Home » Posts tagged with » media (Page 701)
Between Wisconsin Senate and Assembly Vote, Power Plant Sales Reappear

A big thank-you to xoff at UppityWisconsin for this find . Remember that power plant provision ? It wasn’t in the document passed by the Senate on Wednesday. But guess what! It was changed before the Assembly vote on Thursday to include it. Thursday, the fiscal bureau was forced to correct its memo describing the bill, after unearthing some more buried treasure. Seems there were a few things the original memo forgot to mention: There are two items in the LFB’s March 10 document that are not reflected in the March 9 document. 1. The March 10 document includes a provision of the substitute amendment on the Earned Income Tax Credit (page 3, #1). 2. The March 10 document includes a provision of the substitute amendment on the Sale and Contractual Operation of State-Owned Power Plants (page 20, #1) . Here are images of the table of contents: Wednesday’s version – PDF (This was the one I used for my analysis ): enlarge Thursday’s version – PDF (voted on by Assembly as amended): enlarge Here’s the language in the second version of the document: 1. SALE AND CONTRACTUAL OPERATION OF STATE-OWNED POWER PLANTS Governor: Allow the Department of Administration (DOA) to sell any state-owned heating, cooling, or power plant or contract with private entities for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount the Department determines to be in the best interest of the state. As a reminder, that power plant provision points directly to Koch Industries , who is already advertising for power plant managers. Someone just pulled a fast one in Wisconsin. A fast one that should be illegal for so many reasons I can’t count them all. But let’s just call it this: Fraud. When will the Attorney General investigate? In the meantime, Scott Walker makes the specious and disgusting claim that the only dirty tricksters are the heroic Wisconsin 14. He gives the term “sociopath” new meaning. Click here to view this media

Continue reading …
Another ‘isolated incident’: Alaska militiamen arrested in conspiracy to kill state troopers, judges

enlarge Schaeffer Cox, center, with some of his fellow Alaska militiamen Gee, I wonder if Bill O’Reilly is still so certain that the radical right isn’t the country’s most significant domestic-terrorism threat: Five people in the Fairbanks area were arrested Thursday by state and federal law enforcement on charges connected with an alleged plot to kidnap or kill state troopers and a Fairbanks judge, according to the Alaska State Troopers. Francis “Schaeffer” Cox, Lonnie Vernon, Karen Vernon, Coleman Barney and Michael Anderson are accused of conspiring to commit murder, kidnapping, and arson, as well as weapons misconduct, hindering prosecution and tampering with evidence, according to trooper spokeswoman Megan Peters in a written statement late Thursday. An investigation “revealed extensive plans to kidnap or kill Alaska state troopers and a Fairbanks judge,” the statement said. The plans included “extensive surveillance” on the homes of two Fairbanks troopers, the statement said. “Investigation also revealed that extensive surveillance on troopers in the Fairbanks area had occurred, specifically on the locations of the homes for two Alaska state troopers,” the statement said. “Furthermore, Cox et. al. had acquired a large cache of weapons in order to carry out attacks against their targeted victims. Some of the weapons known to be in the cache are prohibited by state or federal law.” U.S. Attorney Karen Loeffler said Lonnie Vernon, 55, was arrested for threatening to kill a federal judge. She said more information about federal charges would be released today Fairbanks Police Chief Loren Zager said the operation involved multiple police actions related to Fairbanks-area members of the “sovereign citizen” movement. Of course, we were pointing out earlier this week how law enforcement officers are the first in line to be targeted by these extremists — which is why conservative hysterics over disseminating intelligence about these extremists can be so harmful. Clearly, the troopers in Alaska were well aware of the nature of the problem they had on their hands. Because it’s been around awhile. Notably, in the more recent past, Cox and his pals were part of the militia faction that supported Joe Miller in his Palin-sponsored run for the Senate. David Holthouse at Media Matters has more. It appears Cox’s issues with law enforcement first cropped up in a court hearing in December : Schaeffer Cox appeared at the Fairbanks courthouse Wednesday morning as scheduled despite saying last week he would treat another court date “like an invitation to a Tupperware party.” However, Cox, the 26-year-old head of the Alaska Peacemakers Militia, did not address the issue of a trial date on a weapons charge as the hearing was intended to do. He instead attempted to serve criminal papers and a restraining order from a “de jure court” on District Court Judge Patrick Hammers. He also told an Alaska State Trooper after the hearing the militia has the troopers “outmanmed, outgunned and we could probably have you all dead in one night.” But Cox added he could not see himself shooting someone who lives in the same town as him. About a half-dozen supporters and members of the militia accompanied Cox at the hearing. Initially, militia member Ken Thesing spoke for Cox, calling himself Cox’s representative and “counsel before God.” Hammers identified himself as a judge at Cox’ request, which was not enough to dissuade Cox in his belief that the Alaska court system is a for-profit corporation. Cox, who also refused to take off his trademark hat in the courtroom, insists the positions of the state judiciary were never actually filled and the court system is a “pre-processing company” with no jurisdiction over Alaskans. “You’re now being treated as a criminal engaged in criminal activity and you’re being served in that manner,” Cox said. As with so many other cases where law enforcement is being targeted, “sovereign citizenship” ideology appears to be a significant component of Cox’s belief system: Cox, who is facing a misdemeanor weapons misconduct charge for not immediately letting a Fairbanks police officer know he was carrying a concealed weapon last March, has in recent weeks been advocating for the concept of “sovereign citizenship.” Cox claims he and all Americans are sovereigns, or kings and queens, and no one is required to obey laws unless not doing so would directly harm other sovereigns. Much of his claims center around the belief President Lincoln subverted the original Constitution and replaced it with a copy that incorporated the United States. Much more on “sovereign citizens” here.

