(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, March 3, 2004
Wed Mar 03 11:24:37 GMT 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
----------------
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
