The Weekly Spin features selected news summaries with links to
further information about media, political spin and propaganda. It
is emailed free each Wednesday to subscribers.
——————————————————————–
THIS WEEK’S NEWS
== BLOG POSTINGS ==
1. Moore Spin: Or, How Reporters Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Nuclear Front Groups
2. Tracking the Front Group “Boomerang”
3. Help Solve the Mystery – For Whom Were the Fired U.S. Attorneys Pushed Aside?
== SPIN OF THE DAY POSTINGS ==
1. MoveOn — End This War or Manage This War?
2. Medical Journal In Double Bubble with Apparent Beverage Industry Conflict
3. Yet Another Fake News Epidemic
4. “Public Intellectuals” Don’t Come Cheap
5. Destroying Journalism in Order to Save It
6. Latest Version of Pay for Play: Bucks for Blogs
7. Winning Hearts, Minds and Arabic Blogs
8. Code (Red) for Cause-Related Marketing
9. Exxon Mobil Partnership Proves Costly for Stanford
10. Seven Papers Axe Coulter’s Column
11. Light Shy Lobbyists
12. David Outsmarts Mining Goliath
13. American Heart Association Sticks with Smoky Partner
——————————————————————–
== BLOG POSTINGS ==
1. MOORE SPIN: OR, HOW REPORTERS LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE NUCLEAR FRONT GROUPS
by Diane Farsetta
“We just find it maddening that Hill & Knowlton, which has an
$8 million account with the nuclear industry, should have such an
easy time working the press,” concluded the Columbia Journalism
Review in an editorial in its July / August 2006 issue.
The magazine was rightly bemoaning the tendency of news
outlets to present former Greenpeace activist Patrick Moore and
former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman as environmentalists who
support nuclear power, without noting that both are paid
spokespeople for a group bankrolled by the Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI). NEI represents nuclear power plant operators, plant
designers, fuel suppliers and other sectors of the nuclear power
industry. Hill & Knowlton is NEI’s public relations firm, though
it’s not the only firm working to build support for nuclear power.
Thanks in part to an ongoing, multifaceted PR push — along
with very real concerns about energy prices, rising energy demand,
aging infrastructure, sustainability and global warming — nuclear
power is attracting serious attention from reporters and
policymakers alike. The question is whether a vital public debate
over energy choices is being skewed by deep-pocketed interests with
a dog in the fight.
The dangers of such distortions are especially acute at the
state and local levels. That’s where efforts to extend the licenses
of existing nuclear power plants, to maintain or expand nuclear
waste storage facilities, and to site new proposed nuclear power
plants, are made or broken. And that’s where pro-nuclear
campaigners appear to be focusing, adopting the mantle and tactics
of community groups while steadfastly refusing to provide details on
their operations.
To read the rest of this item, visit:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5833″> www.prwatch.org/node/5833</a>
2. TRACKING THE FRONT GROUP “BOOMERANG”
by Jonathan Rosenblum
Corporate front groups can cause a “boomerang effect” to
their sponsors, damaging the reputations of companies like
ExxonMobil, Merck, and PepsiCo, when the sponsor’s role in
misrepresenting issues is widely revealed. Moreover, advance
information or instruction can inoculate the public against
deception, according to a new study published in the February 2007
issue of Communications Research.
CMD has exposed corporate and PR front groups for yearssee
John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton’s six books, not to mention Spin of
the Day and SourceWatch. Now, and evidently for the first time,
scholars have undertaken an experiment to show how people respond to
and resent corporate manipulation.
To read the rest of this item, visit:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5847″> www.prwatch.org/node/5847</a>
3. HELP SOLVE THE MYSTERY – FOR WHOM WERE THE FIRED U.S. ATTORNEYS PUSHED ASIDE?
by Elliott Fullmer
The nation’s capital has been in an uproar this week over the
U.S. attorney firings controversy. Both the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees held hearings Tuesday on the matter, where six
of eight former U.S. attorneys (all fired in late 2006) testified
that they had been the target of complaints, telephone calls and
threats from either a high-ranking Justice Department official or
members of Congress in the days and weeks preceding their abrupt
dismissals. The replacements for the attorneys are rumored to be
political appointees with little prosecutorial experience.
