New York Times | June 25, 2007
RICHARD SIKLOS and ANDREW ROSS SORKIN

The News Corporation, controlled by Rupert Murdoch, and advisers for Dow Jones and its controlling Bancroft family were close last night to agreeing on terms designed to protect The Wall Street Journal’s newsroom independence if the company accepts a takeover bid from Mr. Murdoch, according to several people briefed on the talks.

However, these people cautioned that a deal between Mr. Murdoch and the Bancrofts’ advisers did not mean that either the Dow Jones board or the family, which controls 64 percent of the shareholder votes, would approve the arrangement.

If an agreement on newsroom independence were to be made by the Dow Jones board, the News Corporation and the Bancroft family, the only barrier standing in the way of Mr. Murdoch’s control of The Wall Street Journal would be the selling price.

Mr. Murdoch has offered $60 a share for Dow Jones, which he has long wanted to add to his global media empire, and promises that he will not meddle in the news pages. But the Bancroft family, which has controlled the company for more than 100 years, is wary of his reputation for sensationalism and for interfering in the news operations of his media companies for his own political or financial ends.

Over the weekend, Mr. Murdoch responded to a proposal of editorial assurances the Bancrofts sent him on Friday, which his advisers described as wholly unacceptable and virtually identical to what the Bancrofts had proposed three weeks ago. Mr. Murdoch’s counterproposal closely mirrored Mr. Murdoch’s initial proposal, said one person with knowledge of the offer who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Under the proposal, the News Corporation would maintain a 16-member board of directors at Dow Jones and five of those directors would form a special committee charged with preserving editorial independence. The committee’s members would be mutually agreed on by News Corporation and the Bancrofts and would oversee the hiring of the managing editor and editorial page editor. Unlike the Bancroft’s proposal which Mr. Murdoch rejected, the committee would not also oversee budgets and the appointment of publisher.

The News Corporation proposal also offers a seat on its board to a Bancroft family member of its choosing, rather than two members of the family’s choosing as they had proposed. Whereas the Bancroft proposal entrusted the committee with oversight of Dow Jones brands, Mr. Murdoch’s counter-proposal does not. However, it does give the managing editor approval over any deal to use the Journal brand with any business not owned by News Corporation.

That plan resembles one put in place at The Times of London, which he bought in 1981. Some critics and former employees of The Times have accused Mr. Murdoch of reneging on his promises to not interfere in The Times’s news pages, though other editors have said he has maintained the paper’s independence.

Before agreeing to meet Mr. Murdoch on June 4, the Bancrofts had said they had “reached consensus that the mission of Dow Jones may be better accomplished in combination or collaboration with another organization, which may include News Corporation.”

However, since making that statement, no other strong competing bids have emerged. Without one, it is difficult to know how far Dow Jones can push Mr. Murdoch on price. The News Corporation is offering a premium of 67 percent over what Dow Jones shares were trading at when the offer first became public.

AFP | Monday, June 25, 2007

In the strictly controlled media world of communist China, “citizen journalism” is beating a way through censorship, breaking taboos and offering a pressure valve for social tensions.

In one striking example this month, the Internet was largely responsible for breaking open a slave scandal in two Chinese provinces that some local authorities had been complicit in.

A letter posted on the Internet by 400 parents of children working as slaves in brickyards was the trigger for the national press to finally report on the scandal that some rights groups say had been going on for years.

The parents’ Internet posting was part of a growing phenomenon for marginalised people in China who can not otherwise have their complaints addressed by the traditional, government-controlled press.

“The phenomenon of ‘citizen journalism’ suddenly arrived several years ago,” said Beijing-based dissident Liu Xiaobo, who was one of the student leaders of the 1989 Tiananmen democracy protests.

“Since the appearance of blogs in particular, every blog is a new platform for the spread of information.”

He cited the example of a couple in the southwestern city of Chongqing who became known as the “Stubborn Nails” in April because they refused to leave their home until they received adequate compensation from the property developer who wanted them out.

They quickly became household names in China — and symbols of resistance against greedy land developers and corrupt local authorities — mainly thanks to Internet postings.

“That case was first revealed through blogs,” Liu said.

Also in Chongqing, parts of the city were this month set on fire following the beating of flower sellers by the “chengguan”, city police charged with “cleaning up” the city’s roads.

Witnesses to the beatings had appealed to local television journalists, but nothing was broadcast.

The incident only became known outside the city thanks to photos and stories published on the Internet, sparking anger among China’s netizens.

“It’s fascism,” said one, while another mocked: “The inhabitants of Chongqing are truly naive, the Chinese media is all controlled by the Communist Party, they decide what people know.”

Several days later, another blunder by the “chengguan” — this time in Zhengzhou in central Henan province, again targeted at a street seller — provoked further riots.

The image of protesters surrounding a police car, captured by a mobile phone, made its way round the world, after being posted on Chinese movie sharing site Tudou, then reposted on YouTube.

Elsewhere across China, protesters often seek to post photos or videos of unrest on the Internet to counter the versions from the state-run press and local authorities, who usually downplay or deny the events.

