[eccr] The Weekly Spin, Wednesday, March 3, 2004

>THE WEEKLY SPIN, Wednesday, March 3, 2004
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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. Banana Republicans Coming Soon
>2. GM-NO?
>3. Ebony and Ivory
>4. That's Situ-Tainment!
>5. The Blair Pitch Project
>6. Bush Re-election Campaign Kicks Off
>7. Business Doublespeak:  "American Jobs" Coalition Supports Outsourcing
>8. The More Things Change
>9. Beware 'Sound Science'
>10. Blair's 45-minute Gap
>11. Howard's End
>12. Editing With the Enemy
>13. USDA on Mad Cow:  'Don't Look, Don't Find'
>14. The Campaigns Behind the Campaigns
>15. Crisis (of Confidence) Management
>16. The Propaganda of William Safire
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>1. BANANA REPUBLICANS COMING SOON
>   PR Watch editors Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber have finished
>   writing their fifth book, Banana Republicans: How the Right Wing Is
>   Turning America Into a One-Party State. It won't be in bookstores
>   until May, but you can order in now online. If you are a journalist
>   or book review, you can request an advance review copy by emailing
>   (editor /at/ prwatch.org) and including your name, address and phone
>   number along with the name of your publication or organization.
>Web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/March_2004.html#1078290000
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078290000
>
>2. GM-NO?
>http://www.pressdemocrat.com/local/vote04/local/02gmo_b1.html
>   "A consortium of the nation's biggest agribusinesses Monday
>   reported pumping $150,000 in last-minute contributions into a
>   campaign to defeat a Mendocino County initiative that would ban
>   genetically engineered farm products," the Santa Rosa Press
>   Democrat reports. CropLife America -- a Washington, D.C., group
>   representing global agrichemical and biotech companies, including
>   Monsanto, Syngenta, and DuPont -- has now donated $500,000 over a
>   two-month period to fight Measure H. The anti-H campaign has spent
>   the money on opinion polling, intensive radio advertising, PR
>   consultants, legal advise and direct mail appeals to all voters.
>   Self-described corporate activist Ross Irvine argues on
>   ePublicRelations that even though a pro-biotech trade group can
>   outspend supporters of Measure H by a more than 6-to-1 ratio, they
>   still are at a disadvantage. "While leaders of the anti-biotech
>   forces in Mendocino County can be identified, activists do not
>   insist on 'designated spokesmen' as being primary or sole sources
>   of information. As result, there are numerous anti-biotech 'voices'
>   to be heard and quoted in the media. ... Not only are there more
>   spokesmen, they are autonomous and independent. They don't have to
>   funnel questions to a centralized, designated spokesman. As a
>   result, they can respond more quickly and more efficiently to media
>   and other inquiries." The biotech industry representatives fears
>   that Measure H if it passes could become a precedent, triggering
>   similiar efforts across the nation.
>SOURCE: Santa Rosa Press Democrat, March 2, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/March_2004.html#1078203602
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078203602
>
>3. EBONY AND IVORY
>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/02/politics/campaign/02ADS.html
>   The Democratic presidential campaigns of John Edwards and John
>   Kerry have one thing in common: the racial make-up of their TV ads
>   depends on where you watch them. An Edwards ad about job losses
>   "running in Ohio... would be identical to one it ran in South
>   Carolina last month if not for one thing" -- in the Ohio ad, the
>   factory worker is white, but in South Carolina, the worker was
>   black. A Kerry ad about his military record featured a white crew
>   mate in New Hampsire, Iowa and other states, but was revised to
>   feature a black crew mate before airing in South Carolina and
>   Missouri. Both campaigns denied the changes were made to reflect
>   states' racial compositions.
>SOURCE: New York Times, March 2, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/March_2004.html#1078203601
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078203601
>
>4. THAT'S SITU-TAINMENT!