The story dates back to March 2006, when President Bush
signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act. The bill included
a provision (inserted by a staffer to Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) at
the request of the Justice Department) allowing the DOJ to appoint
U.S. attorneys indefinitely without a presidential nomination or
Senate confirmation (previously, this type of appointment could last
only a maximum of 120 days). In late 2006, the administration fired
eight U.S. attorneys, insisting each dismissal was motivated by
performance.
To read the rest of this item, visit:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5830″> www.prwatch.org/node/5830</a>
== SPIN OF THE DAY POSTINGS ==
1. MOVEON — END THIS WAR OR MANAGE THIS WAR?
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5857″> www.prwatch.org/node/5857</a>
Author Norman Solomon editorializes that “Nancy Pelosi is speaker
of the House, and Harry Reid is majority leader of the Senate. But
neither speaks for, much less leads, the antiwar movement that we
need. When you look at the practicalities of the situation, Pelosi
and Reid could be more accurately described as speaker and leader
for the war-management movement.” Solomon notes that the powerful
liberal advocacy group “MoveOn seems to have wrapped itself around
the political sensibilities of Reid, Pelosi and others at the top of
Capitol Hill leadership. … Last week, while MoveOn was sending
out a mass e-mail to its 3.2 million members offering free bumper
stickers urging ‘End This War,’ the MoveOn leadership was
continuing its failure to back the efforts of the Congressional
Progressive Caucus for ‘a fully funded, and systematic, withdrawal
of U.S. soldiers and military contractors from Iraq.’ … It’s
good to see MoveOn churning out bumper stickers that advocate an end
to the Iraq war — but sad to see its handful of decision-makers
failing to support a measure to fund an orderly and prompt
withdrawal from the war.”
SOURCE: Common Dreams, Tuesday, March 13, 2007
2. MEDICAL JOURNAL IN DOUBLE BUBBLE WITH APPARENT BEVERAGE INDUSTRY CONFLICT
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5855″> www.prwatch.org/node/5855</a>
In its current issue, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
acknowledges that a review of soft drinks and obesity (which
challenges links between the one and the other) was funded by the
American Beverage Association. But the journal excludes information
that one of the authors personally and professionally has had close
ties to the beverage industry. “(T)he Associated Press reported last
year that [Researcher Adam] Drewnowski owns stock in beverage
companies and much of his prior research has been financed by the
beverage industry,” reports the Center for Science in the Public
Interest (CSPI). Another study by Drewnowski was funded by the Corn
Refiners Association and American Beverage Institute. The journal
article’s co-author, France Bellisle, for his part, sits on an
advisory board for McDonald’s. Researchers, including CSPI staff,
have written that industry-financed studies predictably reach
conclusions favorable to the beverage companies.
SOURCE: Center for Science in the Public Interest, March 12, 2007
3. YET ANOTHER FAKE NEWS EPIDEMIC
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5852″> www.prwatch.org/node/5852</a>
As a result of “hospitals’ desperate need to compete for lucrative
lines of business” and “TV’s hunger for cheap and easy stories,”
healthcare companies are increasingly getting into the (fake) news
business. Sometimes “the hospitals pay for airtime”; sometimes
“they don’t but still provide expertise and story ideas” — or
prepackaged video news releases. “Viewers who think they are getting
news are really getting a form of advertising,” reports Trudy
Lieberman. One healthcare company, Cleveland Clinic, “sends out
prepackaged stories” every day, including to “Fox News Edge, a
service for Fox affiliates that in turn distributes the pieces to
140 Fox stations.” And, “since TV news operations are finding that
they can get this kind of health ‘news’ supplied to them — and
might even make money on the deal — they are tempted not to invest
in a legitimate health reporter who would ask harder questions and
look at the larger picture.” Not surprisingly, Lieberman finds that
“too often the full nature of the arrangements is not disclosed, or
inadequately disclosed.”
