Home » Posts tagged with » media (Page 240)
L’Oréal’s Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington ad campaigns banned

Advertising watchdog upholds complaints by Liberal Democrat MP Jo Swinson that images overly airbrushed L’Oréal has been forced to pull ad campaigns featuring Pretty Woman star Julia Roberts and supermodel Christy Turlington, after the advertising watchdog upheld complaints by Liberal Democrat MP Jo Swinson that the images were overly airbrushed. Swinson, who has waged a long-running campaign against “overly perfected and unrealistic images” of women in adverts, lodged complaints with the Advertising Standards Authority about the magazine campaigns for L’Oréal-owned brands Lancôme and Maybelline. The ASA ruled that both ads breached the advertising standards code for exaggeration and being misleading and banned them from future publication. L’Oréal’s two-page ad featuring Roberts, who is the face of Lancôme, promoted a foundation called Teint Miracle, which it claims creates a “natural light” that emanates from beautiful skin. It was shot by renowned fashion photographer Mario Testino. The ad for Maybelline featured Turlington promoting a foundation called The Eraser, which is claimed to be an “anti-ageing” product. In the ad, parts of Turlington’s face are shown covered by the foundation while other parts are not, in order to show the effects of the product. Swinson complained that images of both celebrities had been digitally manipulated and were “not representative of the results the product could achieve”. L’Oréal UK admitted that Turlington’s image had been “digitally retouched to lighten the skin, clean up makeup, reduce dark shadows and shading around the eyes, smooth the lips and darken the eyebrows”. However, it claimed there were still signs of ageing, such as crow’s feet, and that the image “accurately illustrated” the achieveable results. The company, which provided the ASA with pictures of both women “on the red carpet” to show that they were naturally beautiful, admitted that digital post-production techniques had been used on Roberts but maintained that the changes were not “directly relevant” and that the ad was an “aspirational picture”. Swinson said it was “shocking” that the ASA was not allowed to see the pre-production pictures of Roberts due to contractual agreements with the actor. “It shows just how ridiculous things have become when there is such fear over an unairbrushed photo that even the advertising regulator isn’t permitted to see it,” she added. In the case of both the Roberts and Turlington ads the ASA said it was not provided with enough information to evaluate what impact the digital enhancements had on the final image. “On the basis of the evidence we had received we could not conclude that the ad image accurately illustrated what effect the product could achieve, and that the image had not been exaggerated by digital post-production techniques,” the ASA said. “Pictures of flawless skin and super-slim bodies are all around, but they don’t reflect reality,” said Swinson. “Excessive airbrushing and digital manipulation techniques have become the norm, but both Christy Turlington and Julia Roberts are naturally beautiful women who don’t need retouching to look great. This ban sends a powerful message to advertisers – let’s get back to reality.” • To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly “for publication”. • To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook Advertising Advertising Standards Authority Julia Roberts Models Mark Sweney guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Probation officers spend 75% of time not dealing with offenders, report finds

Justice select committee report reveals much of their time taken up by computer work and red tape Probation officers spend three-quarters of their time on work that does not involve them in direct contact with offenders, according to a report by the Commons justice select committee. The MPs say they accept that probation officers have to do a certain amount of work that does not involve dealing directly with offenders but are “staggered” to find it can be as much as 75%. “No one would suggest that it would be acceptable for teachers (who also have to do preparatory work and maintain paperwork) to spend three-quarters of their time not teaching,” say the MPs. “The value which really effective probation officers can add comes primarily from their direct contact with offenders.” The report says the rest of the probation officer’s time is split between computer activity, drafting correspondence and reports, meetings and dealing with other red tape. The MPs took evidence from one chief probation officer who said it was true that a routine offender in the middle of their order might be seen for only 10 minutes but a serious violent offender who was coming out of prison would mean several hours a week contact time. The MPs say that a “tick-box culture” imposed by the advent of the national offender management service [Noms], which took over prison and probation a decade ago, is part of the root cause of this growth in bureaucracy. The justice select committee in their report on the role of the probation service also calls for the government’s “payment by results” plans to open up probation to competition to be looked at again. The MPs argue that while there is a lot of scope for new organisations to provide probation services there is a danger that payment by results will overlook the rights of victims and offenders’ obligations towards them. The committee’s report is highly critical about the impact of Noms on the probation service, which it describes as a prison service takeover. The MPs want to see an external review of the future of Noms, saying its creation has not led to a joined-up treatment of offenders and it has not proved itself proficient at handling national contracts such as for bail accommodation and facilities management. Harry Fletcher of Napo, the probation union, said: “The report confirms that Noms has been a major problem from the start. Napo warned in 2004 that Noms would be a bureaucratic nightmare. It is scandalous that probation staff now spend 75% of their time on form-filling and responding to centrally driven emails. Even Daniel Sonnex, who brutally murdered two French students three years ago was seen for just 20 minutes a week. “The last 10 years has witnessed a massive rise in the constant government monitoring of probation staff to the detriment of face-to-face contact with offenders. This does not enhance public protection but undermines it. This flawed historical trend must be reversed,” he said. Prisons and probation UK criminal justice Alan Travis guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Probation officers spend 75% of time not dealing with offenders, report finds