Continue reading …
Wisconsin Can Repeal Walker’s Anti-Union Bill In 2012

Click here to view this media As Rachel discussed with the AFL-CIO’s Richard Trumka, one resolution to these awful union-busting laws we’re seeing passed in States like Wisconsin and Ohio is to get them up as ballot measures in those states and give the voters a chance to overturn them. Here’s more from Think Progress with what’s going on in Wisconsin. Wisconsin Can Repeal Walker’s Anti-Union Bill In 2012 And Amend The State Constitution In 2013 : Last night, Wisconsin Senate Republicans abandoned any remaining pretenses that a bill stripping state workers of their collective bargaining rights has anything whatsoever to do with the state’s finances, and rammed the bill through the senate without any Democrats present. Yet even if Gov. Scott Walker (R) succeeds in signing this bill into law, Wisconsin voters have the power to ensure that his victory is short lived. Third , Wisconsin also has the power to ensure that no future lawmakers can repeat Walker’s assault on working familes : Constitutional amendments. SECTION 1. Any amendment or amendments to this constitution may be proposed in either house of the legislature, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two houses…and if, in the legislature so next chosen, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty of the legislature to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people in such manner and at such time as the legislature shall prescribe; and if the people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amendments by a majority of the electors voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become part of the constitution In other words, the Wisconsin Constitution can be amended in a three step process: 1) the current legislature must approve the amendment; 2) after the next election, the new legislature must approve the amendment; 3) the voters must ratify the amendment by a majority vote. Under this procedure, Wisconsin could amend its constitution to permanently protect working families as soon as 2013. In Ohio, pro-worker lawmakers are already planning a ballot referendum to overrule an anti-worker bill that is moving forward in that state. Wisconsin law will require working families and their supporters to jump through a few more hoops to reverse Walker’s actions. Nevertheless, they unambiguously have the power to repeal Walker’s bill in 2012 and to ensure that similar bills can never become law again in 2013.

Continue reading …
Bill O’Reilly Compares the Koran to Mein Kampf and then tries to deny it and then re-compares it again.