SOURCE: Columbia Journalism Review, March / April 2007
4. “PUBLIC INTELLECTUALS” DON’T COME CHEAP
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5851″> www.prwatch.org/node/5851</a>
After billionaire insurance mogul Maurice “Hank” Greenberg was
charged with fraud and insurance and securities violations, he hired
the eSapience PR firm — whose executives include the dean of MIT’s
Sloan School of Management — to buff up his image. Now eSapience is
suing Greenberg for unpaid bills. The lawsuit states that eSapience
executives “set up a new think tank, the Barbon Institute,
specifically to provide a credible-sounding new platform for
Greenberg” to give an “image-rehabilitating speech.” Greenberg is
disputing $2 million in charges racked up by eSapience executives
who billed him $400 to $1,000 hourly — rates that they said
“reflected the level of detail, sophistication, and status necessary
to present Greenberg in the best light and to assure the presence
and participation of key intellectual and public figures.”
SOURCE: Boston Globe, March 10, 2007
5. DESTROYING JOURNALISM IN ORDER TO SAVE IT
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5850″> www.prwatch.org/node/5850</a>
While fleeing an ambush in Afghanistan, U.S. soldiers reportedly
opened fire on civilian cars and pedestrians and then destroyed
photos and video taken at the scene by freelance journalists.
Destroying the evidence was necessary, a military official explained
later, to protect “investigative integrity” because photos or video
taken by “untrained people” might “capture visual details that are
not as they originally were.” He added, “We are completely committed
to a free and independent press, and we hope that we can help
encourage this tradition in places where new and free governments
are taking root.” Associated Press Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll
remained unconvinced. “In democratic societies,” she noted,
“legitimate journalists are allowed to work without having their
equipment seized and their images deleted.”
SOURCE: Miami Herald, March 10, 2007
6. LATEST VERSION OF PAY FOR PLAY: BUCKS FOR BLOGS
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5846″> www.prwatch.org/node/5846</a>
Beware the blog that gushes about a product, movie, or anything
you might consider purchasing. There’s a chance that the blogger is
on the payroll of “new marketing middlemen such as PayPerPost Inc.
that connect advertisers with mom-and-pop webmasters.” PayPerPost
alone pays 15,500 bloggers for inserting their clients into blog
postings. Other companies that pay bloggers for mentions include
ReviewMe, Loud Launch and SponsoredReviews.com. Not all bloggers
think it’s a good idea. “PayPerPost versus authentic blogging is
like comparing prostitution with making love to someone you care for
deeply. No one with any level of ethics would get involved with
these clowns,” said Jason McCabe Calacanis, co-founder of Weblogs
Inc. The quid pro quo is multilayered; one sponsored blogger’s
“traffic has doubled thanks partly to PayPerPost’s fanatical users,
who link often to fellow Posties. That gives her a bigger audience
for her unpaid musings.” The Federal Trade Commission recently
directed word-of-mouth marketers to clearly disclose.
SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, March 9, 2007
7. WINNING HEARTS, MINDS AND ARABIC BLOGS
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5845″> www.prwatch.org/node/5845</a>
The Washington Times reports on the U.S. State Department’s
“digital outreach team,” mentioned in a recent interview by Karen
Hughes, the Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.
“We want to make sure that U.S. views are present in the Arabic
cyberspace,” said the State Department’s Jeremy Curtin. “The first
step of success is to be there and have people respond. … The
second step is to engage in a conversation. We try to adopt an
informal tone, and we are careful what we say.” The State Department
team “recently began a thread” on egyptiantalks.org, asking, “Will
violence end in Iraq if U.S. forces withdraw?” In another online
engagement described by Curtin, participants challenged “accusations
that the U.S. military is engaged in widespread rape of men and
women in Iraq.” A team member explained, “I stated that, when there
have been cases of misconduct by U.S. soldiers against Iraqi
civilians, a legal process has been implemented. I also said
allegations that such misconduct is widespread are untrue and
unproven.”
