third party technique

Two years ago, an editorial in the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) referred to the dream run that Patrick Moore and Christine Todd Whitman were getting in the media representing the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition. CJR noted that few journalists were disclosing that the group was created by the Nuclear Energy Institute with assistance from Hill & Knowlton. "Part of the thinking, surely, was that the press would peg them as dedicated environmentalists who have turned into pro-nuke cheerleaders, rather than as paid spokespeople. And the press came through." They still do. Jay Hancock, a business columnist for the Baltimore Sun, wrote in his blog that "Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore has decided that the risks of nuclear energy are lower than the risks of continuing to use carbon energy." Hancock is not the only journalist not to disclose Moore's nuclear industry ties to his readers. The week before his post, a CanWest News Service story simply described Moore as an "avid proponent of nuclear" power.

The nuclear power industry is seeing its fortunes rise. "Seventeen entities developing license applications for up to thirty-one new [nuclear] reactors did not just happen," boasted Frank "Skip" Bowman. "It has been carefully planned."

Bowman heads the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the main lobbying group for the industry. His remarks (PDF), at a February gathering of more than 100 Wall Street analysts, were part of a presentation on "reasoned expectations for new nuclear plant construction."

Bowman knew it was important to impress his audience of wary potential investors. "We are where we are today because this industry started many years ago on a systematic program to identify what went wrong the last time," he said, "and develop ways to eliminate or manage those risks."

The American Association of Public Health Physicians (AAPHP) has published an updated analysis of H.R. 1108, the massive bill currently under consideration by Congress that would give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate tobacco products. AAPHP concludes, "This bill is a scam. It gives the image, but not the substance of effective federal regulation of the tobacco industry. If passed in anything close to its current form ... it will assure continuing high levels of cigarette-related illness and death for years to come. The principle benefactor will be the Altria/Philip Morris Company (PM). This bill will assure their continuing dominance of the domestic cigarette market and continuing high levels of sales and profits." The bill would make it illegal to add fruit and spice flavors to cigarettes, but specifically exempts menthol, a flavoring used disproportionately by African-Americans, who also suffer higher rates of tobacco-related illness. AAPHP denounced the menthol exemption in the bill as "institutional racism." However, a coalition of health groups, including the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association, reiterated their support for the current bill.

As the Center for Media and Democracy reported previously, the Sierra Club / Clorox deal -- where Clorox uses the Big Green environmental group's name and logo to sell its "Green Works" line of cleaning products, in exchange for Clorox paying Sierra Club "an (undisclosed) percentage of sales" -- is quite controversial. But it's brought in the green for Clorox. Advertising Age reports that "Green Works sales are estimated at $20 million, the product has gotten exposure on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show' and 'The Ellen DeGeneres Show,' and Clorox has raised its volume forecast five times." Meanwhile, the Sierra Club has been slammed by members and non-members alike. Green Works "brand manager" Mark Kohler dismisses the criticism as "misinformation." Kohler says the negative press has been "frustrating" for Clorox, and AdAge advises marketers to "carefully review both sides of a relationship" before launching a corporate / non-profit partnership. But Clorox appears to be profiting handsomely, while four Sierra Club chapters actively opposed the deal, which -- according to some accounts -- was a factor in the Sierra Club's suspension of its Florida chapter.

Western Sahara -- a North African territory and one of the last remaining official colonies, or non-self governing territories -- is controlled by Morocco. The Polisario Front, a political group of indigenous Sahrawis, wants independence. Tens of thousands of Sahrawis live in Polisario-run refugee camps in Algeria. Recently, "a delegation of six Sahrawi refugees ... visited New York and Washington to talk about their suffering under the Polisario Front." But human rights groups disputed their accounts, and the refugees' trip "was sponsored by a lobbying group for Morocco," the Moroccan American Center for Policy. Eric Goldstein of Human Rights Watch said, "The reason Morocco is funding their trip is to try to discredit the Polisario at a moment when they hope that its own proposal for autonomy will prevail." Morocco and the Polisario Front have been unable to agree on the details of a United Nations proposal to hold a referendum on the future of Western Sahara. As an alternative, Morocco proposed limited autonomy for Western Sahara, "under the purview of Morocco," which is a deal breaker for the Polisario.

