Be The Media

Powell for president

From Broadcasting & Cable, by John Eggerton:

"Regardless of who wins Tuesday’s presidential election, Federal Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell is likely to leave his post next year — as soon as January if Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) prevails and names a Democrat to run the agency.

So, naturally, the rumor mill churning out speculation over Powell’s next stop. There is persistent talk he will be a candidate for president...of William & Mary, his alma mater in Williamsburg, Va."

Was Bush wired? Sure looks like it.

From Mother Jones, by Dave Lindorff:

"A leading NASA scientist who normally spends his days analyzing and enhancing photo images sent across the depths of space by the Cassini and other space probes has turned his expertise to images of the president in his three debates. His conclusion: "George Bush is obviously wearing something — probably a receiver of some kind — under his jacket for each debate."

While the mainstream media for the most part failed to press the matter further, Charles Gibson of ABC's Good Morning America show, in an interview with the president, did ask him for an explanation. Bush replied that the bulge had been the result of a "poorly tailored shirt." Gibson didn't press the matter, and didn't ask about the bulges that were evident during the subsequent debates.

A call to the Bush campaign press office on Oct. 29 elicited the same response: it was a badly tailored shirt.

The problem, of course, is that with photos showing that the bulge was apparent at all three debates, this would mean that the president either wore the same bad shirt on all three occasions (he changed jackets and ties), or that he has a whole wardrobe of similarly ill-fitting shirts.

Besides, it would be hard to imagine any shirt, however outsized, making the prominent bulged-out shapes disclosed by Dr. Nelson's investigation of the photos.


Nelson's work makes one thing abundantly clear: the White House, the Bush campaign, and the president himself ­have been lying about the bulge in his suit.

Nelson says that for several weeks he has tried to interest the major media outlets in photos he had worked on from the first debate, to no avail. "

Web offers hefty voice to critics of mainstream journalists

From the New York Times, by Jim Rutenberg:

"Practicing cheap and dirty politics, playing fast and loose with the facts and even lying: Accusations like these, and worse, have been slung nonstop this year.

The accused in this case are not the candidates, but the mainstream news media. And the accusers are an ever-growing army of Internet writers, many of them partisans, who reach hundreds of thousands of people a day.

Many of the Internet writers say they have been empowered by the Web to begin serving as a long-needed real-time check on mainstream outlets and reporters who they say wield too much power, sometimes irresponsibly and often with hidden partisan motives.

"The traditional players, including the press, have lost some of the control or exclusive control they used to have," said Jay Rosen, chairman of the journalism department at New York University, who keeps his own Web log, or blog."

Networks of influence: The political power of the communications industry

From Center for Public Integrity, by John Dunbar, Daniel Lathrop and Robert Morlino:

"A new Center for Public Integrity investigation of campaign contributions, lobbying expenditures and other spending shows that the communications industry has spent $1.1 billion since 1998 to affect election outcomes and influence legislation before Congress and the White House.

The report focuses on the three primary communications industry sectors that control the information pipelines in the United States – broadcasting, cable television and telecommunications. Researchers also examined lobbying and contribution activity of other companies regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, including satellite television and radio companies.

In addition to corporate spending on lobbying and campaign contributions, the total includes industry-funded trips for members of the House and Senate committees that oversee the FCC. Center researchers also undertook an unprecedented study of former key FCC and congressional officials who left their government jobs for positions in the communications field.

A breakdown shows:

Total lobbying expenditures from 1998 through mid-2004 by the industry were more than $957 million. In comparison, the oil and gas industry spent $396 million over the same period, the Center has found.
Campaign contributions from 1998 through September 2004 were $145.6 million. The total includes both hard and soft money donations from industry employees, labor unions representing employees in the communications industry and political action committees.
The Center identified 450 industry-funded trips valued at $704,229 from 2000 through March of 2004. "

Report: 'Huge fortune' spent on media influence

From Reuters by Brooks Boliek:

"Unions and big communications companies spent more than $1.1 billion in their efforts to elect lawmakers and influence the government over the past half-decade, according to a report released Wednesday.

A Center for Public Integrity investigation found that the communications industry:

-Spent $957 million in its efforts to lobby Congress and the Federal Communications Commission from 1998 through June. By comparison, the oil and gas industry spent $396 million over the same period, the report said.

"These companies are spending not a small fortune but a huge fortune to try to get the government to do what they want the government to do, and it's going up every year," Center for Public Integrity project manager John Dunbar said.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the Communications Workers of America topped the list of industry campaign donors, giving $12.4 million and $12.1 million, respectively. Verizon was the top company, giving $10.7 million, and Time Warner and NBC Universal owner General Electric gave $8.2 million and $6.6 million, respectively, to campaigns, ranking sixth and seventh.

Viacom gave $4 million, the Walt Disney Co. donated $3.5 million and News Corp. contributed $3.3 million.

Traditional telephone companies spent the most on lobbying by ponying up nearly $500 million to influence government officials. Broadcasters spent $222.3 million, and cable operators spent $119.9 million on influence peddling.