Recognising the threat of China’s growing online community, Chinese President Hu Jintao called in January for the Internet to be “purified”, and the government has since launched a number of online crackdowns.

“The department of propaganda has sent out regulations to try and control the opinions being spread on the Internet, but every citizen has the right to criticise or to take part in public affairs on the Internet,” said Zhu Dake, a professor at Shanghai Tongji University.

“The government has to accept the criticisms of the people, it can no longer react crudely like in the past.”

Julien Pain, who monitors Internet freedom issues for Reporters Without Borders, is less optimistic.

“One cannot truly say that the Internet in China is becoming more and more free, because at the same time as the development of citizen journalists, the government finds ways of blocking or censoring content,” Pain said.

Reporters Without Borders, which labels the Chinese government an “enemy of the Internet,” says about 50 cyber dissidents are currently behind bars in China.

Newshounds | Sunday, June 10, 2007

Fox & Friends Weekend, always a fluffy affair, found time today between endless Paris Hilton coverage and a Bridezilla segment to remind viewers that the terrorists want to kill us with a segment about what to do if a major city is nuked. 6/9/07

Greg Kelly and Kelly Wright introduced Ash Carter, who wrote a report about preparing for a nuclear attack on a major city. F&F told viewers the possibility is quite real considering North Korea, Iran and Pakistan and the recent movement of “global terrorism into the Americas” The nuke explosion shown on Fox’s “24″ was also offered as a reminder that the threat is real.

There were no details offered about the report. Carter, using New York as the hypothetical city of a potential attack, claimed that everyone in midtown would be killed by the blast or radiation but the Boroughs and New Jersey would be fine.

Carter was asked about fallout shelters and he was upbeat saying everyone would be fine if they spent 3 days in their basements adding that people wouldn’t like the inconvenience but they should stay put. He made no mention of radiation killing people outside of midtown.

He warned that survivors shouldn’t walk the streets like they did on 9/11 making sure that viewers made the 9/11 connection. Carter optimistically noted that it wouldn’t be like Katrina since the local and state governments would not be in charge. He actually seemed to think the prospect of a federal plan would ease anxiety. Greg Kelly ended the segment declaring Ash Carter’s comments ” scary but honest “.

Soon after this segment there was a quick report on the JFK terror plot offering nothing new but suggesting that there were other locations in danger of attack.

comment: Ash Carter sure didn’t make me feel like the federal government have it under control with an adequate plan. If all of Midtown would be poisoned by radation, how could the boroughs and New Jersey be okay? Do they plan to use left over duct tape and plastic sheeting to make a bubble over NYC. Also, who came up with the 3 days in a basement plan and even if the radiation blew away in that time where do they think it would go.

I have no doubt that Ash Carter has a lot more information he could have shared but he wasn’t given the chance. The FOX message was simple. A nuke attack could and probably will happen but it will be just like “24″ and nothing really horrible will happen to anyone but New Yorkers but let’s not focus on that horrifying reality. Just don’t forget that you need to be afraid.

AFP | Saturday, June 9, 2007

Flashback: JFK Murder Plot “Deathbed Confession” Aired On National Radio

Flashback: Son Of JFK Conspirator Drops New Bombshell Revelations

Flashback: JFK Conspirator Wanted Every Kennedy Dead

Flashback: Former CIA Man Latest To Connect LBJ To JFK Assassination

Oscar-winning actor Tom Hanks is reportedly to produce a television mini-series debunking the conspiracy theories surrounding the assassination of president John F. Kennedy.

According to Variety, Hanks and his partner in the Playtone production house, Gary Goetzman, will be the executive producers on the project which will adapt the book “Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy.”

“I think that we will finally be able to make a substantial dent in the 75 percent of people in this country who still believe the conspiracy theorists,” author Vincent Bugliosi told the industry insider, Variety.

His 1,630-page tome backs the official version of events that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone when he shot and killed Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas.

“I totally believed there was a conspiracy, but after you read the book, you are almost embarrassed that you ever believed it,” Goetzman told Variety.

“To think that guys who grew up in the ’60s would make a mini-series supporting the idea that Oswald acted alone is something I certainly wouldn’t have predicted. But time and evidence can change the way we view things.”

Playtone is in negotiations with the TV channel HBO to diffuse the 10-part series.

Oliver Stone’s movie “JFK” which came out in 1991, starring Kevin Costner, was heavily criticized for supporting the theory that there was a plot to kill Kennedy.

Stone even hinted that Kennedy’s vice-president and successor, Lyndon Johnson, could have been involved.

Hanks, 50, is one of Hollywood’s best paid actors, reportedly earning 25 million dollars per film.

He won back-to-back best actor Oscars for his roles in 1993’s “Philadelphia” and 1994’s “Forrest Gump,” and has also become one of Hollywood’s most powerful producers and directors.

He will next be seen on film in the political film “Charlie Wilson’s War” starring Julia Roberts and Philip Seymour Hoffman.

Faultline
The Register
Friday, March 2, 2007

The mainstream media has become tabloid journalism. If you want information that matters you must find it yourself.