>http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107818272514743436,00.html?mod=mm%5Fmedia%5Fmarketing%5Fhs%5Fleft
>   Today's Wall Street Journal reports on a new advertising trend:
>   "The most obvious alternative to TV clutter, placing products
>   within shows, is generating some backlash among viewers. Marketers
>   and media buyers see the 'situ-mercial' as a promising
>   alternative." What is a situ-mercial? It's a commercial designed to
>   look, sound and feel just like the show it's interrupting. For
>   example, a car insurance commercial set in a jail cell is airing
>   during court shows and dramas. According to an executive at the
>   major marketing firm Ogilvy & Mather, situ-mercials are pushing
>   "the business... to a more journalistic model."
>SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal, March 2, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/March_2004.html#1078203600
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078203600
>
>5. THE BLAIR PITCH PROJECT
>http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000448950
>   An extensive PR blitz is underway to promote Burning Down My
>   Masters' House, the book by disgraced former New York Times
>   reporter Jayson Blair. NBC's "Dateline" is planning an hour-long
>   program about Blair and his book. Blair, who was fired for
>   fabricating stories, will be flogging his book on the "Today" show,
>   "Larry King Live," "The View" and "Hardball."
>SOURCE: Editor and Publisher, March 1, 2004
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078117202
>
>6. BUSH RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN KICKS OFF
>http://www.prweek.com/news/news_story.cfm?ID=203628&site=3
>   George W. Bush's campaign for re-election starts airing its first
>   round of TV ads this week, PR Week reports. Campaign press
>   secretary Scott Stanzel "denied reports that sinking poll numbers
>   led the President to change strategy, abandoning an earlier plan to
>   remain politically 'above the fray' until later this year," PR Week
>   writes. "There's been lots of speculation, but we've always
>   indicated that we were anxious for a debate once the race narrowed
>   to two people," Stanzel told PR Week. "We were always aware of the
>   timeline for the Democratic nominating process, and, ultimately,
>   it's up to the President to decide when to engage." The campaign
>   also has network of "five regional spokesmen, all based at campaign
>   headquarters in Northern Virginia, who handle media inquiries; a
>   rapid-response team charged with countering negative attacks; and a
>   'surrogate' team that finds guests to appear on the President's
>   behalf on television shows, radio programs, and internet chats," PR
>   Week reports. Stanzel, formerly of the White House Office of Media
>   Affairs, reports to campaign director of communications Terry Holt.
>SOURCE: PR Week, March 1, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/March_2004.html#1078117201
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078117201
>
>7. BUSINESS DOUBLESPEAK:  "AMERICAN JOBS" COALITION SUPPORTS OUTSOURCING
>http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107809268846542227,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
>   Big business groups -- including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
>   National Association of Manufacturers, and Information Technology
>   Association of America (the e-voting machine manufacturers' lobby
>   group) -- have formed the Coalition for Economic Growth and
>   American Jobs. Contrary to its name, the coalition "is quietly
>   mounting an offensive against state and federal efforts to keep
>   jobs at home and otherwise restrain globalization." An election
>   year focus on jobs and the recent outsourcing of white collar
>   positions have led to some 80 anti-outsourcing bills being
>   introduced in 30 states. O'Dwyer's PR Daily reports the coalition
>   "may hire a national PR firm to get its message across that
>   globalization is a benefit to this country's future."
>SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal, March 1, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/March_2004.html#1078117200
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078117200
>
>8. THE MORE THINGS CHANGE
>http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/1994Q3/junta.html
>   The 3rd Quarter 1994 issue of PR Watch featured an article by
>   Sheldon Rampton's titled "Hustling for the Junta: PR Fights
>   Democracy in Haiti." Now that Aristide has been removed from power
>   by force for a second time, we've added the 3rd Quarter 1994 issue
>   to our online archives. We've also added the text of the article to
>   our Disinfopedia, where you can edit it yourself if you wish to add
>   new information.
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1078106139
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078106139
>
>9. BEWARE 'SOUND SCIENCE'
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13994-2004Feb27.html
>   "When George W. Bush and members of his administration talk about
>   environmental policy, the phrase 'sound science' rarely goes
>   unuttered," Chris Mooney writes in the Washington Post. "On issues
>   ranging from climate change to the storage of nuclear waste in
>   Nevada's Yucca Mountain, our president has assured us that he's
>   backing up his decisions with careful attention to the best
>   available research. ... It all sounds noble enough, but the phrases
>   'sound science' and 'peer review' don't necessarily mean what you
>   might think. Instead, they're part of a lexicon used to put a
>   pro-science veneer on policies that most of the scientific
>   community itself tends to be up in arms about. In this Orwellian
>   vocabulary, 'peer review' isn't simply an evaluation by learned
>   colleagues. Instead, it appears to mean an industry-friendly plan
>   to require such exhaustive analysis that federal agencies could
>   have a hard time taking prompt action to protect public health and
>   the environment. And 'sound science' can mean, well, not-so-sound
>   science."