Justice select committee report reveals much of their time taken up by computer work and red tape Probation officers spend three-quarters of their time on work that does not involve them in direct contact with offenders, according to a report by the Commons justice select committee. The MPs say they accept that probation officers have to do a certain amount of work that does not involve dealing directly with offenders but are “staggered” to find it can be as much as 75%. “No one would suggest that it would be acceptable for teachers (who also have to do preparatory work and maintain paperwork) to spend three-quarters of their time not teaching,” say the MPs. “The value which really effective probation officers can add comes primarily from their direct contact with offenders.” The report says the rest of the probation officer’s time is split between computer activity, drafting correspondence and reports, meetings and dealing with other red tape. The MPs took evidence from one chief probation officer who said it was true that a routine offender in the middle of their order might be seen for only 10 minutes but a serious violent offender who was coming out of prison would mean several hours a week contact time. The MPs say that a “tick-box culture” imposed by the advent of the national offender management service [Noms], which took over prison and probation a decade ago, is part of the root cause of this growth in bureaucracy. The justice select committee in their report on the role of the probation service also calls for the government’s “payment by results” plans to open up probation to competition to be looked at again. The MPs argue that while there is a lot of scope for new organisations to provide probation services there is a danger that payment by results will overlook the rights of victims and offenders’ obligations towards them. The committee’s report is highly critical about the impact of Noms on the probation service, which it describes as a prison service takeover. The MPs want to see an external review of the future of Noms, saying its creation has not led to a joined-up treatment of offenders and it has not proved itself proficient at handling national contracts such as for bail accommodation and facilities management. Harry Fletcher of Napo, the probation union, said: “The report confirms that Noms has been a major problem from the start. Napo warned in 2004 that Noms would be a bureaucratic nightmare. It is scandalous that probation staff now spend 75% of their time on form-filling and responding to centrally driven emails. Even Daniel Sonnex, who brutally murdered two French students three years ago was seen for just 20 minutes a week. “The last 10 years has witnessed a massive rise in the constant government monitoring of probation staff to the detriment of face-to-face contact with offenders. This does not enhance public protection but undermines it. This flawed historical trend must be reversed,” he said. Prisons and probation UK criminal justice Alan Travis guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

Now that streaming music online is a legal and more social option, downloading music is history. Column Five Media takes a look at who’s fueling the movement, including Spotify and Turntable.FM (July 26, 2011)

Continue reading …
Xbox 360 Wireless Headset, Media Remote announced

Microsoft has revealed some new accessories today, all sleek and black to match its current Xbox 360 S models. First is a new Xbox 360 Wireless Headset with Bluetooth, which is exactly what it sounds like. It’ll be able to connect to mobile phones, PCs, as well as to the Xbox 360 for online communication. It’s out in “early November” and it’ll run you $59.99. Next up is the Xbox 360 Media Remote, which… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Destructoid Discovery Date : 26/07/2011 12:45 Number of articles : 4

Continue reading …
Jose Antonio Vargas: my secret life as an undocumented US immigrant