After top campaign aides resigned over unsavory lobbying activities, Republican presidential candidate John McCain "adopted a five-point policy ... to help restore his reputation as a Washington reformer," reports the Wall Street Journal. The policy bans working for groups critical of his likely opponent, Barack Obama, a point that led McCain advisers Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman to resign from the Vets for Freedom advisory board. Now there are questions about Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), a non-profit whose lobbying arm and political action committee have long supported McCain. After McCain was "hammered for supporting the Air Force's February decision to award a $40 billion contract for refueling tankers to Northrop Grumman and its European partner," the McCain campaign called CAGW. CAGW then worked "with Northrop and one of its consultants to produce a vitriolic advertising campaign defending the tanker deal," reports the Washington Post. The ads don't mention McCain, but offered "indirect support ... on a highly controversial issue while costing his campaign nothing." CAGW has previously come under scrutiny. A Senate investigation of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff found "a pattern of CAGW producing public relations materials favorable to Mr. Abramoff's clients," allegedly in exchange for donations to the group.

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) "has been leading an 'aggressive' public relations campaign ... in an effort to roll back ethanol mandates that passed in last year's energy bill," reports Anna Palmer. GMA "hired Glover Park Group to run a six-month campaign," after realizing that "rising food prices ... create a window to change perceptions about the benefits of bio-fuels." GMA "also expanded its lobbying contract with Dutko Worldwide." In March, GMA began searching for a PR firm to help it build "a global center-left coalition" against ethanol and hire "trusted third-party experts" who would link ethanol to global hunger and poverty. Glover Park's winning proposal to GMA suggested attacking "whatever intellectual justification might still exist for corn-based ethanol among policy elites," including through "third party research" shaped by the PR firm; launching a website; and possibly creating a "costumed 'mascot' ... to drawn attention and distribute advocacy materials at local supermarkets." U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley of corn-rich Iowa, who strongly criticized the anti-ethanol PR campaign, posted GMA's "request for proposal" (PDF) and Glover Park's response (PDF) on his website.

As CMD previously reported, Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) operates a School of Medicine and a School of Public Health while enjoying a cozy relationship with the tobacco industry, especially cigarette maker Philip Morris (PM). Now the New York Times reports that in 2006, VCU entered into a secret and extraordinarily restrictive research contract with PM that bars researchers from publishing, or even talking about, study results without first getting approval from PM. If news organizations ask about the contract, university officials are supposed to decline to comment and tell PM about the inquiry. All patents and other intellectual property created under the contract go to PM. The contract violates VCU guidelines for industry-sponsored research, which state "University faculty and students must be free to publish their results." David Rosner, a professor of public health and history at Columbia University in New York, says VCU's contract is "counter to the entire purpose and rationale of a university." VCU President Eugene Trani, who refused to be interviewed for the Times article, owns 6,250 shares of common stock in the Universal Leaf Corporation and sits on their Board of Directors.

New York Times reporter Melody Petersen, who covered the pharmaceutical industry for four years, has now published a book titled Our Daily Meds: How the pharmaceutical companies transformed themselves into slick marketing machines and hooked the nation on prescription drugs. In her book, Petersen refutes the commonly-held notion that drug companies plow their profits back into research to develop life-saving drugs, and concludes instead that drug companies primarily put their profits into influencing medical science and marketing drugs. Petersen writes, "With their hoards of cash, the companies have readily handed money to patient groups, hospitals, universities, physician societies, government agencies and just about any organization they want on their side. ... The industry's cash-filled coffers have given it a stranglehold on medical science." Petersen also exposes the problems with direct-to-consumer advertising and the drug industry's portrayal of common conditions, like anxiety and urinary frequency, as illnesses, as a way to convince people they need medication.

Eight thousand pages of documents related to the Pentagon's illegal propaganda campaign, known as the Pentagon military analyst program, are now online for the world to see, although in a format that makes it impossible to easily search them and therefore difficult to read and dissect. This trove includes the documents pried out of the Pentagon by David Barstow and used as the basis for his stunning investigation that appeared in the New York Times on April 20, 2008.

The Pentagon program, which clearly violated US law against covert government propaganda, embedded more than 75 retired military officers -- most of them with financial ties to war contractors -- into the TV networks as "message surrogates" for the Bush Administration. To date, every major commercial TV network has failed to report this story, covering up their complicity and keeping the existence of this scandal from their audiences.