>SOURCE: Washington Post, February 29, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1078030802
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078030802
>
>10. BLAIR'S 45-MINUTE GAP
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15697-2004Feb28.html
>   Britons continue to debate the Blair government's now-discredited
>   claim that Iraq was 45 minutes away from launching chemical or
>   biological weapons. Glenn Frankel and Rajiv Chandrasekaran British
>   review in detail the history of the 45-minute claim and Blair's
>   failure to "disclose that the claim had come secondhand from a
>   single, uncorroborated source, and that some of the government's
>   own experts believed it was questionable."
>SOURCE: Washington Post, February 29, 2004
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078030801
>
>11. HOWARD'S END
>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/artsentertainment/2001867825_radio29m.html
>   A Seattle forum on "Fixing Radio" focused on the fallout from Janet
>   Jackson's exposed breast and Clear Channel Communications'
>   suspension of Howard Stern. (Clear Channel executives were shocked,
>   shocked to discover that Stern's show features sexually explicit
>   talk.) But panelist Bruce Wirth of KBCS 91.3 FM commented, "What I
>   think is really indecent is that we're focusing on this and Janet
>   Jackson's (breast) ... We're obsessed about sex when the same
>   stations like Clear Channel were out there rah-rahing a war that
>   has wound up killing hundreds of American soldiers, not to mention
>   Iraqi civilians. Now that's indecent. We're so obsessed about sex
>   in this country, and the typical strategy of the right is to divert
>   our attention to sex issues."
>SOURCE: Seattle Times, February 29, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1078030800
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1078030800
>
>12. EDITING WITH THE ENEMY
>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/28/national/28PUBL.html
>   The U.S. government is threating legal action against anyone who
>   edits manuscripts from Iran and other disfavored nations, on the
>   ground that it amounts to trading with the enemy. "Anyone who
>   publishes material from a country under a trade embargo is
>   forbidden to reorder paragraphs or sentences, correct syntax or
>   grammar, or replace 'inappropriate words,'" reports Adam Liptak.
>   "Adding illustrations is prohibited, too. To the baffled dismay of
>   publishers, editors and translators who have been briefed about the
>   policy, only publication of 'camera-ready copies of manuscripts' is
>   allowed." The policy has drawn protests from the publishing
>   community. "It is against the principles of scholarship and freedom
>   of expression, as well as the interests of science, to require
>   publishers to get U.S. government permission to publish the works
>   of scholars and researchers who happen to live in countries with
>   oppressive regimes," said Eric A. Swanson, a senior vice president
>   at publisher John Wiley & Sons.
>SOURCE: New York Times, February 28, 2004
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077944400
>
>13. USDA ON MAD COW:  'DON'T LOOK, DON'T FIND'
>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/27/national/nationalspecial2/27COW.html
>   The United States' 'don't look, don't find' policy on mad cow
>   disease is beginning to crumble under the weight of the
>   international boycott of US beef. AP, UPI and here the New York
>   Times are all reporting that "a beef producer in Kansas has
>   proposed testing all its cattle for mad cow disease so it can
>   resume exports to Japan, but it is encountering resistance from the
>   Agriculture Department and other beef producers. American beef
>   exports have plummeted since Dec. 23 when a cow in Washington State
>   was diagnosed with [mad cow disease], a fatal disease that can be
>   passed to humans who eat infected cattle tissue. To assure the
>   safety of its meat, the company, Creekstone ... wants to use rapid
>   diagnostic tests that are routinely used in Japan and many European
>   nations." This is potentially great news for American farmers and
>   consumers if other companies break ranks with USDA and the meat
>   lobby and test their cattle. However, any private testing regime
>   must use the most sensitive tests and publicly report any mad cows
>   discovered to have credibility. The two Canadian and US mad cows
>   found so far are the tip of an iceberg of unknown size; only
>   testing of millions of cattle will reveal the extent of this
>   crisis.