The Pulitzer-prizewinning journalist was living the American dream. But as a child he had been smuggled into the US and lived in fear of deportation. Then he decided to publicly confess Two undocumented US residents tell their stories Scenes from an undocumented life, number one. Jose Antonio Vargas is in his late 20s, a remarkably successful journalist, covering the 2008 presidential campaign for the Washington Post. He takes a call from his editor. There’s a political meeting he needs to attend. Vargas leaves the gay bar he has been visiting for a story in Gun Barrel City, Texas, gets in his car and starts speeding along the highway. A sheriff stops him. Vargas hands over his driving licence, secured through a social security number that was in turn secured through a fake passport. He waits. He tries to control his nerves. He is worried he might wet himself. Only a few of his close friends know he’s what some Americans disparagingly call “an illegal” and others call an undocumented immigrant. “I remember thinking,” he says, “I’m a political reporter for the Washington Post. I’m in Texas, I’m covering the primaries , he’s going to go back to his car, and he’s going to put my details into the system, and how long is it going to take him to find out?” Vargas is certain the sheriff is about to discover his secret: that he was sent to the US from the Philippines by his mother, aged 12; that he then grew up with his grandparents, naturalised US citizens, and only learned he was undocumented by accident, aged 16; that he has been trying to make his way as best he can, not always lawfully, ever since. He confides to the sheriff that he’s on his way to an important story. The sheriff takes pity. Vargas drives on. Scenes from an undocumented life, number two. Vargas finds out he has a Wikipedia page . This shouldn’t be surprising. Since riding his bike to a fire for his first story, for his local paper, the Mountain View Voice, in 1999 , he has pursued his career with blistering drive . His editors at the Washington Post put him forward for a Pulitzer nomination for his moving, deeply researched series about the city’s Aids crisis when he is in his mid-20s. Two years later, aged 27, he actually wins a Pulitzer , as part of the team that covers the Virginia Tech massacre for the paper. After this triumph, he sits in the office bathroom thinking (he mimes slumping despair): “What do I do now? What else can I do?” He interviews Al Gore for Rolling Stone magazine . He is assigned to interview one of the most famous and famously private men in the world, Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, for the New Yorker (a magazine that tops the wishlist for young, ambitious American writers who hope to be noticed). And all the while he is feeling sick at the growing scrutiny. He chose to become a journalist because it represented a form of validation. “I remember the first article I ever wrote, and I saw my name in the paper, and I already knew I was undocumented and I was thinking: how can they now say I don’t exist?” But this validation came with extraordinary risks. “The more successful I got, the more scared I got,” he says, when we meet on a sultry summer day in Manhattan. “My name was all over Google. I had a Wikipedia page I was terrified to look at. And so I just snapped. I thought: if I’m going to come out with this, I’m going to do it in a big way. And not just for myself. This can’t just be my story.” When Vargas revealed his secret in a 4,000-word article in the New York Times last month, it became the most-shared article on Google that week, and he became the best-known undocumented immigrant in the US. You might think it would be easy to achieve this last distinction. After all, as Vargas says, the life of the undocumented immigrant is “to lay low. You don’t talk about it.” Many are forced to cut short their education, and make their living in a shadow economy, in low-paid, cash-in-hand jobs. But over the past few years, in a country with an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants, some have tired of the constraints, slurs and stigma, the emptiness and oddness of an immigration debate devoid of undocumented immigrants themselves. And so they have been coming out, declaring themselves “undocumented and unafraid” , and putting themselves at immediate risk of deportation. They have staged marches , rallies , sit-ins , and public coming-out actions . Many are young people, students. People such as Gaby Pacheco, a 26-year-old woman whose parents are originally from Ecuador, who has lived in the US since she was eight. Last year, Pacheco and three fellow activists walked from Florida to Washington DC – 1,500 miles – to demand change ; three, including Pacheco, were undocumented immigrants, one had just obtained legal residency. They were marching for access to higher education, worker’s rights, and to stop deportations and the separation of families. “We were seeing so many children who were being sent from house to house, with neighbours taking care of them, because their parents had been deported,” she says. In 2006, after Pacheco talked openly about her status, someone reported her to the authorities. “One morning, very early, immigration knocked really loudly, and came into our house and rounded us up. That was terrifying.” Pacheco had a temporary student visa, so was released, and continued to speak out. She now works as national co-ordinator of the group Education Not Deportation (End), helps people challenge removal proceedings against them, and is also furthering her own ambitions. When she was 17, she says, she naively thought, “I would have my PhD by now. My dream is to open a music therapy centre and create curriculums specifically for autistic adults, and people with Down’s syndrome.” She has finished her bachelor’s degree, but is ineligible for funding for further study. If a vote on the Dream Act had been successful last year, Pacheco might have had a clear path to her ambitions. Dream stands