Click here to view this media Bill O’Reilly pulled another one of his I didn’t it, but I really didn’t because it’s me, that’s why. C&L Flashback: O’Reilly defends his use of Nazi analogy because it’s different when HE does it:UPDATED with the KKK Yes, a familiar tune he’s played before. Instead of the topic being Nazis, Bill is saying that a NY Times piece was misleading when it said that O’Reilly compared the Koran to Mein Kampf because he only meant “the books.” Do you understand now? O’Reilly: In July 2002 we criticized a professor who wanted to require incoming freshman to read a book explaining the Koran. In the body of that discussion I said this: I wouldn’t read the book and I’ll tell you why. I wouldn’t read Mein Kampf either. If I was going to UNC in 1941 I would have said with all due respect you professor said read Mein Kampf all do respect I would have said shove it. I ain’t reading it. I looked at the Koran and I have nothing against it the Koran by the way. There are some things in it that are good and there are some things in it that aren’t good. Same thing in the Old Testament … So obviously I wasn’t comparing Koran, the book to Mein Kampf, the book. What I did do was criticize the mandatory reading of a controversial book in the face of the war on terror. Professor Ahmed and the NY Times absolutely took the situation out of contex t. That’s his defense. Aren’t they both books? If he wasn’t making a comparison to Mein Kampf, then why didn’t he use a bad romance novel? At least a bad romance novel isn’t evil and while it still wouldn’t be cool to do, I don’t think the love story of Melody and Drake was responsible for millions of people to be gassed. Mein Kampf was not considered a religious holy book by billions of people. It was a sick and twisted vision of Hitler that only the Nazis were required to read and forced to follow. The Koran is the Muslim equivalent to the Bible and it’s treated with reverence around the world. And by the way, the professor was trying to get students to get an understanding of the Koran after the attacks because of what he feared Peter King would be doing years later with his McCarthyesque hearing. Then he went on to attack the NY Times op-ed section and complained that the piece attacking him wasn’t vetted. Just like the WSJ’s op-ed’s aren’t vetted. have you ever heard him complain about their lunatic op-eds? PHD, Professor Ahmed joins The Factor and Bill asks him if he should be apologized to by the Professor. Ahmed: Bill, you owe me one because I was brought up by some wonderful Catholic priests who taught me in my boarding school in Pakistan, something that they drummed into our heads was ‘never say anything that will be painful or hurtful to anyone who thinks something is sacred and I think that’s a lesson in life so you know even comparing or hinting at the Koran which is a sacred book to millions and millions of Muslims to this vile evil book Mein Kampf, written by an evil man really was very hurtful and upsetting. I’m glad you corrected the record Bill. I’m glad you said you did not compare the Koran to Mein Kampf and I am grateful Wow, the segment should be done, The controversy is over. Ahmed accepted Bill’s apology so that should end the segment, yes? O’Reilly: But I’m not apologizing because I think you absolutely took the situation out of context and I think you’re smart enough to know it and I’m not being condescending. I was actually saying, you heard my own words alright, that a mandatory reading of the Koran in the face of the war of terror , remember this is 2002, was akin to after WWII started a mandatory reading of Nazi propaganda. Again, it had nothing to do with the Koran itself, it had nothing to do with Mein Kampf itself. It was the act of forcing students to read something that obviously was flying in the face of what the times were, you know that. Oh, sh*t. He just compared the Koran to Nazi war propaganda now. Dammit Bill, and you almost escaped unscathed. What flew in our faces on 9/11 were Muslim extremists led by Osama Bin Laden and not Prof. Ahmed’s. Maybe Bill doesn’t understand the meaning of the word ‘akin”. That’s what Colbert would say anyway.

Continue reading …
Bill O’Reilly Compares the Koran to Mein Kampf and then tries to deny it and then re-compares it again.

