(From 2002 until 2005, this mailing list was called the ECCR mailing list)
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
[eccr] The Weekly Spin, Wednesday, June 25, 2003
Wed Jun 25 08:00:21 GMT 2003
>THE WEEKLY SPIN, Wednesday, June 25, 2003
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>sponsored by PR WATCH (www.prwatch.org)
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>The Weekly Spin features selected news summaries with links to
>further information about current public relations campaigns.
>It is emailed free each Wednesday to subscribers.
>
>SHARE US WITH A FRIEND (OR FIFTY FRIENDS)
>Who do you know who might want to receive Spin of the Week?
>Help us grow our subscriber list! Just forward this message to
>people you know, encouraging them to sign up at this link:
>
>http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>THIS WEEK'S NEWS
>
>1. PR Watch 1st Quarter 2003 Now Online
>2. Crazy Like a Faux
>3. Bush Deceived Us Into War - Why the Denial ?
>4. Rent This [Public] Space
>5. The Iron Triangle
>6. Corporate Irresponsibility Spurs PR Growth
>7. Fibbing It Up at Fox
>8. No Go for NGOs
>9. "Ignorance Is Strength" for Bush on Iraq
>10. Cure for the Common Cold
>11. PTA Goes Better With Coke
>12. Linking 9/11 To Iraq
>13. Free Speech, Inc.
>14. Verizon & IDI 'Rent' Gray Panthers to Attack WorldCom
>15. Plastics Council Targets Women And Children
>16. White House Edits EPA Report On Climate Change
>17. Bush's 9/11 Coverup
>18. Pentagon Ponders Embedded Reporter Policy
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>1. PR WATCH 1ST QUARTER 2003 NOW ONLINE
>http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2003Q1/index.html
> The 1st Quarter 2003 issue of PR Watch has now been added to our
> website. It features several articles by Andy Rowell and Bob Burton
> that show how drug and biotechnology PR suppresses important health
> information while persuading patients to consume drugs of
> questionable safety and efficacy. It also features "Weapons of Mass
> Deception," an article by PR Watch editor Sheldon Rampton that
> examines some of the themes covered in our upcoming new book with
> the same name, which looks at the uses of propaganda in Bush's war
> on Iraq.
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056513600
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056513600
>
>2. CRAZY LIKE A FAUX
>http://www.agitproperties.com/cease.htm
> It was apparently just a matter of time. A parody website called
> the "Faux News Channel, P.N.N. (Pentagon News Network)" has
> received a letter from attorneys for the Fox News Network. The
> attorneys object, among other things, to the sale by Faux of "Bill
> O'Reilly Hitler Youth" t-shirts. They express concern that people
> may confuse the real Faux with the fake Fox ... or is that
> vice-versa? Faux responds: "Now isn't that a hoot: to be accused of
> 'incredibly poor taste' and being 'highly offensive' by a
> representative of the network responsible for such benchmarks of
> good taste as 'Temptation Island 3,' 'Joe Millionaire' and 'Stupid
> Behavior Caught On Tape.' Folks, the irony is so thick around here
> you can cut it with a knife."
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056441024
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056441024
>
>3. BUSH DECEIVED US INTO WAR - WHY THE DENIAL ?
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/24/opinion/24KRUG.html?ex=1057460635&ei=1&en=ccf7f0e0cc3cf4ab
> Paul Krugman writes that "There is no longer any serious doubt that
> Bush administration officials deceived us into war. The key
> question now is why so many influential people are in denial,
> unwilling to admit the obvious. ... [I]f you admit to yourself that
> such a thing happened, you have a moral obligation to demand
> accountability - and to do so in the face not only of a powerful,
> ruthless political machine but in the face of a country not yet
> ready to believe that its leaders have exploited 9/11 for political
> gain." Our new book, the first documenting Bush's Weapons of Mass
> Deception, goes on sale July 28th in the U.S., Britain and
> Australia. You can pre-order it now online or in stores.