for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors. The act was first proposed 10 years ago, and polls suggest it is supported by a majority of the US population . It would allow people brought to the country as minors a path to permanent residency status, either by pursuing a college education, or through military service. Pacheco and her fellow activists lobbied hard for this legal change, but were unsuccessful. On 18 December last year, the senate voted on the bill ; 60 votes in favour were needed for it to proceed. It fell just short at 55 (41 voted against it). Pacheco was devastated, and moved to Washington DC so the legislators would have a human face to answer to. “I decided to come and live here, to continue fighting, to be a constant reminder to senators that they voted no to an individual, an individual who wants to work in special education.” Vargas had been watching Pacheco’s walk with interest, as well as following groups such as UnitedWeDream and DreamActivist on Twitter. When the Dream Act failed, it was a turning point for him too. That day, he took a long walk from his home in Manhattan to the Brooklyn bridge, and decided it was time to tell his story . Coming out as an undocumented immigrant involves obvious risks. Last week, for instance, Vargas’s driving licence – his main proof of identity – was revoked . This was inevitable, he says, when he published the article, because it documented the subterfuge involved in securing the licence, and so he had already decided to stop driving. “I came forward in the article to say I had broken these laws, and I don’t want to break them any more, and now I have to live an alternative kind of life,” he says. It was on a trip to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), aged 16, to obtain a driving permit, that he first discovered he wasn’t a legal US resident. When he handed over his green card, the clerk told him it was fake, and he suddenly faced a very different life from the one he had expected. One lawyer told Vargas that publishing his story was “legal suicide”, but he decided he was ready for the consequences. The conversation around immigration in the US is as febrile as ever – think of all the bizarre, often offensive debate that took place around Barack Obama’s citizenship status, the dogged pursuit of his birth certificate by those in the “birther movement” . As that debate raged, deportations were taking place at an enormous rate: almost 800,000 people have been deported during Obama’s time in office . And Vargas could potentially follow them. Since telling his story, Vargas has been criticised for the lies he has told to get by. Some have suggested these undermine his entire career as a journalist, which depends on truth and transparency. But for him, he says, the question is: “What did I lie about, and why did I have to lie about it? It would be another issue if they found lies in the news articles. In many ways I think I’ve always overcompensated. I was always almost too careful, because I knew if anybody ever found any way to doubt my work, then they’d start picking my life apart too. The question I’ve been asking everybody is: what would you have done? Would you have just stopped? Would you have just started waiting tables? Would you have just gotten married, even though you were gay?” Vargas came out as gay in his late teens, causing a short rift with his grandfather, who, as a Catholic, was upset on religious grounds – and also because this closed the most obvious path to citizenship. A few years later, Vargas visited a lawyer for advice. He was told his only chance for legal residency was to go back to the Philippines, stay for 10 years, and then apply to return. The conversation left him devastated. This would mean travelling back to a country he hardly knew, and a family he hadn’t seen for years; it’s now 18 years since he last saw his mother. He hasn’t seen his half-sister since she was two (she is now 20), and he has never met his 14-year-old half-brother. Now Vargas has dedicated himself to re-framing and elevating the debate around immigration. He has started a group called Define American , and emails have been flooding in, both from undocumented immigrants and the people who help and protect them. He says he set up the group because “the way we talk about immigration is broken. The only reason my story got the traction it did online is because other people see themselves in it. They see themselves as me, or as one of the people who helped me.” His story includes many instances of exemplary kindness: his school principal went so far as to consider adopting him , his choir teacher switched a school trip from Japan to Hawaii so he could attend, one of his mentors at the Washington Post put his own job and reputation on the line to keep Vargas employed there after he told him his secret . “That’s the only reason why this story spoke as much as it did, because so many people are involved . . . The strategy now is how do we make sure we’re not just talking among ourselves with this issue? How do we talk to people who don’t agree with us? How do we target people who haven’t quite made up their minds? How do we reach the persuadable middle, who we can persuade through facts and individual stories?” There will be hard questions along the way about where immigration lines are drawn. Vargas says he’s ready to face them. “I’m more than willing to go to places and talk to people who believe that I am an illegal alien, who deserves to be jailed. I want to look them in the eye and say: ‘What makes you think I’m any different from you?’ I think for our generation immigration rights is a civil rights issue.” He has already, unsurprisingly, faced racist comments, with people online telling him to “go home”. “I think, which home?” he says. “My home is 30 blocks away. I’m home right now. Where do you want me to go?” More information: defineamerican.com US immigration Kira Cochrane guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Dominique Strauss-Kahn court date put back by prosecution