SOURCE: Washington Times, March 9, 2007
8. CODE (RED) FOR CAUSE-RELATED MARKETING
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5844″> www.prwatch.org/node/5844</a>
A year into the Red campaign — a cause-related marketing effort
that allows partners to profit from charity — $100 million has been
spent on marketing, but only $18 million has been raised worldwide
for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. “The
disproportionate ratio between the marketing outlay and the money
raised is drawing concern among nonprofit watchdogs, cause-marketing
experts and even executives in the ad business,” reports Advertising
Age. “It threatens to spur a backlash, not just against the Red
campaign … but also for the brands involved,” Gap, Apple and
Motorola. The Global Fund’s Rajesh Anandan defended Red: “The launch
cost of this kind of campaign is going to be hugely frontloaded.”
The website buylesscrap.org parodies Red, stating, “Shopping is not
a solution,” and encouraging direct donations to the Global Fund.
Professor Mark Rosenman explained, “There is a broadening concern
that business is taking on the patina of philanthropy and crowding
out philanthropic activity and even substituting for it. It benefits
the for-profit partners much more than the charitable causes.”
SOURCE: Advertising Age, March 5, 2007
9. EXXON MOBIL PARTNERSHIP PROVES COSTLY FOR STANFORD
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5843″> www.prwatch.org/node/5843</a>
“Exxon Mobil has teamed up with Stanford University to find
breakthrough technologies that deliver more energy while reducing
greenhouse gas emissions,” enthuses a TV commercial by the oil
giant. Under Exxon Mobil’s partnership with Stanford, first
announced in 2002, the university “will get up to $100 million from
the company over 10 years to fund climate and energy research.”
After seeing the ads, major Stanford donor Steve Bing “decided to
rescind a promised $2.5 million donation to the school.” He is also
“asking other major philanthropists to reconsider their promises to
give to the Stanford cause,” and is pushing for “an end to the
4-year-old ad campaign.” Bing’s advisor on climate issues said,
“Exxon Mobil is trying to greenwash itself, and it’s using Stanford
as its brush.” A Stanford spokesperson countered, “We are proud of
our work on seeking solutions to serious energy and environmental
problems and our collaborations in these areas with a variety of
private and non-profit organizations.” An earlier Exxon print ad,
carrying the Stanford seal, “suggested that scientists were debating
the cause of global warming.”
SOURCE: Mercury News (San Jose, CA), March 11, 2007
10. SEVEN PAPERS AXE COULTER’S COLUMN
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5842″> www.prwatch.org/node/5842</a>
In the last week at least seven newspapers have dropped the
syndicated column of conservative firebrand Ann Coulter. Speaking at
the American Conservative Union’s annual Conservative Political
Action Conference in Washington, D.C. on March 2, Coulter said “I
was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic
presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go
into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an
impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.” Newspapers that have
dropped her column include: Sanford Herald (North Carolina); Daily
Chronicle (Illinois); American Press (Louisiana); Lancaster New Era
(Pennsylvania); The Oakland Press, (Michigan); The Mountain Press
(Tennessee); and The Times (Louisiana). The editorial director of
The Clarion-Ledger in Jackson, Mississippi, David Hampton, said that
while he disagreed with her opinions, the paper would keep her
column. “I think her popularity will continue to wane. I believe
ideas rise and fall on their merits, and I haven’t seen much depth
in hers,” he said.
SOURCE: Editor & Publisher, March 9, 2007
11. LIGHT SHY LOBBYISTS
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5841″> www.prwatch.org/node/5841</a>
Andrew Parker, the head of the Australian PR and lobbying firm
Parker & Partners — a part of the Ogilvy PR Worldwide network — is
worried that the Australian government will re-introduce a system of
regulating lobbyists. Calls for registering lobbyists have grown in
the wake of a series of revelations over the lobbying activities of
former West Australian Premier Brian Burke, who was later imprisoned
after a Royal commission of Inquiry into business deals done by his
government. After serving seven months of a two-year prison
sentence, Burke re-invented himself as a lobbyist. “There is no
denying the Brian Burkes of this world — those lobbyists who rely
on personal ‘political mates’ alone — face extinction. But we need
to speed up this process,” Parker wrote in an opinion column. While
Parker supports lobbyist registration, he has caveats. “Calls for
complete financial disclosure are not only unprecedented for other
professional service sectors but are designed to simply give these
[anti-business] crusaders the ability to misrepresent and deceive,”
he complained. In the U.S., lobbyists are required to disclose
clients and broad details of their work for them.