>SOURCE: New York Times, June 24, 2003
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056427200
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056427200
>
>4. RENT THIS [PUBLIC] SPACE
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/23/business/media/23ADCO.html
> "This property for rent. That's what an increasing number of
> strapped municipalities are proclaiming to Madison Avenue as they
> make available for advertising, marketing and promotional purposes
> an expanding range of public places - whether zoos, parks and train
> stations, or museums, piers and beaches. And while you still may
> not be able to fight City Hall, in some instances you can rent it
> for an event. ... 'We call it the city-for-sale phenomenon,' said
> Gary Ruskin, the executive director at Commercial Alert in
> Portland, Oregon, an organization dedicated to fighting what he
> terms ad creep. 'Every one of these is a victory of crass
> commercialism over local values. Places like parks are intended to
> be sanctuaries from the more noxious aspects of our commercial
> culture, refuges from the hustle and bustle of marketing. Instead,
> they're now degraded into huckstering, up for bid to the
> corporations with the deepest pockets.' "
>SOURCE: New York Times, June 23, 2003
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056340802
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056340802
>
>5. THE IRON TRIANGLE
>http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/06/23_briody.html
> The Carlyle Group sits at the epicenter of the military-industrial
> complex that connects the Bush-Cheney administration with crony
> capitalism. Dan Briody, discusses The Iron Triangle, his new book
> about the Carlyle Group, which has recently begun to dabble in
> media acquisition. "We're looking at the potential for having a
> real controlling influence in the media," he says. "And I
> personally would not like to see Carlyle Group controlling the
> information that I receive on a daily basis."
>SOURCE: Buzzflash.com, June 23, 2003
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056340801
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056340801
>
>6. CORPORATE IRRESPONSIBILITY SPURS PR GROWTH
>http://www.prweek.com/news/news_worldwire.cfm?site=1&ID=183300&site=3
> Following a trend reported in PR Watch, 3rd Quarter 2002 of using
> PR to improve the image of global capitalism, PR giant Hill &
> Knowlton has formed a corporate social responsibility (CSR) group.
> PR Week reports, "The CSR unit will attempt to focus on providing
> strategic counsel and communications support to CSR programs in
> areas including public outreach, internal communications, financial
> communications, community investment, public affairs, and
> environmental and CSR reporting.
>SOURCE: PR Week, June 23, 2003
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056340800
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056340800
>
>7. FIBBING IT UP AT FOX
>http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/steinreich8.html
> If you're wondering whatever happened to all those alleged weapons
> discoveries that Fox News reported during the war, Lew Rockwell has
> compiled a list, along with other examples of dishonesty, error,
> bias and propaganda at Fox News.
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056261890
>
>8. NO GO FOR NGOS
>http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=NGOWatch.org
> The American Enterprise Institute has launched a new web site,
> NGOWatch.org, as part of its campaign against nongovernmental
> organizations, which it says "are unregulated, spared any
> requirement to account for expenditures, to disclose activities or
> sources of funding or even to declare their officers." Rather
> ironic isn't it, that a these sorts of complaints would come from a
> libertarian think tank that is itself a nongovernmental
> organization and that does not publicly disclose its own
> institutional funders? Author and journalist Naomi Klein calls
> NGOWatch.org a "McCarthyite blacklist, telling tales on any NGO
> that dares speak against Bush administration policies or in support
> of international treaties opposed by the White House. "
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1056258978
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056258978
>
>9. "IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH" FOR BUSH ON IRAQ
>http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/6136245.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
> In George Orwell's 1984 "Ignorance Was Strength" for Big Brother's
> regime, and so it is for President Bush. "A third of the American
> public believes U.S. forces found weapons of mass destruction in
> Iraq, according to a recent poll. And 22 percent said Iraq actually
> used chemical or biological weapons. Before the war, half of those
> polled in a survey said Iraqis were among the 19 hijackers on Sept.
