Little Brother Forum

Joel Simon, Committee to Protect Journalists, Sep 28, 2007

The Committee to Protect Journalists sent the following letter to 14 bipartisan cosponsors of the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, expressing support for the legislation, which calls for increased US responsiveness to the refugee crisis in the region. This legislation addresses many of the dire needs of Iraqi journalists targeted for their work for media outlets based or funded by the United States.

Dear Senators Kennedy and Smith,

I am writing to you as executive director of the Committee to Protect Journalists to express our concern for the safety of Iraqi journalists and others who now may find themselves imperiled for having helped U.S.-based and U.S.-backed media organizations report the news from Iraq. We would therefore like to express our support for the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act Senate Amendment #2872 to H.R. 1585 Department of Defense Authorization, which you recently co-sponsored. CPJ is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, dedicated to defending press freedom worldwide and the rights of journalists to report the news without fear of reprisal.

We have watched with alarm Iraq’s emergence in the last four years as the most dangerous country in the world for journalists. At least 112 journalists and another 40 media support workers have been killed there since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, making Iraq the deadliest nation, by far, for the press throughout CPJ’s 26 years of monitoring press freedom.

Among those most targeted have been Iraqi journalists affiliated with Western media, particularly U.S.-based news groups, and those working for government-backed media. For example, 12 journalists and 10 other staff members working for the Iraq Media Network, which has received funding from the U.S. government, have been killed since 2003. About 85 percent of the journalists and media workers killed have been Iraqis, and insurgent actions are responsible for the majority of media deaths. (more…)

By A. Chris Gajilan/CNN/June 30, 2007

Michael Moore’s “Sicko,” which opened nationwide Friday, is filled with horror stories of people who are deprived of medical service because they can’t afford it or haven’t been able to navigate the murky waters of managed care in the United States.

It compares American health care with the universal coverage systems in Canada, France, the United Kingdom and Cuba.

Moore covers a lot of ground. Our team investigated some of the claims put forth in his film. We found that his numbers were mostly right, but his arguments could use a little more context. As we dug deep to uncover the numbers, we found surprisingly few inaccuracies in the film. In fact, most pundits or health-care experts we spoke to spent more time on errors of omission rather than disputing the actual claims in the film.

Whether it’s dollars spent, group coverage or Medicaid income cutoffs, health care goes hand in hand with numbers. Moore opens his film by giving these statistics, “Fifty million uninsured Americans … 18,000 people die because they are uninsured.”

(more…)

By Jo Becker, Richard Siklos, Jane Perlez and Raymond Bonner/The New York Times/25 June 2007

In the fall of 2003, a piece of Rupert Murdoch’s sprawling media empire was in jeopardy.

Congress was on the verge of limiting any company from owning local television stations that reached more than 35 percent of American homes. Mr. Murdoch’s Fox stations reached nearly 39 percent, meaning he would have to sell some.

A strike force of Mr. Murdoch’s lobbyists joined other media companies in working on the issue. The White House backed the industry, and in a late-night meeting just before Thanksgiving, Congressional leaders agreed to raise the limit - to 39 percent.

One leader of the Congressional movement to limit ownership was Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi. But in the end, he, too, agreed to the compromise. It turns out he had a business connection to Mr. Murdoch. Months before, HarperCollins, Mr. Murdoch’s publishing house, had signed a $250,000 book deal to publish Mr. Lott’s memoir, “Herding Cats,” records and interviews show.

An aide to Mr. Lott said the book deal had no bearing on the senator’s decision, and a spokesman for Mr. Murdoch chalked it up to coincidence. Still, the ownership fight showcases the confluence of business, political and media prowess that is central to the way Mr. Murdoch has built his global information conglomerate.

His vast media holdings give him a gamut of tools - not just campaign contributions, but also jobs for former government officials and media exposure that promotes allies while attacking adversaries, sometimes viciously - all of which he has used to further his financial interests and establish his legitimacy in the United States, interviews and government records show.

