You are here

Media

Helen Thomas Cries, Denies Anti-Semitism, Calls President Obama 'Reprehensible'

Asked whether she's anti-Semitic, she responded "Baloney!" She said she wants to be remembered for "integrity and my honesty and my belief in good journalism" and would like to work again.

Associated Press/Huffington Post

Helen Thomas

In a radio interview, former White House correspondent Helen Thomas acknowledges she touched a nerve with remarks about Israel that led to her retirement. But she says the comments were "exactly what I thought," even though she realized soon afterward that it was the end of her job.

\r\n

"I hit the third rail. You cannot criticize Israel in this country and survive," Thomas told Ohio station WMRN-AM in a sometimes emotional 35-minute interview that aired Tuesday (Oct 12). It was recorded a week earlier by WMRN reporter Scott Spears at Thomas' Washington, D.C., condominium.

\r\n

More...

Section(s): 

Does Anyone Object to U.S. Drone Wars in Pakistan?

    \r\n
  • Apparently not, although there are obviously fundamental questions about this policy--such as whether or not it's legal.
  • \r\n

  • America Detached from War
  • \r\n

  • Can the New York Times Count—or Quote—Peace Activists?
  • \r\n

\r\n

Peter Hart, Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

\r\n

Apparently not, judging by the Washington Post's October 3 story ("Military Drones Aid CIA's mission") about the CIA's expansion of its drone war in Pakistan. It is "part of a high-stakes attempt by the Obama administration to deal decisive blows to Taliban insurgents," and also  "a significant evolution of an already controversial targeted killing program."

\r\n

Post readers get details from "a U.S. official"--who says things like, "Our intelligence has gotten a lot better." The only other perspective comes from Bruce Reidel at Brookings, who is "a former CIA analyst who led the Obama administration's initial overhaul of its Afghanistan/Pakistan strategy." In other words, not much of a critic.

There are obviously fundamental questions about this policy--such as whether it's legal, something Jim Lobe wrote about recently for Inter Press Service (4/2/10).

\r\n

More...

\r\n

Related:

\r\n

America Detached from War, Tom Engelhardt, TomDispatch
Bush’s Pilotless Dream, Smoking Drones, and Other Strange Tales from the Crypt

\r\n

Can the New York Times Count—or Quote—Peace Activists? Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

\r\n

    \r\n
  • The rallies held in Washington were not the first time the paper downplayed peace activism.
  • \r\n

  • Action Alert
  • \r\n

\r\n

Section(s): 

Can the New York Times Count—or Quote—Peace Activists?

    \r\n
  • The rallies held in Washington were not the first time the paper downplayed peace activism.
  • \r\n

  • Action Alert
  • \r\n

\r\n

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting<>

Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, the New York Times has downplayed and distorted peace rallies and demonstrations against a military response.

After thousands of anti-war activists gathered in Washington, D.C. on September 29, the Times responded with a 10-sentence story, under the headline "Protesters in Washington Urge Peace with Terrorists." Given that a call for bringing terrorists to justice through non-military means was central to the rallies, the headline is a gross mischaracterization of the protesters' message.

The Times also misreported other basic facts, like the size of the crowd in Washington. The Times estimated that a "few hundred protesters" were on hand, while the official police estimate was 7,000 (Washington Post, 9/30/01). One only had to watch the live coverage on C-SPAN to know the Times was way off.

More...

Related:

Action Alert: Please call on the New York Times to improve its coverage of the peace movement by including the perspectives of anti-war activists in its reporting about the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks. (New York Times 229 West 43rd St. New York, NY 10036-3959 nytnews@nytimes.com Toll free comment line: 1-888-NYT-NEWS)

If you liked reading this article, consider contributing a cuppa jove to Evergreene Digest--using the donation button in the above right-hand corner—so we can bring you more just like it.

Section(s): 

Haiti: 1,000 dead, who cares?

    \r\n
  • Haiti and media hypocrisy
  • \r\n

  • Haiti: The white curse
  • \r\n

\r\n

Sokari Ekine, New Internationalist

A leaked email from a BBC editor highlights the Western media’s lack of interest in Haiti.

\r\n

David Edwards writes:

\r\n

“The whistleblower’s editor had listed several stories which he described as “not that interesting”, followed by the comment: “Dull stories - every one of them, don’t you think?” These were the stories:

\r\n

\r\n
    \r\n
  • “The leading anti-drugs judge in Afghanistan has been assassinated.
  • \r\n

  • “There’s been an angry reaction in France following the magazine publication of photos of Taleban fighters displaying trophies they’d stripped from French soldiers killed in an ambush.
  • \r\n

  • “The authorities in Haiti say the number of those killed in the wake of Tropical Storm Hanna has risen to more than sixty.
  • \r\n

  • “A United Nations report says the world’s wealthiest countries are failing to deliver on their promises to boost development aid.”
  • \r\n

\r\n

\r\n

More...

\r\n

Related:

\r\n

Haiti: The white curse, Eduardo Galeano, New Internationalist
Haiti is a country that has been thrown away, as an eternal punishment of its dignity. There it lies, like scrap metal. It awaits the hands of its people.

\r\n

If you liked reading this article, consider contributing a cuppa jove to Evergreene Digest--using the donation button above—so we can bring you more just like it.

