Showing posts with label MEDIA INTERFERENCE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MEDIA INTERFERENCE. Show all posts

Thursday, May 10, 2012

FCC takes calls to pull Fox's broadcast licenses 'very seriously'

By Brendan Sasso - 05/09/12 05:25 PM ET  -  The Hillicon

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski testified Wednesday that his agency takes calls to cancel Fox's broadcast licenses "very seriously."

Groups, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), have urged the FCC to pull Fox's licenses because of evidence that its parent company News Corp. hacked people's phones in the United Kingdom to get stories.

During a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) pressed Genachowski on whether he plans to do anything about the allegations.

Genachowski said it wouldn't be appropriate to comment on a specific case, but that the commission is "certainly aware of the serious issues that have been raised in the U.K."

He noted that the law requires that the FCC only grant broadcast licenses to people of "good character."

"If any issues arise, the commission has an obligation, we would take it very seriously, to look at the record, look at the facts and apply the law," Genachowski said.

A British parliamentary committee ruled earlier this month that News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch is "not fit" to run an international media company because of the phone hacking scandal.

News Corp. owns 27 Fox stations in the United States.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, wrote to the British committee probing the scandal earlier this month, requesting that it provide any evidence of whether News Corp. violated any U.S. laws.

**If you want some kind of alternative news to the MSM big 3 time to call, fax or write in, in favor of Fox News and perhaps some of the one-sided slanted coverage, especially on NBC and ABC.**

Friday, May 4, 2012

Obama Assembling De Facto Propaganda Ministry

By Steve Peacock – WND

The U.S. State Department is planning to “buy” media broadcasts, as the Obama administration assembles a de facto propaganda machine, according to documents that reveal the president’s plans moving closer to the 2012 election.

Watching32-276x275[1]

According to information WND located via routine database research, State’s Bureau of Public Affairs is soliciting the help of “global news coverage service providers” to create and disseminate department “news.”

The selected contractor will provide “full-time, 24/7 service,” the Statement of Work for the plan said.

“The department seeks a service provider for full, turn-key news-style global television coverage of ad hoc open press events featuring the Secretary of State and other officials across the United States and throughout the world,” according to the SOW, “and to send this content back to the department’s Washington headquarters…”

Upon receiving these privately packaged productions, the department, in turn, “will distribute this video content to media organizations through an array of traditional and new media platforms.”

Indeed, just as the department is awaiting contractor bids on the project, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s representative at the World Press Freedom Day in Tunisia heaped accolades upon UNESCO for hosting the annual event.

Read about how the U.S. mission at the United Nations works with reporters, and find out what the White House does with some of those raising questions.

In a “tweet” from Tunisia, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Esther Brimmer said, “I applaud the tireless, continuing work of #UNESCO in promoting the ideals of free and open media.”

Brimmer delivered remarks on behalf of the Obama administration during the opening ceremony, along with presenting a video speech from Clinton.

Referring to the Arab Spring demonstrations across the Middle East and North Africa, Clinton said, according to a prepared statement, “Voice by voice, text by text, Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans and many others have dared to say what they believe and stand up for their own rights.

“Many others have dared to report on what they see happening, even when their lives were at risk.”

The State Department plan is twofold: to hire a single contractor to provide television news crew services on the one hand, and to provide transmission/streaming services as a corollary service.

“The television news crew category is both one and two-person crews, and includes one and multi-camera productions,” the SOW pointed out. “The transmission category includes both traditional fiber, terrestrial and satellite-based as well as file-based and Internet delivery platforms.”

The use of such government- as well as industry-funded broadcasts, known as “video news releases,” or VNRs, has increasingly come under fire in the past decade.

VNRs “are segments designed to be indistinguishable from independently produced news reports that are distributed and promoted to television newsrooms,” according to Source Watch, a Center for Media and Democracy project that chronicles the intersecting of public relations and public policy.

The General Accountability Office – the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress – in 2005 declared that several federal entities, such as the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services, may have violated the law by disseminating VNRs as fact-based news reports.

Subsequent to the GAO’s findings, the “Stop Government Propaganda Act” was introduced to rein in and punish such activities; it died, however, after being introduced in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Proponents of VNR distribution claim that use of the video products is wholly legitimate. The Public Relations Society of America is that a VNR simply is “the video equivalent of a press release.”

The organization does advocate that industry members abide by certain parameters to ensure the integrity of VNR usage:

  1. Organizations that produce VNRs should clearly identify the VNR as such and fully disclose who produced and paid for it at the time the VNR is provided to TV stations.
  2. PRSA recommends that organizations that prepare VNRs should not use the word “reporting” if the narrator is not a reporter.
  3. Use of VNRs or footage provided by sources other than the station or network should be identified as to source by the media outlet when it is aired.

Despite congressional refusal to crack down on VNRs, the Federal Communications Commission issued a reminder to licensees of their sponsor-identification requirements under the Communications Act or 1934. Rather than holding liable the creators of the reports, the commission has placed the burden of disclosure on who ultimately airs the VNR.

“These rules are grounded in the principle that listeners and viewers are entitled to know who seeks to persuade them with the programming offered over broadcast stations and cable systems,” the FCC said.

When such VNRs are aired, “licensees and operators generally must clearly disclose to members of their audiences the nature, source and sponsorship of the material that they are viewing.”

Although the FCC continues to enforce these rules, the penalties arguably have been light.

Last year, for instance, it issued a forfeiture order to Fox Television Stations, Inc. when station affiliate KMSP-TV of Minneapolis used – but failed to identify – a General Motors-provided VNR during a news broadcast.

The FCC fined Fox $4,000 for failing to disclose GM sponsorship of the report.

Among other VNR-related enforcement actions, in 2007 it imposed a $4,000 fine on Comcast Corp. for also violating the sponsorship disclosure rules. Comcast’s CN8 news affiliate in that case had aired a VNR produced on behalf of Nelson’s Rescue Sleep.

The FCC soon after separately slapped a $16,000 forfeiture against Comcast for airing two VNRs from General Mills and Allstate, respectively.

The State Department through May 21 is reviewing contractor proposals in response to the new solicitation. It did not disclose the estimated cost of the endeavor, for which it will award a year contract with four one-year options.

Monday, August 8, 2011

Navy Seals Team 6 - Update or Conspiracy Alert

Saturday, August 6th, 2011 Fox news released the alert early in the day that twenty members of Seal Team Six, the unit responsible for getting Osama Bin Laden were killed in Afghanistan. Additional information trickled out bit by bit…  And in minutes the blogosphere lit up.  More people than not immediately felt and stated their suspicions that something was just not right with this news.

Then mysteriously by the end of the day the reports began to change and the news was “corrected”, now it was being reported that it wasn’t any of the guys from the Bin Laden mission but other Seals.

We have friends who has a son serving right now that is part of a Special Forces Team and just back states side at a base filled with Special Forces.  He says that everyone of them believes that there is something fishy with the deaths, the reports, the events and especially the changing story.  Below is some input:

Was Seal Team Six Executed by Obama Administration?

The shocking death of the SEALS who took out bin Laden is starting to stink like a corpse.  And the one who's sniffing that stench the loudest is Ann Barnhardt.  Immediately upon the tragic news of the deaths of Seal Team 6, Ann erupted with disgust at why President Obama's staff had blared news of the deaths before the families of the deceased had themselves been notified.  This is NOT in accordance with military protocol.  She was also vehemently suspicious of just how Obama had been able to know the identities of the dead personnel when there hadn't been enough time for DNA analysis; indeed, most of the bodies hadn't yet been recovered.  But most of all she was highly suspicious as to just how the bumbling buffoons of the Taliban had been able to take out the elite Seals.  We all know that America's soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan are awesome - but, face it folks, the Seals are a breed apart.

Seals operate in total secrecy, nobody knows who they are, where they are or what they're doing; in short, the Seals are 'invisible' to the world, including their own fellow soldiers.  In fact, the Seals are 'invisible' to themselves in terms of knowing where they will be within the next hour or what they will be doing.  That secrecy protects them.  And the protection is ratcheted even higher when one adds in the amazing agility with which Seals move; finding them is nearly impossible because they slip and slide amongst the landscape like - well, like seals do in the ocean, darting at awesome speeds in the twinkling of an eye.  Which means that even if you DO get them in your sights, their speed is so incredible they could vanish before you pull the trigger.  So, given the slovenly ineptitude of the Taliban (a ragtag bunch of losers who more often blow themselves up instead of their targets), it is unthinkable that such a band of incompetents would have been able to execute such a huge number of highly trained, incredibly well-protected Seals.  It was akin to a high school dweeb taking down Bruce Lee with a single kick.

As far as Barnhardt was concerned, the death of the Seals could only have happened because of insider information.  The Taliban had to have known exactly where and when those Seals would be appear on the landscape - and had to been waiting with proper weaponry that would fire at precisely the right moment and angle.  Only then could all of those Seals been taken down.  The Seals wouldn't have told the Taliban, their brother officers wouldn't have and neither would have their immediate superiors.  No, only someone much higher up, someone privy to top secret information could have given that out.  And once you understand that an attack of this magnitude needed an insider, the next logical question is - why would the insider do that?  What would be their motive? 

Well, if that insider were a President who refused to take out bin Laden because that President didn't want to 'upset' the Muslims, than getting revenge on the ones who did is a whopper of a motive.  A fit of the self-pitying sulks only makes the motive worse.  Contrary to the lies from his administration, Obama was not glorified by the take down of bin Laden, he was instead humiliated.  This is because Obama never had a single thing to do with the terrorist's death; it was all the work of CIA Director Leon Panetta.  Four months before the attack on the terrorist, Panetta and General Petraeus had located bin Laden's whereabouts and begged the President to authorize a takedown of the murderer.  But Obama flatly refused.  He was more concerned with the feelings of the Muslim world than the grief and pain of the American victims of 9/11.  Enraged by Obama's stance, Panetta then staged a palace coup by secretly organizing the entire operation himself (with the explicit cooperation of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates).  The killing of bin Laden was thus Panetta's triumph, not the Commander in Chief - which accounts for that humiliating picture of the Command Center in the White House basement on the night bin Laden died.  Whereas Clinton, Gates and even VP Biden are all seated at the command table as they're briefed (off camera) by Panetta on the takedown, the President of the United States is banished from the table to squat in the corner like a tyke on his potty straining to make Number 2.  (Obama even has his finger in his mouth.)  It also explains why Obama's nanny, Valerie Jarrett, was nowhere in sight.  Because she'd shrieked even worse than Obama against taking out the terrorist because of her concern for Muslim 'good will', Panetta had slammed the door of the room shut in her face.  Trust me - Valerie and Barack had more than enough motive to 'punish' the Seals. 

Well, someone did just that because now the Seals are dead.  Barnhardt is smelling a rat - and I am also.  And the smell is only getting worse with the news (which Barnhardt outlines below) that the Seals themselves were not only clumped together in abnormally huge numbers (they never travel in large packs) but were also NOT traveling in their usual specially armored choppers.  

I hope and pray that I (and Ann) are wrong.  But I don't think so.

-------------------------

http://barnhardt.biz/

Tip from Afghanistan

Posted by Ann Barnhardt - August 7, AD 2011 6:57 AM MST

I received a tip from a soldier stationed with an aviation brigade out of Jalalabad overnight.

"Almost immediately, after news of the crash began to spread, we were placed in an internet and phone blackout. This means communication with family, friends and "others" back home, in real time, is prevented until further notice.

However, there are also chinook pilots, crews and mechanics assigned here who were privy to the details of the crash almost immediately. One of confirmed details they have been discussing is that the chinook shot down belonged to a National Guard unit. Which is causing people to whisper in astonishment, "why were some of the most elite of America's military, in such large numbers, tooling around on a National Guard aircraft?"

Also, those around me are wondering why such a large number(extremely unconventional for Seals, Green Berets, etc) of them riding in a single aircraft instead of being spread out into numerous aircraft.

Without question, I mean no disrespect to the pilots and crew of the National Guard aircraft, but the fact is that it's very "strange" that Seals would be conducting an actual mission, with such large numbers, in such a basic aircraft. Especially, given the fact, that there were special operation chinooks easily available, and sitting idle, when this tragedy took place."

I am not a journalist. I have no means of checking this. But SOMEONE needs to investigate if in fact the SEALS were on a National Guard helo, if there were SPECOPS Chinooks available and idle, and what the difference in armament is between Guard Chinooks and SPECOPS Chinooks. This potential difference in armament is HUGE and could account for the possibility of the Chinook being shot down by an RPG, if that is what happened.

Hello? Journalists? Anyone out there?

UPDATE: The SPECOPS Chinook is a very different beast that is heavily upgraded with enhanced survivability features. It is the Boeing MH-47E/G. Boeing's Homepage for the SPECOPS chinook here. The soldier quoted above contends that the SEALS were NOT in one of these units, but rather in a standard Chinook while these SPECOPS Chinooks were available and sitting idle. Again, a JOURNALIST needs to confirm this.

UPDATE 2: From a reader:

Ann,
You are on to something here. I was in the 160th 1982- 1985 and I can tell you that the reason the aviation wing was created was so special ops would never again have to fly missions with anyone other than their own pilots and birds.

UPDATE 3: From a reader:

Ann, I'm sure you're getting a lot of notes on the Chinook debacle. I'm retired USAF familiar with how the system works when it comes to the questions asked by your Jalalabad contact. First, look to the Command Authority. Dispersion protocols are almost never broken except on direct order up the chain high enough that nobody could question or refuse the order without jeopardizing their career. Second, 'who benefits'? Follow the trail of beneficiaries to the incident. Tactically, intell had to be passed to the shooters as to the timetable. I'm willing to bet that there were several RPG's (if not Stinger's - remember, we provided quite a few and never kept a record during the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan) involved. Then, once fired, the shooters had to egress unseen to fight another day. Many people I know, including some recently back from that area say this stinks to high Heaven, as you do.

h/t to George King

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Nebraska Alert: Nuclear Plant in Nebraska with Arnie Gundersen–Updated

Video: Nebraska Nuke Plant goes to level 4

http://youtu.be/mSvvmrB7qEg 

Additional information that you won’t hear on mainstream news…

The video (1:41 min) below describes a discussion with power plant employee who shared info about this.

Power Plants To Shut Down For Solar Flares & Civil Unrest & Possibly Martial Law

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FdXvr1VTxY&feature=uploademail

(from Oct 2010)

Solar Flares Mitch Battros Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFw6L9Vzl8M

Satellites would go out first - communications & digital - working it's way from north to south

Recent article

GEOMAGNETIC STORM IN PROGRESS; TWO VOLCANOES EXPLODE;

http://globalrumblings.blogspot.com/2011/06/geomagnetic-storm-in-progress-two.html

Today from the Intel Hub

U.S And United Kingdom To Cut Power In Preparation of Massive Solar Storm

http://theintelhub.com/2011/06/13/u-s-and-united-kingdom-to-cut-power-in-preparation-of-massive-solar-storm/

Excerpt:

The solar flare on June 7th, 2011 was luckily pointed away from Earth but caused many to wonder if another solar flare is imminent, this one aimed directly at earth.

Now, due to the possibility of a large scale solar flare, officials in Europe and the United Kingdom are preparing what they call, “controlled” power cuts. What this actually means remains to be seen.

Snip

“Senior space agency scientists believe the Earth will be hit with unprecedented levels of magnetic energy from solar flares after the Sun wakes “from a deep slumber” sometime around 2013,” The Daily Telegraph reported in 2010.

Scientific America also is also running a compelling article on the subject. The article covers the fact that last weeks solar flare has “illuminated” the power grids vulnerabilities and reflects on the outcome of a massive solar storm.

“If the solar storm of 1921, which has been termed a one-in-100-year event, were to occur today, well over 300 extra-high-voltage transformers could be damaged or destroyed, thereby interrupting power to 130 million people for a period of years,” Joseph McClelland, director of the Office of Electric Reliability at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, said at a May 31 House Energy subcommittee hearing on the issue.

Be Prepared:  Taking Iodine regularly and during and after radiation exposure could save you life!

Lugol's Iodine Solution 2%

Nuclear Anti Radiation Tablets KIO3 ...

Iodine  -  with David Brownstein’s:  Medical Alternativ...

Reminder:  Just last weekend intercepted agenda of discussions from the Bilderberg Conference: 

UPDATED TOPICS: 6-10-2011 Bilderberg Meeting:  Comet Elenin (or ELEnin Brown Dwarf Star), Solar Flares, Earthquakes, Tornadoes, Underground Cities, and related topics

Also:  NASA Head Issues Agency-Wide Preparedness Alert: "I Became Aware of Some Things..."  See Video:  NASA Head Issues Agency-Wide Preparedness Alert: "I Became Aware of Some Things..."

With the announcement yesterday that the White House Is Cutting Access to Half of the Government Websites (Their HAARP website has been shut down for quit some time now), the new Ministry of Information Czar scouring the Internet and the mainstream media in the bag for the administration, awareness and access to info like this and the truth in general will become harder and harder to come, especially if you don’t look for it!

h/t to Jean Stoner

Updates 6.15.11: on FT Calhoun, Nebraska Nuclear Alert from yesterday… original message from yesterday below

clip_image002

Search ENENEWS

80 miles from Nebraska nuclear plant: “Sandbags provide no protection from water coming from underground”

June 15th, 2011 at 03:00 AM

Ground saturation deepens concerns, Argus Leader, June 11, 2011:

[In] portions …Read More

18 comments

Containment building flooded at Nebraska nuke plant in order to cool fuel rods

June 15th, 2011 at 02:21 AM

Ft. Calhoun Flood Defenses, WOWT, June 14, 2011:

From the air …Read More

28 comments

Radioactive whales caught 650 km from Fukushima plant

June 15th, 2011 at 01:39 AM

Report: Radiation found in whales in Japan, Japan Today, June 15, …Read More

8 comments

Nebraska nuke plant totally surrounded by floodwaters: How can Omaha levees hold? Dykes designed for a few weeks of water — 3-4 months expected, with 5+ foot rise

June 14th, 2011 at 08:07 PM

WOWT, June 13: Nuclear plant “almost like a castle surrounded by …Read More

119 comments

“Experts don’t know” how radioactive cesium from Fukushima ended up so far southwest of Tokyo, says radiation monitoring specialist

June 14th, 2011 at 02:26 PM

Radiation ‘hotspots’ hinder Japan response to nuclear crisis, Reuters, June 14, …Read More

96 comments

No-fly zone remains over troubled nuclear plant near Omaha — “In effect for flood relief efforts”

June 14th, 2011 at 12:50 PM

clip_image003

FAA NOTAM text:

FDC 1/6523 ZMP FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS FORT CALHOUN …Read More

48 comments

Curium-244 detected for first time outside Fukushima plant – Requires lead shield 20 times thicker than Plutonium-238

June 14th, 2011 at 10:32 AM

Curium: As compared to a competing thermoelectric generator isotope such as …Read More

103 comments

Osaka detects radioactive substances in sewage sludge

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Photographic Fraud

The media have an obvious vested interest in constantly urging that cameras be allowed in more places where governmental decisions are being made, including the Supreme Court of the United States. Like so many things that are said to be good for the public, this is something that would be good only for its advocates-- and harmful to the process of making decisions in the public interest, as distinguished from providing a forum for grandstanding.

he adage that "seeing is believing" should be a warning. What you see in politics is what politicians want you to see. You believe it at your own risk-- and at greater risks to the country.

Televised Congressional hearings are not just broadcasts of what happens to be going on in Congress. They are staged events to create a prepackaged impression.

Politically, they are millions of dollars' worth of free advertising for incumbents, while campaign finance laws impede their challengers from being able even to buy name recognition or to present their cases to the public nearly as often.

The real work of Congress gets done where there are no cameras and no microphones-- and where politicians can talk turkey with one another to make deals that could not be made with the public listening in.

To be a fly on the wall, able to listen in while these talks were going on, would no doubt be very enlightening, even if painfully disillusioning. But that is not what you are getting in video footage on the evening news.

Some might argue that, in the absence of the cameras, many people might not know what is going on in Congress or in the courts. But being uninformed is not nearly as bad as being misled.

For one thing, it is much easier to know that you are uninformed than to know that you are being misled.

Quite aside from the fraudulence of a photographic facade, even if everyone involved played it straight, there is often remarkably little to be learned from observing a court case, for example, unless you understand the legal framework within which that case is to be decided. That is especially so in appellate courts, including the Supreme Court.

The same thing applies in many other contexts. You could watch televised brain surgery for years without getting a clue, if you had no medical training that would enable you to understand what is being done and why-- and what the alternatives are that you do not see on camera, much less know whether the surgeon has consummate skill or is botching the whole thing.

The more complex the issue, the more likely that understanding the context is vastly more important than seeing a picture and hearing sound bites.

Wars are especially susceptible to being distorted on camera. A dramatic event with emotional impact need not tell you what its military significance is. The viewer is able only to react emotionally, in circumstances where rationality can be the difference between life and death, not only for the combatants, but also for the societies from which they come.

Even when televised Congressional hearings are meaningless in themselves-- the real decisions having been made off camera-- their implications can be devastating. But implications cannot be televised.

Over the past two decades, judicial confirmation hearings have often become exercises in character assassination against nominees that Senators oppose for political reasons having nothing to do with the inflammatory charges that are aired on nationwide TV.

Judges who have for years supported civil rights have been depicted as racists. Other events in their careers have been twisted beyond recognition. Utterly irrelevant questions have been raised to appeal emotionally to uninformed television viewers.

The most direct harm is of course to the nominees. But the most important harm is to the public and to the country. Not only are many top-notch people lost and many innocuous second-raters appointed in their place, many other top-notch people refuse even to be nominated, rather than see the sterling reputation of a lifetime destroyed by political demagogues.

None of those lost people and their talents are televised, though they may be far more important than what is televised.

Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com ColumnistBy Thomas Sowell - a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

 

Posted:  Daily Thought Pad