> 11, 2001. But such weapons have not been found in Iraq, and were
> never used. Most of the Sept. 11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
> None were Iraqis. ... These results startled the pollsters who
> conducted and analyzed the surveys. ... Pollsters and political
> analysts see several reasons for the gaps between facts and
> beliefs: the public's short attention span on foreign news,
> fragmentary or conflicting media reports that lacked depth or
> skepticism and Bush administration efforts to sell a war by
> oversimplifying the threat. ... Bush has described the preemptive
> attack on Iraq as "one victory in the war on terror that began
> Sept. 11." Bush officials also claim that Iraq sheltered and helped
> al-Qaida operatives. ... And GOP pollsters said any controversy
> over weapons wouldn't change public attitudes because ridding Iraq
> of an oppressive regime was reason enough for war for many
> Americans. 'People supported the war for national security reasons
> and that shifted to humanitarian reasons when they saw evidence of
> Saddam's atrocities,' said Republican strategist Frank Luntz."
>SOURCE: St Paul Pioneer Press, June 22, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056254400
>
>10. CURE FOR THE COMMON COLD
>http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7403/1403
> Clinical trials showed that ViroPharma's anti-cold drug,
> pleconaril, was little better than a placebo in clinical trials,
> but that didn't stop hundreds of newspapers from hyping it as a
> miracle cure. "It fell far short of what any rational person would
> call a cure," observes Gary Schwitzer. "Yet hundreds of journalists
> called pleconaril just that - and more - in hundreds of news
> stories before the drug was ever submitted to the FDA for approval.
> ... Journalists used an array of superlative terms for the drug
> -cure, miracle, wonder drug, super drug, a medical first. It was
> described as 'good news for physicians and their patients,'
> 'potentially huge,' and as a treatment that 'may drastically help
> relieve your misery.' It was compared with the search for the Holy
> Grail and with man's landing on the moon."
>SOURCE: British Medical Journal, June 21, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056168001
>
>11. PTA GOES BETTER WITH COKE
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17527-2003Jun20.html
> The venerable Parent-Teachers Association has begun seeking
> corporate funding partnerships with companies including Coca-Cola
> Enterprises, Disney Interactive and Microsoft. "I know the PTA may
> need money, but when they accept money from whomever, it loses its
> independence," says parent Loretta Pleasant-Jones. "How can a PTA
> now turn and say, 'We want the Coke machines out of our schools?' "
>SOURCE: Washington Post, June 21, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056168000
>
>12. LINKING 9/11 TO IRAQ
>http://www.fair.org/press-releases/clark-iraq.html
> Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting says major media is ignoring the
> story that flawed intelligence " may have been a result of
> deliberate deception, rather than incompetence." According to FAIR,
> "former General Wesley Clark told anchor Tim Russert that Bush
> administration officials had engaged in a campaign to implicate
> Saddam Hussein in the September 11 attacks-- starting that very
> day. Clark said that he'd been called on September 11 and urged to
> link Baghdad to the terror attacks, but declined to do so because
> of a lack of evidence. ... Clark's assertion corroborates a
> little-noted CBS Evening News story that aired on September 4,
> 2002. As correspondent David Martin reported: 'Barely five hours
> after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, the
> secretary of defense was telling his aides to start thinking about
> striking Iraq, even though there was no evidence linking Saddam
> Hussein to the attacks.' According to CBS, a Pentagon aide's notes
> from that day quote Rumsfeld asking for the 'best info fast' to
> 'judge whether good enough to hit SH at the same time, not only
> UBL.' (The initials SH and UBL stand for Saddam Hussein and Osama
> bin Laden.) The notes then quote Rumsfeld as demanding, ominously,
> that the administration's response 'go massive...sweep it all up,
> things related and not.'"
>SOURCE: FAIR, June 20, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056081603
>
>13. FREE SPEECH, INC.
>http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8160
> "The Supreme Court should decide a case by the end of this month
> that seemingly pits multiple issues -- all dear to liberal hearts
> -- against each other: the First Amendment versus decent working
> conditions overseas and consumer protection," Lisa J. Danetz writes
> for TomPaine.com. The case, Nike v. Kasky, centers on whether or
> not Nike violated California's truth-in-advertising laws with its
> statements about the working conditions in its overseas factories.