Former IMF chief’s lawyers hope prosecutors will have decided to dismiss case by 23 August, when trial is now due Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s court date in New York has been postponed from 1 August to 23 August as prosecutors continue investigating. His lawyers said they hope that by then prosecutors will have decided to dismiss the case. The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment, but prosecutors had said on 1 July the case had weakened because the hotel maid he is accused of raping had lied to them on her background and was inconsistent about her actions right after the encounter. Strauss-Kahn, the former IMF chief, denies charges of sexual assault. Dominique Strauss-Kahn France United States Europe guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
No 10 boss attended Scotland Yard dinner with ex-NoW deputy Neil Wallis

Details of all contacts between ministers and News International reveal that Wallis and Ed Llewellyn, the chief of No 10 staff, attended a dinner hosted by Sir Paul Stephenson Ed Llewellyn, David Cameron’s chief of staff, last night found himself in the spotlight over phone hacking for the second time in a week after No 10 announced that he attended a Scotland Yard dinner attended by Neil Wallis, the former deputy editor of the News of the World. Llewellyn and Andy Coulson, then communications director at No 10, attended a dinner hosted by Sir Paul Stephenson when he was Metropolitan police commissioner on 17 June last year. Wallis, once Coulson’s deputy at the News of the World, had been hired as a media adviser by the Met and was present at the dinner. Earlier this month Wallis was arrested by the Met as part of Operation Weeting, the main investigation into allegations of phone hacking. Downing Street sources played down the significance of the dinner. Last week Llewellyn was forced to release emails to show that, last September, he rebuffed an offer from the outgoing Met assistant commissioner, John Yates, to discuss the phone-hacking scandal. Yates made the offer after an article in the New York Times put new pressure on Coulson. A No 10 source said last night: “Ed was late for the dinner because he was dealing with an urgent party matter that night. He was in and out of the dinner as he took calls. Is it odd for the prime minister’s chief of staff to meet the Met commissioner? No, it is not.” But Labour, which was informed of the dinner in a letter to the frontbencher Kevin Brennan, is likely to ask questions about Llewellyn’s decision to meet the Met commissioner in the company of Wallis at a time when questions were being asked about the links between the Yard and News International. One No 10 source said: “The first Ed remembered of the dinner was when he saw Neil Wallis’s picture on television.” The disclosure of the Yard dinner came as the Cabinet Office released information showing that George Osborne has held 16 meetings with News International executives since the election and Michael Gove has met Rupert Murdoch six times. Ministers’ contacts with News International executives continued until recent weeks after police had arrested senior News of the World journalists. Osborne met Rebekah Brooks on five occasions in the year following the 2010 general election. The chancellor met James Murdoch on four occasions and Rupert Murdoch twice. In total, he attended 16 meetings at which News International executives were present. Gove, a former senior Times journalist, met Rupert Murdoch on three occasions between 19 May and 26 June this year. A dinner on 26 June came just 10 days after Gove met Murdoch for dinner on 16 June. A spokesman for the education secretary said: “Michael worked for the BBC and News International, and his wife works for News International now. He’s known Rupert Murdoch for over a decade. He did not discuss the BSkyB deal with the Murdochs and isn’t at all embarrassed about his meetings, most of which have been about education, which is his job.” Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, met James Murdoch on two occasions in January this year to discuss the News Corp bid to take full control of BSkyB. Hunt was handed control of media takeovers in December after Vince Cable was stripped of his powers in the wake of the disclosure of a recording in which he told undercover journalists that he had “declared war” on Murdoch. The culture department has already published details of the meetings. In the first meeting Hunt told Murdoch that he had a duty to inform him that he had received the Ofcom report on the BSkyB bid. Hunt told Murdoch he had the right to reply. In the second meeting Hunt told Murdoch that he was minded to refer the bid to the Competition Commission, though he would consider any undertakings from News Corp. Osborne’s News International charm offensive, following his appointment as shadow chancellor by Michael Howard in 2005, paid off when the Conservatives came to power as part of the coalition. Osborne, who became particularly close to James Murdoch because they have children of a similar age, first met him after the election at a meeting also attended by Brooks. Murdoch and Brooks had another joint meeting in April this year. Osborne met Rupert Murdoch in May last year, the first of two meetings during the year. They also met for dinner in New York on 17 December last year, four days before Cable was stripped of his responsibility for media takeovers. The chancellor invited Elisabeth Murdoch, the tycoon’s daughter, and James Harding, the editor of the Times who was a few years above Osborne at St Paul’s School, to his 40th birthday party at Dorneywood last month. A Treasury source said that Osborne did not discuss the BSkyB bid with any of the News International executives after making clear shortly after the election that Cable was in charge of media takeovers. A Treasury spokesman said: “Early on in the process George explained this was a matter for Vince Cable alone and he could not get involved. It was not raised at any other discussion.” A source said that Osborne has no recollection of having discussed phone hacking with the executives. Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, told LBC News: “There have been shenanigans going on here, and until we know what actually was said in the meetings, the fact of the meetings doesn’t prove it one way or the other. It just does raise rather a lot of questions about whether politics was being played over commercially sensitive matters like this.” The Yard dinner is likely to raise questions for Stephenson, who played down the significance of Wallis when he appeared before MPs last week after his resignation as commissioner. He told the home affairs select committee: “Mr Wallis was never employed to be my personal assistant or to provide personal advice to me … He had a very part-time, minor role.” Phone hacking Sir Paul Stephenson Rupert Murdoch Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers James Murdoch Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
No 10 boss attended Scotland Yard dinner with ex-NoW deputy Neil Wallis