Click here to view this media Bill O’Reilly pulled another one of his I didn’t it, but I really didn’t because it’s me, that’s why. C&L Flashback: O’Reilly defends his use of Nazi analogy because it’s different when HE does it:UPDATED with the KKK Yes, a familiar tune he’s played before. Instead of the topic being Nazis, Bill is saying that a NY Times piece was misleading when it said that O’Reilly compared the Koran to Mein Kampf because he only meant “the books.” Do you understand now? O’Reilly: In July 2002 we criticized a professor who wanted to require incoming freshman to read a book explaining the Koran. In the body of that discussion I said this: I wouldn’t read the book and I’ll tell you why. I wouldn’t read Mein Kampf either. If I was going to UNC in 1941 I would have said with all due respect you professor said read Mein Kampf all do respect I would have said shove it. I ain’t reading it. I looked at the Koran and I have nothing against it the Koran by the way. There are some things in it that are good and there are some things in it that aren’t good. Same thing in the Old Testament … So obviously I wasn’t comparing Koran, the book to Mein Kampf, the book. What I did do was criticize the mandatory reading of a controversial book in the face of the war on terror. Professor Ahmed and the NY Times absolutely took the situation out of contex t. That’s his defense. Aren’t they both books? If he wasn’t making a comparison to Mein Kampf, then why didn’t he use a bad romance novel? At least a bad romance novel isn’t evil and while it still wouldn’t be cool to do, I don’t think the love story of Melody and Drake was responsible for millions of people to be gassed. Mein Kampf was not considered a religious holy book by billions of people. It was a sick and twisted vision of Hitler that only the Nazis were required to read and forced to follow. The Koran is the Muslim equivalent to the Bible and it’s treated with reverence around the world. And by the way, the professor was trying to get students to get an understanding of the Koran after the attacks because of what he feared Peter King would be doing years later with his McCarthyesque hearing. Then he went on to attack the NY Times op-ed section and complained that the piece attacking him wasn’t vetted. Just like the WSJ’s op-ed’s aren’t vetted. have you ever heard him complain about their lunatic op-eds? PHD, Professor Ahmed joins The Factor and Bill asks him if he should be apologized to by the Professor. Ahmed: Bill, you owe me one because I was brought up by some wonderful Catholic priests who taught me in my boarding school in Pakistan, something that they drummed into our heads was ‘never say anything that will be painful or hurtful to anyone who thinks something is sacred and I think that’s a lesson in life so you know even comparing or hinting at the Koran which is a sacred book to millions and millions of Muslims to this vile evil book Mein Kampf, written by an evil man really was very hurtful and upsetting. I’m glad you corrected the record Bill. I’m glad you said you did not compare the Koran to Mein Kampf and I am grateful Wow, the segment should be done, The controversy is over. Ahmed accepted Bill’s apology so that should end the segment, yes? O’Reilly: But I’m not apologizing because I think you absolutely took the situation out of context and I think you’re smart enough to know it and I’m not being condescending. I was actually saying, you heard my own words alright, that a mandatory reading of the Koran in the face of the war of terror , remember this is 2002, was akin to after WWII started a mandatory reading of Nazi propaganda. Again, it had nothing to do with the Koran itself, it had nothing to do with Mein Kampf itself. It was the act of forcing students to read something that obviously was flying in the face of what the times were, you know that. Oh, sh*t. He just compared the Koran to Nazi war propaganda now. Dammit Bill, and you almost escaped unscathed. What flew in our faces on 9/11 were Muslim extremists led by Osama Bin Laden and not Prof. Ahmed’s. Maybe Bill doesn’t understand the meaning of the word ‘akin”. That’s what Colbert would say anyway.

Continue reading …
Bill O’Reilly Compares the Koran to Mein Kampf and then tries to deny it and then re-compares it again.