> "Technically, the Court must determine whether the statements at
> issue should be considered 'commercial' or 'non-commercial'
> speech," Danetz writes. "Practically speaking, though, the case is
> about a different but equally important question -- one likely to
> be decided with no discussion. Namely, do corporations have the
> same First Amendment rights as individuals? The issue goes beyond
> advertising and business practices, directly addressing corporate
> participation in the political process, and how the government
> should -- or shouldn't -- regulate this participation."
>SOURCE: TomPaine.com, June 20, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056081602
>
>14. VERIZON & IDI 'RENT' GRAY PANTHERS TO ATTACK WORLDCOM
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14490-2003Jun19.html
> "What seemed to be a groundswell of protest materialized last week
> when WorldCom Inc. lawyers arrived at federal court for a hearing
> on whether the company's agreement to pay a $500 million fine was
> sufficient punishment for its mammoth fraud. ... Outside the
> courthouse, a small group of demonstrators rallied" including the
> Gray Panthers. "The outpouring, though, was hardly spontaneous.
> Several of the opponents, including protest organizers and
> petitioners, had ties to Issue Dynamics Inc. (IDI), a
> Washington-based consulting firm whose clients include some of
> WorldCom's biggest competitors, such as the regional phone giant
> Verizon Communications Inc. ... Verizon spokesman Eric Rabe
> confirmed that IDI is working for the telephone company. 'We are
> happy to support groups that have similar views as ours, and [IDI]
> is bringing us together,' Rabe said. ... Rabe would not say how
> much Verizon is paying IDI. He said Verizon is not the only company
> contributing to a 'funding pool' on the WorldCom issue, but he
> declined to identify other participants."
>SOURCE: Washington Post, June 20, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056081601
>
>15. PLASTICS COUNCIL TARGETS WOMEN AND CHILDREN
>http://www.mediapost.com/PrintFriend.cfm?articleId=209845
> The American Plastics Council recently launched a new marketing
> campaign that targets women and children. APC, through its ad
> agency Grey Worldwide, will spend $19 million on TV and print
> advertising, one of its lowest marketing budgets in the 11 year
> history of the trade association, MediaPost reports. "Because one
> of [APC's] targets is mothers of infants, Grey has gotten the
> American Plastics Council spots on The Newborn Channel. [Grey's
> Charlie] Herzog said that a lot of baby supplies -- like diapers --
> can be made with plastic and it's a great way to get the women
> thinking about plastic from the beginning of their child's life,"
> MediaPost writes. Public health advocates, however, are critical of
> the industry's effort to target women and children, whose bodies,
> they say, are at risk of being contaminated by the toxic additives
> in plastics.
>SOURCE: MediaPost, June 20, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1056081600
>
>16. WHITE HOUSE EDITS EPA REPORT ON CLIMATE CHANGE
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/19/politics/19CLIM.html
> "The Environmental Protection Agency is preparing to publish a
> draft report next week on the state of the environment, but after
> editing by the White House, a long section describing risks from
> rising global temperatures has been whittled to a few noncommittal
> paragraphs," the New York Times reports. "The editing eliminated
> references to many studies concluding that warming is at least
> partly caused by rising concentrations of smokestack and tail-pipe
> emissions and could threaten health and ecosystems. Among the
> deletions were conclusions about the likely human contribution to
> warming from a 2001 report on climate by the National Research
> Council that the White House had commissioned and that President
> Bush had endorsed in speeches that year. White House officials also
> deleted a reference to a 1999 study showing that global
> temperatures had risen sharply in the previous decade compared with
> the last 1,000 years. In its place, administration officials added
> a reference to a new study, partly financed by the American
> Petroleum Institute, questioning that conclusion."
