Submitted by John Stauber on
"The New York Times offered a sharp editorial Tuesday critiquing the indisputable role of the White House in distorting the intelligence on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, and in stampeding Congressional and public opinion by spinning worst-case scenarios -- 'inflating them drastically' -- to justify an immediate invasion last March to repel an alleged imminent threat to the United States.
Submitted by Sheldon Rampton on
"In recent months, US news organizations have rushed to expose the Bush administration's pre-war failings on Iraq," notes Michael Massing. "Watching and reading all this," he says, "one is tempted to ask, where were you all before the war? Why didn't we learn more about these deceptions and concealments in the months when the administration was pressing its case for regime change -- when, in short, it might have made a difference? Some maintain that the many analysts who've spoken out since the end of the war were mute before it. But that's not true.
Submitted by Diane Farsetta on
University of Kansas' journalism school will award its prestigious William Allen White Foundation Medal for "outstanding journalistic merit" to PR professional and former Reagan and Bush I White House press secretary Marlin Fitzwater. Previous honorees include Charles Kuralt, Bob Woodward and Molly Ivins.
Submitted by John Stauber on
Greg Palast writes that "the future for fake and farcical war propaganda is quite bright indeed. ... So M'Lord Hutton has killed the messenger: the BBC. Should the reporter Gilligan have used more cautious terms? Some criticism is fair. But the extraordinary import of his and Watts' story is forgotten: our two governments bent the information then hunted down the questioners. And now the second invasion of the Iraq war proceeds: the conquest of the British Broadcasting Corporation.
Submitted by Sheldon Rampton on
The Columbia Journalism Review has started up a new web site, the CampaignDesk, devoted to analyzing their coverage of reporters covering the election campaign. According to Steve Lovelady, the site's managing editor, journalists are the site's primary audience. "Most blogs are 99.9 percent opinion," he said. "This is a Web site run by and staffed by responsible journalists whose job is to monitor, critique and praise the campaign press, on a daily basis."
Submitted by Sheldon Rampton on
Just in time for the elections, there's a new web site out called FactCheck.org. Headed by Brooks Jackson and sponsored by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, it is a "nonpartisan, nonprofit, 'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases.
Submitted by Sheldon Rampton on
Jay Rosen thinks coverage of the 2004 presidential election is shaping up as an exercise in "Horse Race Now! Horse Race Tomorrow! Horse Race Forever!" In this time-dishonored tradition of political journalism, reporters use sports as a metaphor for reporting on politics, relying for insights on political insiders who have learned how to spin the "race" as a game of "inside baseball." The result: "An army of sentries encircles the game, guarding every situation from which a glimmer of fresh truth might be allowed to escape."
Submitted by Sheldon Rampton on
Columnist Paul Krugman is wondering if the news media will take its job seriously when reporting on the 2004 elections and offers some suggestions to reporters: "Don't talk about clothes." "Actually look at the candidates' policy proposals." "Beware of personal anecdotes." "Look at the candidates' records." "Don't fall for political histrionics." "It's not about you." Although this is all pretty basic advice, concludes, "I don't really expect my journalistic colleagues to follow these rules. ...
Submitted by John Stauber on
"In the first case of its kind since the Nuremberg trials, an international court [convened in Tanzania] convicted three Rwandans of genocide for media
reports that fostered the killing of about 800,000
Rwandans, mostly of the Tutsi minority, over several months
in 1994. A three-judge panel said the three men had used a radio
station and a newspaper published twice a month to mobilize
Rwanda's Hutu majority against the Tutsi, who were
massacred at churches, schools, hospitals and roadblocks.
Submitted by Sheldon Rampton on
Hollinger International Inc., a newspaper publisher caught up in a widening financial scandal, is looking into an investment the company made to a venture capital fund with links to neoconservative defense adviser Richard Perle and Henry Kissinger, both directors of the company.
Center for Media and Democracy (CMD)
520 University Ave, Ste 305 • Madison, WI 53703 • (608) 260-9713
CMD is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt non-profit.
© 1993-2024