Mr. Murdoch may be best known in the this country as the man who created Fox News as a counterweight to what he saw as a liberal bias in the news media. But he has often set aside his conservative ideology in pursuit of his business interests. In recent years, he has spread campaign contributions across both sides of the political aisle and nurtured relationships with the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
(more…)

By Steven Rosenfeld, TomPaine.com/Posted on June 23, 2003, Printed on June 27, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/16242/

Editor’s Note: The FCC is currently considering Rupert Murdoch’s plan to acquire DirecTV, the biggest satellite cable provider in the nation. Jeff Chaster tells Steven rosenfeld why this deal will spell disaster for broadcast media.

Jeff, why is the proposed transfer of DirecTV to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. of particular concern to progressives and liberals?

This deal by Murdoch will vastly enhance his political power in the United States and around the world, to shape news and information and entertainment programming. Once he takes control over the U.S.’s most powerful and important direct broadcast satellite system, DirecTV, Murdoch will really be just one of two people in the country who can literally create a national programming channel with the snap of his fingers.

So Murdoch, it’s likely, if he gets DirecTV, will be able to create a suite of Fox News channels. Imagine Fox News on steroids — that’s what we’re about to get if this deal goes unopposed.
(more…)

WorldNetDaily.com/June 21, 2007

A NAFTA superhighway plan under way in Texas will be extended to Oklahoma and Colorado, stretching the four-lane, train-truck-car-pipeline corridor from the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas, to Denver, reports WND columnist Jerome Corsi, whose new investigative book, “The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada,” has just been released.

As WND has reported, the Federal Highway Administration is promoting public-private partnership projects to expand superhighway projects, consistent with extending the Trans-Texas Corridor network north.

The plan is for the states of Texas, Oklahoma and Colorado to apply the TTC toll road concept first developed by the Texas DOT to largely rural areas along the Ports-to-Plains Corridor.

(more…)

Glenn Greenwald/Saturday June 23, 2007 07:47 EST

Josh Marshall a reader who identifies what is one of the most astonishing instances of mindless, pro-government “reporting” yet:

It’s a curious thing that, over the past 10 - 12 days, the news from Iraq refers to the combatants there as “al-Qaida” fighters. When did that happen?

Until a few days ago, the combatants in Iraq were “insurgents” or they were referred to as “Sunni” or “Shia’a” fighters in the Iraq Civil War. Suddenly, without evidence, without proof, without any semblance of fact, the US military command is referring to these combatants as “al-Qaida”.

Welcome to the latest in Iraq propaganda.

That the Bush administration, and specifically its military commanders, decided to begin using the term “Al Qaeda” to designate “anyone and everyeone we fight against or kill in Iraq” is obvious. All of a sudden, every time one of the top military commanders describes our latest operations or quantifies how many we killed, the enemy is referred to, almost exclusively now, as “Al Qaeda.”

But what is even more notable is that the establishment press has followed right along, just as enthusiastically. I don’t think the New York Times has published a story about Iraq in the last two weeks without stating that we are killing “Al Qaeda fighters,” capturing “Al Qaeda leaders,” and every new operation is against “Al Qaeda.”
(more…)

From Self-Censorship to Official Censorship
By:Pat Arnow/Jun 23 2007

In his letter, Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno protested a January 29 article that portrayed the death of Sgt. Hector Leija during a house-to-house search in Baghdad (”Man Down” by Damien Cave with photo by Robert Nickelsberg). Odierno expressed “profound disappointment in the New York Times’ decision to publish a photograph of a mortally wounded American soldier.” He called the photo (and an online video) “offensive,” and asserted that the “clear depiction is also directly counter to the written agreement made by the reporter and the photographer before publication.”

(more…)

Project for Excellence in Journalism’s Analysis Finds Iraq War Coverage Mostly about the U.S., 2008 Presidential Campaign Coverage Mostly about Democrats

May 25, 2007

The four-year-old war in Iraq dwarfed all other topics in the American news media during the first quarter of 2007. But although the bloodshed is occurring about 6,000 miles from Washington, coverage of the conflict has been overwhelmingly U.S.-centric. More than 80% of war news has focused on Americans — those shaping policy, fighting or affected at home. Only about one in six stories about the war has primarily been about Iraqis, whether about their government, their lives, or their casualties.

(more…)