>SOURCE: New York Times, June 19, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1055995200
>
>17. BUSH'S 9/11 COVERUP
>http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/06/18/911/
> "While the administration of President George W. Bush is
> aggressively positioning itself as the world leader in the war on
> terrorism, some families of the Sept. 11 victims say that the facts
> increasingly contradict that script," reports Eric Boehlert. "The
> White House long opposed the formation of a blue-ribbon Sept. 11
> commission, some say, and even now that panel is underfunded and
> struggling to build momentum. And, they say, the administration is
> suppressing a 900-page congressional study, possibly out of fear
> that the findings will be politically damaging to Bush." According
> to Monica Gabrielle, whose husband Richard died at the World Trade
> Center, "As soon as we started looking for answers we were blocked,
> put off and ignored at every stop of the way. We were shocked. The
> White House is just blocking everything."
>SOURCE: Salon.com, June 18, 2003
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1055908801
>
>18. PENTAGON PONDERS EMBEDDED REPORTER POLICY
>http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/6112625.htm
> "The Pentagon may make it official policy to include journalists
> with U.S. military units headed for battle," the Associated Press's
> Matt Kelley reports. During a panel discussion on media coverage of
> the Iraq war, outgoing Pentagon spokesperson Victoria Clarke said
> that Pentagon officials were pleased with the results of embedding
> journalists with troops. Clarke said she would like to see more
> reporters accompany U.S. troops in the future, AP reports.
> "Transparency works," Clarke said. "The good news gets out. The bad
> news gets dealt with quickly." Clarke also defended the military's
> handling of Pfc. Jessica Lynch's capture and rescue, denying
> military officials were the source of any inaccurate or overblown
> stories. "We were downplaying it," Clarke said. "We weren't hyping
> it. We weren't spinning it. We don't do that."
>SOURCE: Associated Press, June 18, 2003
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/June_2003.html#1055908800
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1055908800
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>The Weekly Spin is compiled by staff and volunteers at PR Watch.
>To subscribe or unsubcribe, visit:
>http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
>
>Daily updates and news from past weeks can be found at the
>Spin of the Day" section of the PR Watch website:
>http://www.prwatch.org/spin/index.html
>
>Archives of our quarterly publication, PR Watch, are at:
>http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues
>
>PR Watch, Spin of the Day and the Weekly Spin are projects
>of the Center for Media & Democracy, a nonprofit organization
>that offers investigative reporting on the public relations
>industry. We help the public recognize manipulative and
>misleading PR practices by exposing the activities of
>secretive, little-known propaganda-for-hire firms that
>work to control political debates and public opinion.
>Please send any questions or suggestions about our
>publications to:
>(editor /at/ prwatch.org)
>
>Contributions to the Center for Media & Democracy
>are tax-deductible. Send checks to:
> CMD
> 520 University Ave. #310
> Madison, WI 53703
>
>To donate now online, visit:
>https://www.egrants.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2344-0|1118-0
>_______________________________________________
>Weekly-Spin mailing list
>(Weekly-Spin /at/ prwatch.org)
>http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/weekly-spin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Carpentier Nico (Phd)
Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Free University Brussels
Studies on Media, Information & Telecommunication (SMIT)
Centre for Media Sociology (CeMeSO)
Office: C0.05
Pleinlaan 2 - B-1050 Brussels - Belgium
T: ++ 32 (0)2-629.18.30
F: ++ 32 (0)2-629.28.61
E-mail: (Nico.Carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
W1: http://smit.vub.ac.be/
W2: http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~ncarpent/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
ECCR-Mailing list
---
To unsubscribe, send an email message to (majordomo /at/ listserv.vub.ac.be)
with in the body of the message (NOT in the subject): unsubscribe eccr
---
ECCR - European Consortium for Communications Research
Secretariat: P.O. Box 106, B-1210 Brussels 21, Belgium
Tel.: +32-2-412 42 78/47
Fax.: +32-2-412 42 00
Email: (freenet002 /at/ pi.be) or (Rico.Lie /at/ pi.be)
URL: http://www.eccr.info
----------------
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