Details of all contacts between ministers and News International reveal that Wallis and Ed Llewellyn, the chief of No 10 staff, attended a dinner hosted by Sir Paul Stephenson Ed Llewellyn, David Cameron’s chief of staff, last night found himself in the spotlight over phone hacking for the second time in a week after No 10 announced that he attended a Scotland Yard dinner attended by Neil Wallis, the former deputy editor of the News of the World. Llewellyn and Andy Coulson, then communications director at No 10, attended a dinner hosted by Sir Paul Stephenson when he was Metropolitan police commissioner on 17 June last year. Wallis, once Coulson’s deputy at the News of the World, had been hired as a media adviser by the Met and was present at the dinner. Earlier this month Wallis was arrested by the Met as part of Operation Weeting, the main investigation into allegations of phone hacking. Downing Street sources played down the significance of the dinner. Last week Llewellyn was forced to release emails to show that, last September, he rebuffed an offer from the outgoing Met assistant commissioner, John Yates, to discuss the phone-hacking scandal. Yates made the offer after an article in the New York Times put new pressure on Coulson. A No 10 source said last night: “Ed was late for the dinner because he was dealing with an urgent party matter that night. He was in and out of the dinner as he took calls. Is it odd for the prime minister’s chief of staff to meet the Met commissioner? No, it is not.” But Labour, which was informed of the dinner in a letter to the frontbencher Kevin Brennan, is likely to ask questions about Llewellyn’s decision to meet the Met commissioner in the company of Wallis at a time when questions were being asked about the links between the Yard and News International. One No 10 source said: “The first Ed remembered of the dinner was when he saw Neil Wallis’s picture on television.” The disclosure of the Yard dinner came as the Cabinet Office released information showing that George Osborne has held 16 meetings with News International executives since the election and Michael Gove has met Rupert Murdoch six times. Ministers’ contacts with News International executives continued until recent weeks after police had arrested senior News of the World journalists. Osborne met Rebekah Brooks on five occasions in the year following the 2010 general election. The chancellor met James Murdoch on four occasions and Rupert Murdoch twice. In total, he attended 16 meetings at which News International executives were present. Gove, a former senior Times journalist, met Rupert Murdoch on three occasions between 19 May and 26 June this year. A dinner on 26 June came just 10 days after Gove met Murdoch for dinner on 16 June. A spokesman for the education secretary said: “Michael worked for the BBC and News International, and his wife works for News International now. He’s known Rupert Murdoch for over a decade. He did not discuss the BSkyB deal with the Murdochs and isn’t at all embarrassed about his meetings, most of which have been about education, which is his job.” Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, met James Murdoch on two occasions in January this year to discuss the News Corp bid to take full control of BSkyB. Hunt was handed control of media takeovers in December after Vince Cable was stripped of his powers in the wake of the disclosure of a recording in which he told undercover journalists that he had “declared war” on Murdoch. The culture department has already published details of the meetings. In the first meeting Hunt told Murdoch that he had a duty to inform him that he had received the Ofcom report on the BSkyB bid. Hunt told Murdoch he had the right to reply. In the second meeting Hunt told Murdoch that he was minded to refer the bid to the Competition Commission, though he would consider any undertakings from News Corp. Osborne’s News International charm offensive, following his appointment as shadow chancellor by Michael Howard in 2005, paid off when the Conservatives came to power as part of the coalition. Osborne, who became particularly close to James Murdoch because they have children of a similar age, first met him after the election at a meeting also attended by Brooks. Murdoch and Brooks had another joint meeting in April this year. Osborne met Rupert Murdoch in May last year, the first of two meetings during the year. They also met for dinner in New York on 17 December last year, four days before Cable was stripped of his responsibility for media takeovers. The chancellor invited Elisabeth Murdoch, the tycoon’s daughter, and James Harding, the editor of the Times who was a few years above Osborne at St Paul’s School, to his 40th birthday party at Dorneywood last month. A Treasury source said that Osborne did not discuss the BSkyB bid with any of the News International executives after making clear shortly after the election that Cable was in charge of media takeovers. A Treasury spokesman said: “Early on in the process George explained this was a matter for Vince Cable alone and he could not get involved. It was not raised at any other discussion.” A source said that Osborne has no recollection of having discussed phone hacking with the executives. Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, told LBC News: “There have been shenanigans going on here, and until we know what actually was said in the meetings, the fact of the meetings doesn’t prove it one way or the other. It just does raise rather a lot of questions about whether politics was being played over commercially sensitive matters like this.” The Yard dinner is likely to raise questions for Stephenson, who played down the significance of Wallis when he appeared before MPs last week after his resignation as commissioner. He told the home affairs select committee: “Mr Wallis was never employed to be my personal assistant or to provide personal advice to me … He had a very part-time, minor role.” Phone hacking Sir Paul Stephenson Rupert Murdoch Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers James Murdoch Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Media Skip Over Sen. Bernie Sanders’s Anti-Obama Remark

