Archive for June 2003

(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]