Click here to view this media Bill O’Reilly pulled another one of his I didn’t it, but I really didn’t because it’s me, that’s why. C&L Flashback: O’Reilly defends his use of Nazi analogy because it’s different when HE does it:UPDATED with the KKK Yes, a familiar tune he’s played before. Instead of the topic being Nazis, Bill is saying that a NY Times piece was misleading when it said that O’Reilly compared the Koran to Mein Kampf because he only meant “the books.” Do you understand now? O’Reilly: In July 2002 we criticized a professor who wanted to require incoming freshman to read a book explaining the Koran. In the body of that discussion I said this: I wouldn’t read the book and I’ll tell you why. I wouldn’t read Mein Kampf either. If I was going to UNC in 1941 I would have said with all due respect you professor said read Mein Kampf all do respect I would have said shove it. I ain’t reading it. I looked at the Koran and I have nothing against it the Koran by the way. There are some things in it that are good and there are some things in it that aren’t good. Same thing in the Old Testament … So obviously I wasn’t comparing Koran, the book to Mein Kampf, the book. What I did do was criticize the mandatory reading of a controversial book in the face of the war on terror. Professor Ahmed and the NY Times absolutely took the situation out of contex t. That’s his defense. Aren’t they both books? If he wasn’t making a comparison to Mein Kampf, then why didn’t he use a bad romance novel? At least a bad romance novel isn’t evil and while it still wouldn’t be cool to do, I don’t think the love story of Melody and Drake was responsible for millions of people to be gassed. Mein Kampf was not considered a religious holy book by billions of people. It was a sick and twisted vision of Hitler that only the Nazis were required to read and forced to follow. The Koran is the Muslim equivalent to the Bible and it’s treated with reverence around the world. And by the way, the professor was trying to get students to get an understanding of the Koran after the attacks because of what he feared Peter King would be doing years later with his McCarthyesque hearing. Then he went on to attack the NY Times op-ed section and complained that the piece attacking him wasn’t vetted. Just like the WSJ’s op-ed’s aren’t vetted. have you ever heard him complain about their lunatic op-eds? PHD, Professor Ahmed joins The Factor and Bill asks him if he should be apologized to by the Professor. Ahmed: Bill, you owe me one because I was brought up by some wonderful Catholic priests who taught me in my boarding school in Pakistan, something that they drummed into our heads was ‘never say anything that will be painful or hurtful to anyone who thinks something is sacred and I think that’s a lesson in life so you know even comparing or hinting at the Koran which is a sacred book to millions and millions of Muslims to this vile evil book Mein Kampf, written by an evil man really was very hurtful and upsetting. I’m glad you corrected the record Bill. I’m glad you said you did not compare the Koran to Mein Kampf and I am grateful Wow, the segment should be done, The controversy is over. Ahmed accepted Bill’s apology so that should end the segment, yes? O’Reilly: But I’m not apologizing because I think you absolutely took the situation out of context and I think you’re smart enough to know it and I’m not being condescending. I was actually saying, you heard my own words alright, that a mandatory reading of the Koran in the face of the war of terror , remember this is 2002, was akin to after WWII started a mandatory reading of Nazi propaganda. Again, it had nothing to do with the Koran itself, it had nothing to do with Mein Kampf itself. It was the act of forcing students to read something that obviously was flying in the face of what the times were, you know that. Oh, sh*t. He just compared the Koran to Nazi war propaganda now. Dammit Bill, and you almost escaped unscathed. What flew in our faces on 9/11 were Muslim extremists led by Osama Bin Laden and not Prof. Ahmed’s. Maybe Bill doesn’t understand the meaning of the word ‘akin”. That’s what Colbert would say anyway.

Continue reading …

Justin Timberlake

No Comment
Justin Timberlake

Justin Timberlake, Jessica Biel Break Up Actor, Actress Split . [Exclusive] Report: Justin Timberlake & Jessica Biel Head to Splitsville Video Exposed [Exclusive] Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel Split Video Live Justin Timberlake , Jessica Biel Break Up – Healthy Lifestyle … In a joint statement, reps for the couple confirm to UsMagazine.com, “Addressing the media speculation regarding Jessica Biel and Justin Timberlake’s relationship, we are confirming that they mutually have decided to part ways. … Justin Timberlake , Jessica Biel Break Up: Actor, Actress Split Jessica Biel and Justin Timberlake have broken up, TMZ reports, citing a source close to the former couple. Report: Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel Split | PopEater.com Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel are reportedly no longer dating, a source close to the pair told UsMagazine.com. The on-again/off-again couple fina. Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel Have Split | Celeb Dirty Laundry Jessica Biel, 29,  and Justin Timberlake , 30,  who have been rumored to have split up many times in the. Justin Timberlake & Jessica Biel Split: Source | Radar Online The Social Network star Justin Timberlake and his longtime lover Jessica Biel have split. The two decided to end their four-year relationship recently and “there are no hard feelings,” a source told People. PHOTOS: Justin and Jessica Go … CandacePParker says: I thought this happened a long time ago RT @extratv Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel call it quits… http://su.pr/2GQWbS

Continue reading …

Sxsw

No Comment
Sxsw

The Shack is Mobile @ SXSW: Staying Connected mos “Clap Clap” SXSW Promo 2011 March 18 @ The Marq (one shot) Cisco @ SXSW Dan Scheinman Cisco Media Solutions Group.mp4 5 Social Apps That Will Make SXSW More Intimate If you’re worried that SXSW is getting a bit to hectic, these 5 apps can help you connect with the right people and make some time to discuss big ideas. At SXSW ? Send Your Best Photos & Videos to Mashable & CNN iReport In partnership with CNN iReport, Mashable would like to feature your best photos and videos from SXSW 2011, which runs from March 11-15. Apple to Open Pop-Up Shop at SXSW [REPORT] Apple is set to open a temporary Apple store in the Scarbrough building on Congress Avenue in downtown Austin, Texas. Dispatch from SXSW : Have Startups Become a Fetish? : Tech News and … SXSW has become cluttered with startups, and is a celebration of startups in general. But celebration has turned into a fetish — placing the act of creating a startup on a pedestal without casting any sort of critical eye on the … UberGenius: Uber Is Taking Control of SXSW Pedicabs It seems as if the entire city has packed up and headed to Austin, Texas for SXSW . The conference was too big two years ago. Then it got bigger last year. And this year it’s expected to be significantly bigger once again. … baxie404 says: Will be happy the day I drive through Waco and have a good experience… #ontheroadagain # sxsw