Section(s): 

Caving in and turning over the free and open Internet to the big phone and cable companies

\r\n

    \r\n
  • Call and help stop the Waxman Net Neutrality cave
  • \r\n

  • Net Neutrality Bill Gives FCC No New Rulemaking Power
  • \r\n

\r\n

Progressive Change Campaign Committee

Submitted by Evergreene Digest Contributing Editor Will Shapira

Urgent news -- it's hard to believe, but Representative Henry Waxman may be about to cave and turn over the free and open Internet to the big phone and cable companies.

The National Journal is reporting that Waxman just cut a deal that would kill Net Neutrality -- the First Amendment of the Internet -- and he's pushing House leaders to hold a vote this year.

The Washington Post is calling it a "big win for the Bells and cable." But ending the Internet's level playing field and letting big corporations control whose opinions get heard more online would make the rest of us big losers.

House leadership can stop this bill. Can you call Speaker Pelosi and DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen? Tell them the worst thing for Democrats before a big election is another cave to corporations -- and they should kill Waxman's bill. Click here for the numbers and a script.

A world without Net Neutrality means that free speech online is replaced with speech for the highest bidder. Is that more likely to be you or Fox News?

The National Journal reports that under Waxman's bill, "nondiscrimination language does not apply to wireless providers" -- meaning, phone and cable companies could kill free speech on that little thing known as wireless internet (aka the future of the Internet).

The bill "leaves open their ability to block applications" and actively blocks the FCC's request to "allow the government to impose rules designed to preserve the Internet's openness."

At a time when Democrats need to inspire people to vote, a bill that caves and gives control of the Internet to big corporations is about the worst idea possible. Let's make that clear!

Can you call Speaker Pelosi and DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen? Tell them to use their clout to kill Waxman's bill -- click here for the numbers and a script.

Thanks for being a bold progressive,

Jason Rosenbaum, Adam Green, Julia Rosen, Stephanie Taylor, and the rest of the PCCC team

Related:

Net Neutrality Bill Gives FCC No New Rulemaking Power, Eliza Krigman, Tech Daily Dose

\r\n

    \r\n
  • The FCC will not have rulemaking authority under a network neutrality bill that key House Democrats plan to introduce soon, according to a recent draft obtained by Tech Daily Dose.
  • \r\n

  • Jim Hightower: The fight for net neutrality
  • \r\n

\r\n

Section(s): 

Updated: Net Neutrality Bill Gives FCC No New Rulemaking Power

\r\n

    \r\n
  • Caving in and turning over the free and open Internet to the big phone and cable companies
  • \r\n

  • The FCC will not have rulemaking authority under a network neutrality bill that key House Democrats plan to introduce soon, according to a recent draft obtained by Tech Daily Dose.
  • \r\n

  • Jim Hightower: The fight for net neutrality
  • \r\n

\r\n

Eliza Krigman, Tech Daily Dose

The FCC will not have rulemaking authority under a network neutrality bill that key House Democrats plan to introduce soon, according to a recent draft obtained by Tech Daily Dose.

\r\n

Instead, the commission will deal with enforcement on a case-by-case basis. Broadband providers who violate the law will face a maximum penalty of $2 million by the FCC, under the bill.

\r\n

The absence of the rulemaking authority, along with other provisions of the bill, is consistent with information reported by Tech Daily Dose last week (Sep 19-25).

\r\n

More...

\r\n

Related:

\r\n

Caving in and turning over the free and open Internet to the big phone and cable companies, Progressive Change Campaign Committee

\r\n

    \r\n
  • Call and help stop the Waxman Net Neutrality cave
  • \r\n

  • Net Neutrality Bill Gives FCC No New Rulemaking Power
  • \r\n

\r\n

FCC Chief Concedes Slow Pace,  Amy Schatz, Wall Street Journal | NY

\r\n

    \r\n
  • Key parts of the Obama administration's technology agenda are stalled at the Federal Communications Commission, its chairman acknowledged Monday (Sep 27), but he said he's impatient to move forward on them as soon as possible.
  • \r\n

  • Julius Genachowski took over the FCC 15 months ago with an ambitious to-do list, including a plan to improve U.S. broadband service and a promise that he would prevent phone and cable companies from interfering with Internet traffic.
  • \r\n

\r\n

Jim Hightower: The fight for net neutrality, Jim Hightower, Hightower Lowdown
Big biz wants to own the information superhighway while We the People bump along the backroads

\r\n

If you liked reading this article, consider contributing a cuppa jove to Evergreene Digest--using the donation button above—so we can bring you more just like it.

Section(s): 

Move to cancel U film's airing draws backlash

    \r\n
  • U delays debut of film on Mississippi River pollution
  • \r\n

  • The documentary on farming and river pollution was criticized as unfair, but backers disagree.
  • \r\n

\r\n

Tom Meersman, Minneapolis Star Tribune | MN

Submitted by Evergreene Digest Contributing Editor Paul Oman

\r\n

The executive producer of a documentary about farming, pollution and the Mississippi River said Monday that the University of Minnesota made a rash mistake in canceling its broadcast on public television.

\r\n

Barbara Coffin, head of the film unit at the U's Bell Museum of Natural History, spoke for the first time about what she called "our messy internal confusion."

\r\n

More...

\r\n

Related:

\r\n

U delays debut of film on Mississippi River pollution, Minnesota Daily

\r\n

(University vice president of relations Karen Himle, who canceled the airing) lists her husband’s public relations firm, Himle Horner Inc.,  as an outside source of income on her University-required conflict of interest form. The company has represented the Minnesota Agri-Growth Council,  which lobbies for agribusiness. (Ed note: Himle's husband has an affiliation with big agribusiness as well as candidate Tom Horner.)

\r\n

 

Section(s): 

Pages

Subscribe to Media