rape case? I think that's horrifying."
While the photos sent shock waves through some corner offices in Manhattan, some female editors, while troubled by the photos, were not at all surprised by them.
"As a journalist I just can't say, 'Man, am I surprised to see that in the Globe!' said Ellen Levine, the editor in chief of Good Housekeeping. "It's the Globe."
And Roberta Myers, editor in chief of Elle, said, "I am personally of the school that out of deference to the victim you do not publish an image of her face. You just don't do it, unless the victim is willing to identify herself."
Premium Benefits
Salon's latest music mix
Listen to 16 tracks from artists like June Carter Cash, Warren Zevon and Steve Earle.
Get Premium on your PDA or Wireless device
One year subscription to Wired, National Geographic Adventure and U.S. News and World Report magazines
Give the gift of Premium for only $20
$25 discount on your next ticket purchase from RazorGator.com
Get a free month of Premium when you refer a friend
Choose one of six best selling audio books like Jonathan Franzen's " How to Be Alone "
Get Salon's headlines delivered to your e-mail address
Download Salon as plain text or PDF
But, Myers continued, "The fact that it is damaging to that particular woman or that it is something that a lot of journalists wouldn't do doesn't mean that it's a total surprise on the cover of the Globe. It's not like the Times did it."
O'Dair agreed. "They're doing what they're trained to do. These are attack dogs, they go for the jugular. And they are just going to go for whatever will rake in as much money as possible."
"What's the hot market right now?" asked Lesley Jane Seymour, editor of Marie Claire. "Celebrity journalism, tabloid journalism. Tabloid journalism has really been absorbed into the mainstream media and ironically you have the bottom of the barrel -- the Globes and the Stars -- going upscale [by hiring editors from legitimate media organizations], which is completely crazy and hilarious. Because usually people find the biggest audiences by going downscale."
A big part of the tabloids' trip up-market has to do with Fuller, who is currently engaged in remaking the Star as a celebrity-gossip-must-read in the spirit of Us and In Touch.
She worked miracles at Us, transforming the snoozy movie rag into the guiltiest journalistic pleasure of the last decade. Her move to American Media surprised many of her former colleagues, and the controversy over the Globe cover on her watch may illustrate exactly why her decision to officially abandon "respectable" journalism was so risky.
As O'Dair pointed out, Fuller's statement to the Post that running a story like this was within the publication's mission was fair: "She's absolutely right. That's what she signed on for."
"Sure, she did come from the legitimate press," said France. "But she left the legitimate press, too. And I don't think that anything that happens at the Globe is going to impact the legitimate press. Or so I'd like to think."
But France may be dreaming. In a conversation with Marie Claire's Lesley Jane Seymour she casually used the alleged victim's first name -- which she had learned from the Globe -- three times on the record. When I pointed this out to her she laughed mirthlessly.
"Yes, I know I said her name," said Seymour. "Once it's in the Globe, it doesn't matter whether it's right or wrong, the taboo's broken and the name is now part of the lexicon. They have a huge circulation. It's not like it was revealed in Mother Jones."
As for the Fuller issue, Seymour said, "She says she didn't have anything to do with it, but there's a lot of pressure for everybody in journalism to make a buck today and that's the bottom line.
"I certainly don't know what she had in her mind, but unfortunately with media today you have two bosses: your bosses who care about ethics and readers, and your bosses in the marketplace of media conglomerates."
Ellen Levine, of Good Housekeeping, did not quite damn the publication. Though she said that she doubted a case like this would stir any legitimate debate of these issues, she expressed her own confusion about whether journalists should shy away from naming victims.
Declaring that she was not referring to the Bryant rape case specifically, Levine said that she thought a lot about what happens to men who are accused of rape, publicly identified, and then found innocent.
"Why does the man get drawn and quartered while the woman is garbed in a journalistic burka?" she asked. "I'm not saying that I know the answer. Just that I think it's a timely question. And of course the Globe's going to choose a picture that's racy. And if it sells very well they'll be doing a lot more of it."
O'Dair pointed out that the mainstream media's handling of the Bryant case hadn't been exactly heroic. She noted that Bryant was honored at the Teen Choice Awards , which were held in Los Angeles a month after he turned himself in to the police. Bryant and his wife, Vanessa, appeared at the ceremony, which was broadcast on the Fox network. He accepted the award for favorite male athlete, and was greeted with a standing ovation.
"I thought it was interesting that Fox saw fit to honor Kobe Bryant after charges were filed against him," said O'Dair, whose former title, Teen People, hosts the Teen Choice Awards. "It was certainly a bad move on their part. And it perpetuated a really complicated view of heroism for kids to try to understand."
This story has been corrected since it was originally published.
salon.com
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