Continue reading …
The massacre in Zawiya

Click here to view this media (YouTube) Alex Crawford of Sky News gives a behind-the-scenes account of how she was able to report from Zawiya, Libya. A follow-up to my previous post, The Battle for Zawiya . COOPER: One of the things I found so moving, beyond the injuries and the courage of people who were defending themselves against this onslaught, was them coming up to you and saying, please, please, get these pictures out, please tell our story, because otherwise their deaths will be in vain, and no one will know really the truth about what is happening there right now and continues to happen there right now at this hour. For you, you used the word massacre. Are you saying what is happening there is a massacre? CRAWFORD: Well, the true sense of the word massacre is large-scale deaths, right? There are large-scale deaths going on there, and these are primarily — I mean, seriously, they are — 99 percent of them are civilians. They are women. They are children. They are old people. They’re not fighters. They’re not soldiers. They’re just people who are criticizing and who want a change of government. I don’t — if that’s not a massacre, I don’t know what is. They actually can’t do much to defend themselves. They are (AUDIO GAP) to even leave. They can’t even get out of the way of the firing. And they are continuing to be (AUDIO GAP). And that’s why, at the end, there was almost constant firing, but one particular brave individual managed to get us out under fire. And it was so important for them to know that we were going to be able to broadcast the pictures to the world, because as far as Gadhafi authorities are concerned, that didn’t happen. The march didn’t happen. There aren’t tens of thousands of people in Zawiyah who are critical of him, Gadhafi, and they aren’t being shelled and they aren’t being killed. And if we hadn’t actually had the help and support of these incredibly courageous people, they would still be saying that. But now — now that the pictures, I would suggest, have put a — put (INAUDIBLE) to those lies. They — how can we make up those pictures? We saw people dying with horrible injuries, and they are civilians. They are — boys are as old as my son, who is 15. They are young men. I saw one young man who looks he was — he might be a university student, if he was living in Britain or America. He had glasses on. He was wearing a T-shirt and jeans. He didn’t look at all like a soldier. He was being shown at the last minute as these tanks were rolling into the square how to use a rocket-propelled grenade launcher. And someone was saying, put it on your shoulder, put it on your shoulder. Just try to kneel a bit and just fire. And he says Allahu akbar and goes off to fight and probably is not alive now. This is — these are civilians. So, I don’t know what — if that isn’t a massacre, I really don’t know what is. COOPER: Well, Alex, I have been just so struck by your reporting over these last several days. And thank you for talking with us. And I’m so glad you’re safe. And I’m so glad you have been able to tell the world what is really happening, the truth about what is happening in Zawiyah. Thank you. CRAWFORD: Thanks for asking me on. UPDATE : According to ITV news , Zawiya has now fallen. The centre devastated, perhaps hundreds of lives lost. Gaddafi’s men are cleaning up Zawiya, the town they have finally taken after bombarding it for a week. They have brought in road sweepers to brush away the evidence of the worst fighting between Libyans in a century. It is certainly the worst devastation I’ve seen in any town centre. … The only people were bands of Gaddafi’s men, high on victory and bent on revenge, searching buildings for any sign of the rebels who had held them at bay for a week. A resident told us by phone two days ago that there wasn’t an animal in the street or a bird in the air above Zawiya. She was right. Dozens were killed in the battle for Martyrs’ Square. There are now many more “martyrs” buried there. I counted more than 20 new graves. Clean-up crews swept furiously, trying to make the square look normal. Soon there will be no sign of what I saw: blackened tanks being loaded on to transporters; militia vehicles burned and peppered with bullet holes; the clothing of the newly dead, shot in a battle in Gaddafi’s backyard.