SOURCE: The Australian, March 9, 2007
12. DAVID OUTSMARTS MINING GOLIATH
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5840″> www.prwatch.org/node/5840</a>
By invoking Australian copyright law, the New South Wales Minerals
Council (NSWMC) twice succeeded in shutting down a website that
satirized its “Life: Brought to you by mining” advertising campaign.
However, the website of the spoofers, Rising Tide Newcastle, is now
hosted overseas. Following protests that the mining industry was
attempting to “silence” them, the environmentalists are enjoying
more web traffic than their corporate rivals. NSWMC’s chief
executive, Nikki Williams, said the industry’s campaign is about
“establishing a fair voice for the mining industry.” Associate
lecturer in law at the Queensland University of Technology Peter
Black argues, “This is clearly a situation that would be covered by
the fair dealing defence of parody and satire. … This is political
speech that is being suppressed by our copyright regulations, which
is something that should not happen.” The NSWMC represents major
mining companies, including subsidiaries of global corporations such
as BHP-Billiton and Xstrata.
SOURCE: Sydney Morning Herald, March 5, 2007
13. AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION STICKS WITH SMOKY PARTNER
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/node/5829″> www.prwatch.org/node/5829</a>
The American Heart Association (AHA) is once again partnering with
the Rite Aid Drug Store chain to promote its “Go Red for Women”
campaign, aimed at increasing public awareness of heart disease in
women. But just last year, AHA was embarrassed by the partnership
after a web site featured photos of AHA’s “healthy heart” posters
located immediately next to cigarette displays in Rite Aid Stores.
AHA then promised tobacco control advocates that it would pull its
partnership with Rite Aid. AHA does not currently list Rite Aid as a
sponsor on its “Go Red” campaign web site, but the partnership was
renewed for this Spring’s campaign. Rite Aid is notorious among
public health advocates, for having launched its own brand of
cigarettes, for helping the tobacco industry fight anti-tobacco
legislation, and for fighting a bill to reduce young people’s access
to cigarettes.
SOURCE: Rite Aid press release, February 1, 2007
——————————————————————–
The Weekly Spin is compiled by staff of the Center for Media and
Democracy (CMD), a nonprofit public interest organization. To
subscribe, visit:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html”> www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html</a>
To unsubscribe, visit:
<a href=”http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/cmd/unsubscribe.jsp?unsubscribe”> www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/cmd/unsubscribe.jsp?unsubscribe</a>
Daily updates and news from past weeks can be found in the “Spin of
the Day” section of CMD’s website:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/spin”> www.prwatch.org/spin</a>
Archives of our quarterly publication, PR Watch, are at:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues”> www.prwatch.org/prwissues</a>
CMD also sponsors SourceWatch, a collaborative research project
that invites anyone (including you) to contribute and edit
articles. For more information, visit:
<a href=”http://www.sourcewatch.org”> www.sourcewatch.org</a>
PR Watch, Spin of the Day, the Weekly Spin and SourceWatch 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@prwatch.org
——————————————————————–
Contributions to the Center for Media and Democracy are
tax-deductible. Send checks to:
CMD
520 University Avenue, Suite 227
Madison, WI 53703
To donate now online, visit:
https://secure.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/cmd/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=1107
——————————————————————–
SHARE US WITH A FRIEND (OR FIFTY FRIENDS)
Who do you know who might want to receive “The Weekly Spin”? Help
us grow our subscriber list! Just forward this message to people
you know, encouraging them to sign up at this link:
<a href=”http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html”> www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html</a>