The cozy relationship between the communications industry and officialdom also is illustrated by the number of people on corporate payrolls who once worked at the FCC or for key members of Congress or the committees. Nearly 400 people who once worked as government watchdogs overseeing the communications industries in some capacity now work for the companies they once oversaw.

"It makes me worry about the people who work for the government," Dunbar said. "I can just see the guy whose friend who works two cubicles down suddenly goes to work for a company at four times his salary thinking, 'Why should I keep doing this?' It raises the question: Who is really watching out for the public interest?"

Now It's Howard Stern vs. Colin Powell

From the Associated Press, carried on ABC:

"Foul-mouthed radio personality Howard Stern has another Powell to reckon with: Secretary of State Colin Powell. The nation's top diplomat came to the defense of his son, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell, after Stern said the younger Powell only got the job because of his family name.

Colin Powell labeled the accusation "just so much nonsense." "My son is an enormously qualified individual, and I think he has served if I may so as a father and as a not so distant observer with great distinction," Powell said Wednesday in an interview with CNBC.

"How did you get your job?" Stern asked. "It is apparent to most of us in broadcasting that your father got you your job, and you kind of sit there and you're the judge, you're the arbiter, you're the one who tells us what we can and can't say on the air."

Stern added, "I really don't even think you're qualified to be the head of the commission."

Powell responded, 'I think it's a cheap shot to say just because my father is famous, I don't belong in my position.'

The Ronn Owens broadcast with Michael Powell and Howard Stern can be found here.

BBC news boss slams US media bias

From ABC News Online, by Reuters:

"The head of the BBC's news operations has accused United States media organisations of being overly patriotic in their coverage of the lead-up to the Iraq war.

"Before Iraq, it seemed to me that some US news broadcasters wrapped themselves in the flag and, as a consequence, did not perform the role the public expects of them," said Richard Sambrook, director of the BBC's global news division.

"Our natural instinct is to support our country. But the responsibility of the news media is to ask the difficult questions, to press, to verify," Mr Sambrook said, according to an advance copy of his speech to the Columbia Journalism School in New York. "

Madison Avenue ponders the potential of web logs

From the New York Times, by Nat Ives:

"Web logs have had an astonishing season this year, enough to freckle the faces of bloggers who do not, as a rule, get much time outdoors.

Although political blogs have received the most attention, advertising agencies and communications professionals are using blogs to create discussion about ideas within their industries.

Butler, Shine, Stern & Partners in Sausalito, Calif., produces a blog, Influx Insights (www.influx.bsands .com), that includes discussion of video game marketing. Yellowfin Direct Marketing in Boston has commented on the politics of emotion and the art of client service on its blog, A Fine Kettle of Fish (www .afinekettleoffish.blogspot.com)."

Howard Stern to Michael Powell: Who's Your Daddy?

From Howard Stern's web site:

"Yesterday afternoon, Howard Stern called into the Ronn Owens radio show on KGO 810 AM in San Francisco to talk to his guest, FCC Chairman Michael Powell. Powell was not expecting the call from Howard but said he was not nervous to talk to him. Howard tried to get Powell to admit that because Michael's father is Colin Powell, that helped him greatly in getting his job at the FCC."

Powell repeatedly denied that, saying there is no correlation between the two and insisted he was just as qualified for the job as anyone else at the FCC. Howard told Powell he was missing the point, that it's not a question of whether or not he's qualified, but why it is that out of all people, he was the one chosen by the Bush Administration to run the FCC?

Howard played a bunch of news reports about his confrontation with Powell yesterday. It was a huge news story, but Howard made the point that it really shouldn't be. Powell is a public servant that should be questioned by journalists and the people all the time. Everyone is Powell's boss, including Howard, and the fact that he got to talk to Powell by calling into a radio show should be a non-story, not a huge story. Howard said if journalists did they jobs and asked the hard questions, and if Powell actually went to public meetings and took questions from the people, then this wouldn't be that big of a deal. The fact that it is a big deal just goes to show how Powell and the FCC aren't being held accountable by anyone. Howard heard that Powell's people threw a fit after Howard got off the phone with him. Howard said that shouldn't happen, because Powell should be able to answer questions from anyone. They shouldn't put him in a protective bubble and keep him from talking to the public he serves."

The Ronn Owens broadcast with Michael Powell and Howard Stern can be found here.

Cable companies see surge in net business

From Associated Press, by Michael Rubinkam:

"The cable industry's foray into high-speed Internet service continues to pay off, with Comcast Corp. and Cox Communications Inc. both reporting hundreds of thousands of new broadband subscribers - and double-digit revenue increases.

The gains buoyed investors, who sent the shares higher despite profits that fell short of expectations.

Comcast, the nation's biggest cable television company, said Wednesday it added a record number of new high-speed Internet subscribers in the third quarter, helping boost revenue by 12.1 percent. The company now has 6.5 million broadband subscribers.

Atlanta-based Cox, the No. 3 cable company, said that high-speed Internet subscriptions increased 32 percent to 2.4 million customers, helping lead to an 11 percent revenue jump. Cox swung to a third-quarter profit, though recent Florida hurricanes and an unfavorable legal ruling hurt net income. "