>SOURCE: New York Times, February 27, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077858000
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077858000
>
>14. THE CAMPAIGNS BEHIND THE CAMPAIGNS
>http://thehill.com/news/022604/iraq.aspx
>   In a sign of "close tactical coordination with the White House" and
>   "at a time when Sen John Kerry has surged ahead of Bush in the
>   presidential popularity polls," Republican Senators planned a
>   surprise debate on Iraq today. Majority Leader Bill Frist and Jon
>   Kyl are leading the estimated six-hour rebuttal of Democratic
>   criticisms. Bush-Cheney campaign officials also plan to meet "with
>   Senate GOP press secretaries and speechwriters." According to The
>   Hill, "many Republicans are incensed that Democratic lawmakers have
>   used floor time scheduled for their so-called morning business
>   remarks to attack the president." The GOP hopes to reframe national
>   security issues and put pressure on Kerry for "flip-flopping on the
>   war."
>SOURCE: The Hill, February 26, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077771600
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077771600
>
>15. CRISIS (OF CONFIDENCE) MANAGEMENT
>http://www.odwyerpr.com/members/0225diebold.htm
>   Diebold Election Systems has launched a five-year, $1 million
>   "outreach campaign" to educate Maryland residents about its voting
>   machines. The campaign, which will include radio and TV
>   commercials, a website, more than 1.5 million brochures, and voting
>   demonstrations, begins just prior to Maryland's March 2 primary.
>   "The money would be better spent making the system more secure
>   instead of trying to win voter confidence through public
>   relations," replied Johns Hopkins computer science professor Avi
>   Rubin. A study co-authored by Rubin identified serious security
>   flaws with Diebold machines. Strong criticisms of electronic voting
>   led machine manufacturers to form an industry lobbying group late
>   last year.
>SOURCE: O'Dwyer's PR Daily, February 25, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077685201
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077685201
>
>16. THE PROPAGANDA OF WILLIAM SAFIRE
>http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1280
>   "Found: A Smoking Gun," declared the headline by New York Times
>   columnist William Safire, which claimed that a "clear link" had
>   recently been found between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. But
>   what did Safire base his case-closed pronouncement upon? A New York
>   Times story that had appeared a day earlier. But the original Times
>   story reached the opposite conclusion from Safire, stating that the
>   recent discover not evidence of a link between al Qaeda and Ansar
>   al-Islam. "So Safire ignored what his paper's own reporters
>   reported," writes David Corn, "and he juggled a highly selective
>   set of factoids to make a rather serious charge. ... This was not a
>   first for Safire. He has often hyperbolically exclaimed, 'case
>   closed, in discussing the supposed Al Qaeda-Iraq connection,
>   frequently pointing to the so-called Prague connection" - even
>   though, once again, the Times's own reporters have debunked it. "If
>   a newspaper columnist writes articles that defy the reality
>   reported by the paper's own correspondents, how should the paper's
>   editors and publisher respond?" asks Corn. "Columnists are
>   certainly entitled to their views," he writes. "They are free to
>   speculate and suppose. ... But Safire's recent work--unburdened by
>   factchecking, unchallenged by editors--shows he is more intent on
>   manipulating than interpreting the available information. ... Under
>   the cover of opinion journalism, he is dishing out disinformation.
>   How is that of service to the readers of the New York Times?"
>SOURCE: The Nation, February 24, 2004
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
>    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077598803
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Katholieke Universiteit Brussel - Catholic University of Brussels
Vrijheidslaan 17 - B-1081 Brussel - Belgium
T: ++ 32 (0)2-412.42.78
F: ++ 32 (0)2/412.42.00
Office: 4/0/18
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Free University of Brussels
Centre for Media Sociology (CeMeSO)
Pleinlaan 2 - B-1050 Brussels - Belgium
T: ++ 32 (0)2-629.18.30
F: ++ 32 (0)2-629.28.61
Office: C0.05
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: (Nico.Carpentier /at/ kubrussel.ac.be)
Web: 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
----------------