Continue reading …
New Egypt, new media | Osama Diab

Egyptians will no longer tolerate paying for the state-run newspapers that peddled Hosni Mubarak’s propaganda A few hours before the ousting of the former president Hosni Mubarak, the Tahrir Square protesters were described in Egypt ‘s state-run media as “vandals” and “hooligans”. A few hours after Mubarak’s fall, the “vandalisers” had become “heroes”, and what was previously described as “chaos instigated by foreign powers” had suddenly become “a glorious revolution”. None of this impresses young Egyptians who – unlike older generations – have become accustomed to seeking out more neutral sources of information. They are increasingly fluent in alternative media, whether it’s social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, or the newly emerging independent newspapers that suffered under the former regime and are seen as one of the reasons behind the 25 January revolution. Sales of state-run papers have fallen quite drastically – partly because of the growth in independent media but also because of the way they sugar-coated Mubarak’s unpopular regime. One of the more outrageous examples came last September when al-Ahram doctored a photograph taken during the Israel-Palestine peace talks in Washington to suggest that 82-year-old Mubarak was leading the negotiations. The most loyal readers of the state-run press come from older generations who have a nostalgic attachment. Meanwhile, the young people who now represent the majority of the market prefer independent media – even foreign media such as the BBC, al-Jazeera and the Guardian – to get a more accurate picture. There are no reliable circulation figures for the state-run press in Egypt. Rafik Bassel, a media analyst and chief executive of Smartcomm advertising agency, says al-Ahram claims a circulation of 800,000 on weekdays and 1,000,000 on Fridays. He doubts this claim and suggests the real figure is 140,000 on weekdays of which 40,000 are subscriptions paid for by the government and distributed to officials around the country. “Advertising in state-run newspapers has been mandatory for businesses close to the previous regime,” Bassel added. “Large companies, banks and services were ordered to publish ads … not to mention obituaries, ‘congratulation’ ads, etc.” Mostafa Sakr, the chairman and editor of the independent al-Borsa daily (who used to work for al-Ahram’s economic magazine) told me that not only has the circulation of all state-run newspapers plunged seriously, but their influence has declined too. According to Sakr, people want sources of information they can trust – which is why sales of the independent newspaper al-Shorouk doubled during the revolution, reaching a circulation of about 150,000 a day. Even in the online world, independent media have proved more successful. Al-Youm al-Sabea news website was named as the Middle East’s top online newspaper by Forbes. Al-Ahram, the highest-ranking state-run newspaper on the list, came in 24th place. Economically speaking, these increasingly unpopular media outlets have become a financial burden on the Egyptian treasury. Taxpayers were paying the regime to provide them with lies and propaganda. A report from the Central Auditing Agency in 2008 accused Rose al-Youssef newspaper of wasting public money, since 74% of its printed copies were returned unsold, making its actual sales less than 2,500 a day. Rose al-Youssef, like many other state-run media, has a long and proud history that was severely polluted by its affiliation to unpopular, corrupt regimes. The future situation of these outlets is still unclear. However, the supreme council of armed forces, which is in charge of Egypt until a new president is elected in August, has ordered the dissolution of the information ministry – something the opposition had long been calling for. The ministry was regarded as the government’s means for controlling the media and limiting its freedom. Many journalists have also demonstrated at the syndicate of journalists, calling for the dismantling of the higher council of journalism, a government body controlled by parliament which is in charge of – and owns – Egypt’s seven state-funded newspapers. Whatever the future of these publications, the status quo should not be an option. Some of these papers, such as Rose al-Youssef, circulate in the low thousands and get funding in the tens of millions. With new, independent, credible and economically successful models of newspapers, the state-run press should be something of the past. If they can be made profitable they should probably be privatised so they can break free from the government’s grip and develop a more independent tone. If they cannot be profitable (which is more likely) then there is no reason for them to stay and be the burden they are. “If the state stops funding [its] newspapers, they will collapse in a heartbeat,” Bassel said. Egyptians have long paid a huge bill to be told lies. It’s time to do something more with this money. The era of communist-style propaganda is over in Egypt and the disparity between the content provided by state-run and independent newspapers has already narrowed since the fall of Mubarak’s regime. Starting a new era in Egypt should come with a new set of media practices and allow trusted names to lead a less stagnant media scene, replacing newspapers whose editorial policies were developed secretly in state security offices on presidential orders. Egypt Hosni Mubarak Newspapers Digital media Newspapers & magazines Middle East Arab and Middle East protests Press freedom Osama Diab guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …