Go Home

free press

18 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

What Oppression Looks Like

The New York Times just published a chilling report by two reporters detained while leaving for the Cairo airport. As CNN's Ben Wedeman observed, this is why the people are fighting for democracy.

We had been detained by Egyptian authorities, handed over to the country’s dreaded Mukhabarat, the secret police, and interrogated. They left us all night in a cold room, on hard orange plastic stools, under fluorescent lights.

But our discomfort paled in comparison to the dull whacks and the screams of pain by Egyptian people that broke the stillness of the night. In one instance, between the cries of suffering, an officer said in Arabic, “You are talking to journalists? You are talking badly about your country?”

A voice, also in Arabic, answered: “You are committing a sin. You are committing a sin.”

We — Souad Mekhennet, Nicholas Kulish and a driver, who is not a journalist and not involved in the demonstrations — were detained Thursday afternoon while driving into Cairo. We were stopped at a checkpoint and thus began a 24-hour journey through Egyptian detention, ending with — we were told by the soldiers who delivered us there — the secret police. When asked, they declined to identify themselves.

Captivity was terrible. We felt powerless — uncertain about where and how long we would be held. But the worst part had nothing to do with our treatment. It was seeing — and in particular hearing through the walls of this dreadful facility — the abuse of Egyptians at the hands of their own government.

Read the rest.

I was on Danny Schechter's show on the Progressive Radio Network this morning talking about Egypt. Our conversation turned to the media, and how hard Egyptians were fighting to get the truth out about the oppression in their country. And yet, here we are in a country that allows a free press. That trust has eroded into parody for the most part, with the corporate news media giving us what profits them instead of what we need to know. As much as I appreciate Al Jazeera, it frustrates me to know I have to go outside the country to get actual reporting. But hey -- Katie Couric and Brian Williams were able to get out of Cairo, so thank God the faces of American news are safe and sound.

Today's HUGE gathering in Tahrir Square with hundreds of thousands of Egyptians had a mood of excitement, optimism, and solidarity. As I write this, there are now scattered reports of state thugs attacking people remaining for the night, molotov cocktails, and other assorted reports of state-sponsored violence. Al Jazeera's Cairo headquarters has been burned and its website hacked in an effort to discredit their reporting. Der Spiegel is reporting that rural poor are being paid by the state to stir violence among the protesters.

Egyptian State TV was very careful to show snippets of the protest on their broadcasts -- snippets taken from careful distances on the very edge of the gathering in Tahrir Square. A little sign here, a few people there, and a careful interview with a man who had been injured. They forgot to mention the journalist Ahmed Mohamed Mahmoud, who died from gunshot wounds inflicted at the hands of Egyptian government thugs. Ironic that he worked for a state-owned newspaper. I fully expect to see the government spin this as the act of the protesters, but for the fact that the protesters were unarmed and had to resort to using rocks made from breaking sidewalks to defend themselves.

I saw people in Cairo with bandages on their heads, arms, legs, with crutches and slings. They return. They hope this is the day that ends this dictatorship. They hope for tomorrow to be the day democracy begins. And it makes me wonder when we will stop taking our own democracy for granted and begin to treasure it, participate in it, and demand better from those protected by it.

Look at CNN's banner as it appeared while this post was written.

Priorities?



Mike's Blog Roundup

Martin Wolf's Exchange : The political genius of supply-side economics

slacktivist: Credit scoring and unemployment

CONELRAD Adjacent: Barry Goldwater's Mothers for Moral America

Sensen No Sen: Land of greatly diminished opportunity

The Reality-Based Community: The party of Lincoln vs the party of Jeff Davis

The Faithful Progressive: And to think the Republicans wanted to give up on the auto industry



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (862)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (24139)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

One of libertarians' real blind spots is that they seem to believe that only government is capable of taking away your freedoms and your rights. Which is how right-wingers like Glenn Beck and his fellow Foxheads (see especially Michelle Bachmann) have managed to turn things smack on their heads and create the Planet Bizarro talking point that "net neutrality means censorship of the Internet".

It never seems to occur to them that, you know, lots of other people are perfectly capable of taking away your freedoms. Especially the giant corporations who control our media.

Megyn Kelly gave a succinct demonstration of how this works at propaganda shops like Fox News yesterday on her America Live program. To discuss net neutrality, she brought on Jim Harper of the libertarian Cato Institute and Josh Silver of Free Press.

Kelly proceeded to let Harper ramble uninterrupted at length, pitching the hogwash notion that "free enterprise created the Internet" (um, no it didn't). Then, when it was Silver's turn to talk, Kelly aggressively interrupted him, notably just as he was getting to the major point: Maintaining net neutrality is about ensuring that there will be no corporate censorship of content -- in other words, about maintaining the architecture that made the Internet the free and open medium that it is.

Then, when Silver finally got a chance to raise that point again, Kelly again interrupted:

Kelly: Is that right, Jim? Because everything I've read about this says this is a push, the beginnings of a push by the Obama administration to control the Internet to some extent -- more so than they had in the past.

Well, she's obviously reading from diverse sources, isn't she?

In any event, Kelly again let Harper ramble on, speculating that taxes would be imposed, blah blah blah -- and cut the segment off before Silver could point out the blatant falsity of his claims.

It was quite an exhibition in "fair and balanced" TV news. And it demonstrated rather neatly what happens when corporate news channels control the flow of information: They pretend to offer "balance," but facts that undermine the predominant narrative are never given the light of day.

All the more reason to defend our Web freedoms by maintaining net neutrality. And what's bizarre is that the supposed defenders of "liberty" are on the side of the would-be corporate media controllers. But then, we already knew that libertarianism is fundamentally incoherent.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (726)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (7262)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Everyone in the journalism business knows that Bill O'Reilly's ambush crews are among the more outstanding examples of the gaping lack of anything resembling journalistic ethics at the Fox News Channel.