Over the past few days, media coverage has been dedicated almost entirely to the debt negotiations between President Obama and more outspoken members of Congress. As the Los Angeles Times pointed out , this let slide an interesting statement by the self-described democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, who said, “I think it would be good if President Obama faced some primary opposition.” For one of the most outspoken defenders of universal healthcare, same-sex marriage, and environmentalism to be challenging Obama signals major problems with what should be Obama's most ardent base of supporters, which is also confirmed by new polls from CBS, NBC, and ABC. The networks, however, are failing to report their own polls because they reflect poorly on the president. Obama's campaign team has been forcing a centrist image upon the president gearing up for 2012, vying for the independents who pushed him to victory in 2008. The independents were the ones who abandoned Obama first, dropping their support when America wanted solutions to the economy and jobs but all Obama wanted to do was pass healthcare through Congress. Progressive politicians like Sanders have been turned off by the centrist branding of Obama. As Sanders explained , “I think one of the reasons President Obama has moved as far to the right as he has is he thinks he can go all the way and no one will stand up to him.” Independents seem to have dumped him for the opposite reason, for being too progressive, but if Obama can't hold support from either side of the balance, then his base of support will wither away. According to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll , Sanders and the independents are not the only ones in Obama's crumbling base of support. Some of the highlights from their polling: 82% of Americans still say the job market in their area is struggling [N]early half…call it “very” difficult to find jobs in their area Ninety percent rate [the national economy] negatively, including half who give the economy the most negative rating, “poor.” [A] mere 15 percent say they're “getting ahead financially” Obama’s approval rating on handling the economy has slipped below 40 percent for the first time, to 39 percent. Fifty-seven percent disapprove, and strong disapprovers outnumber strong approvers by more than 2 to 1 Likewise, CBS found only 43% of respondents approved of Obama's handling of debt ceiling negotiations, and NBC News/Wall Street Journal found 54% disapproved of the way Obama is handling the economy as a whole. As NewsBusters and MRC's Kyle Drennen explains , though, the media avoided discussing Obama's poor polling in favor of discussing low polling numbers for Republicans. All three networks did find time to use their respective poll findings to focus blame for the stalemate on the Republican Party.

Continue reading …