But no one wants to talk about it. So like clockwork, we can count on Jesse Waters and his intrepid crew ambushing various people -- some of them public figures, some of them private citizens.

Their most recent victim was Al Gore, who knows a thing or two about journalism. He recognized what Waters was up to and told him flatly at the outset: "I don't like ambush journalism."

Finally, Gore had to get in Waters' face to explain to him he had no intention of being interviewed under those circumstances. O'Reilly seems to think that this was some sort of coup.

But notice that Waters does get off two questions. And they're very revealing, because both are predicated on falsehoods. In other words, Waters' questions are lies.

In order:

A. "What's your reaction to the fact that the Arctic ice is increasing?"

Actually, the Arctic ice cap is indeed shrinking dramatically, with 2007 being the worst year on record. However, things got slightly better in 2008 and 2009: they were only the second- and third-worst ice-cap melt years on record.

See, for folks on the right, that constitutes an "increase." But only for folks on the right.

B. "Are you embarrassed at all by Climategate, sir?"

Hmmm. I dunno about Al Gore, but since the scientific work and the scientists involved have been completely exonerated and the entire "Climategate" dustup revealed as a right-wing hoax that served double duty as propaganda and a smear campaign, it sure would be tempting to answer this one:

"Not at all, Jesse. And aren't you embarrassed at all for having promulgated a hoax and a smear?"

Of course, that is much wordier than the simple, handy, universal answer to any and every question we recommend for anyone ambushed by Jesse and his pals:

"Andrea Mackris."



Devil In The Details: Kevin Martin's Big Plans

HuffPo:

Earlier this month the FCC convened the final of six public hearings to air out concerns about this proposed rule change. I have watched, listened to or attended all of these hearings and one thing is clear. The public is single-mindedly opposed to more media consolidation.

Martin himself admitted recently that he remembers "only one" public witness calling for relaxation of media ownership rules at these hearings.

This public opposition is not just evident in the passion of the thousands of people who came to the FCC hearings in Seattle, Los Angeles, Nashville, Tampa, Harrisburg and Chicago. It's a fact reflected in the public record.

The last time the FCC tried to change the rules in 2003, millions of people contacted Congress and the FCC to oppose the changes, which were ultimately thrown out by the courts. My organization, Free Press, checked the filings and found that more than 99 percent of the public comments received by the FCC opposed changing the rules.

None of this has halted Martin's headlong rush to let loose a new wave of consolidation by the end of the year.

FreePress has this .pdf report as well: 10 Facts Kevin Martin Doesn’t Want You to Know About His New Media Ownership Rules

FreePress has ways for you to get involved as well.



The (conservative) spirit of the radio

 radiographic21.gif

I knew talk radio in this country skewed heavily to the far-right, but I had no idea it was this bad.

While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, right-wing talk reigns supreme on America’s airwaves. Some key findings:

* In the spring of 2007, of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners, 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming was conservative, and only 9 percent was progressive.

* Each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk — 10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk.

* 76 percent of the news/talk programming in the top 10 radio markets is conservative, while 24 percent is progressive.

That’s astounding. America embraces progressive ideas on almost every issue of national significance, but according to this report (.pdf), prepared by the Center for American Progress and Free Press, progressive ideas have practically been wiped from the radio dials.



Blue Gal's Blog Round Up

Ice Station Tango on the Obama-Clinton preach-off in Selma, Alabama.

Mother Jones: It's not the Internet that's killing newspapers. It's the equity-chasing investors and their friends at the FCC who have put outsize profits before a free press.

David E is a little, um, "worried" about the Cheney's health. Wonkette wins the hyperbole headline award, though. And Local Crank suggests we need a cuddly anime version of the Vice President.

Off the beaten path, Wacky Middle East Wars Edition: Live from Tehran's "The Insider" is beating around the Bush. And some real Iranians hold a flickr snow war, complete with UN representation!
--
Blue Gal
http://bgalrstate.blogspot.com



Net Neutrality Wins A Battle

I'm of the belief that this should be in the "Good News/Bad News" category. The bad news is that it looks like the major obstacles blocking the merger of AT&T and BellSouth have been cleared, and history shows that these mergers do not benefits consumers. The good news is that one of those cleared obstacles has scored a victory for net neutrality and eliminated one of the anti-neutrality forces' biggest arguments.

FreePress/Save the Internet:

In a striking victory for Internet freedom advocates, AT&T officials agreed on Thursday night to adhere to strict Network Neutrality conditions if allowed to complete their proposed $85 billion merger with BellSouth.

The phone company filed a "letter of commitment" with the Federal Communications Commission in which it promises to observe Net Neutrality principles for at least 24 months. Now it's left to Congress to follow the FCC's lead and make Net Neutrality permanent under the law.

Continue reading »



Mike's Blog Round Up

AGITPROP: The Understander...and don't miss the Wingnut Roundup!

The Reaction: This Canadian blog examines the attack on America's free press

Calling All Wingnuts: Always entertaining. Recordings of Mike Stark's never-ending battle against the airwave wingers

Drive Democracy: George Lakoff's new book, "Whose Freedom," addresses the fundamental fight -- the radical conservative idea of freedom as obedience and unaccountable authority and the progressive idea of freedom as responsibility and opportunity.

David E’s Fablog: Heaven Knows Mr. Obama

Shakespeare's Sister: A Tale of Two Pictures



Bush got caught with his mic down

Digby:

White House aides had arranged for only the first few minutes of the session to be open to reporters. But an apparent mistake left a microphone on for longer than anticipated. In the interim, he said, "I support the free press, let's just get them out of the room...read on