not watching television

WSYX Memorial . . .

We just made it back from the demonstration in front of Station WSYX in Columbus, Ohio, one of the 8 ABC affiliates that parent company Sinclair Broadcast Group banned from showing Ted Koppel's memorial to US soldier killed in the present war, which airs on Nightline tonight. (Right now the Sinclair Web site has two letters posted on its homepage; one is their rationale for censoring Ted Koppel, the other a response to a critical letter addressed to Sinclair from Sen. John McCain. The gist of the response letter seems to be that Sinclair thinks naked news, news not suitably clothed in the opinions of media owners, is bad for Americans.

We all assembled on the tree lawn at the edge of the station's driveway (Columbus cops were on hand to keep us from gathering around the WSYX sign in front of the building itself), and shortly after 5 p.m. JB read the direct and power letter he sent to Sinclair CEO David Smith. Then, in the sobbing rain, the reading of the names began. Those of us who wanted to read formed a line and took our turns with mic in hand to call out the names from a list JB downloaded from the internet. It ceremony grew more moving as time passed, nearly an hour to read out all the names. Everyone was attentive throughout with only a few socco voce introductions and questions from the press.

The gathering dispersed fairly quickly once the reading was done, the most recent casualties represented only by numbers, their names not yet released. As we were leaving I spotted a familar face who turned out to be Bob Fitrakis, a central figure in the Columbus progressive community for many years. I learned some interesting stuff from him during our brief conversation, which I'll write more about in a later post . . .

The drive home was over 50 tedious miles, a good part of it through Columbus rush-hour traffic. Just as we turned in our drive about 8 pm the radio station we were listening to began an interview with the news director from WSYX. I wasn't paying enough attention to catch his name or that of the radio talkshow host who called him, but the gist of the conversation was that an Ohio cable station will air Nightline since Sinclair stations won't. Oh, and in Nightline's place on WSYX? Sinclair Broadcasting is going to give viewers its side of the controversy followed up by it's own program on the war. The news director said he'd seen some of the program and thought it looked pretty balanced. I'm going to take up his offer to viewers to watch and see for themselves (since I don't get cable I can't watch Nightline, anyway), so I'll let you know . . . For now, I just keep asking myself, "If dead soldiers can still be so dangerous, what's all the killing for?"

Censoring Nightline

I just used this form at Common Cause to write Sinclair Broadcasting about its decision to pre-empt Ted Koppel's airing on the names and photographs of fallen US soldiers on tonight's Nightline program (see my letter below).

Now my daughter and I are off to demonstrate against this decision in front of the offices of Columbus, Ohio's Sinclair-owned ABC affiliate. We'll be standing in front of the station and reading the names of those who have died, the names Sinclair Broadcasting does not trust Central Ohioans to hear . . .

My Letter

Dear Mr. Smith:

One of the ways we protect the rights and responsibilities of citizenship in our democracy is establishing laws to insure Americans are given access to issues effecting our nation over the people's airwaves.

My family and I planned to watch Nightline tonight to see the faces and hear the names of the American soldiers who have died in the present war, to honor the fallen by meditating on their sacrifices and by discussing what this war and all wars mean for the world in which we live.

You have no right pre-empt these images and the thoughtful debates in our home and around the country they may engender. Indeed, just the opposite; you have a legal obligation to present programs that serve the public interest and promote informed debate.

Sinclair Broadcasting has justified its decision by claiming that Ted Koppel's program is partisan -- a laughably hypocritical rationalization from a broadcasting corporation that misleadingly insinuates Mr. Hyman's rabidly partisan editorial commentary into local news programming.

I cannot but wonder why Sinclair Broadcasting finds putting real names and real faces to the inanimate statistics of America's war dead is an act of partisanship. It seems if the label "partisan" belongs anywhere, it on the chests of corporate media executives who would censor the public's right to know.

Why?

_______________________________________________________________________

A year ago Dan Rather filed a report from Baghdad on "An Iraqi House of Horrors", the prison at Abu Ghraib where inmates suffered unspeakable tortures and often death under the rule of Dictator Sadddam Hussein. Yet, for reasons unfathomable to me, after George Bush arrived on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit a year ago today to announce that major combat in Iraq had ended, we turned Abu Ghraib -- that symbol of oppression -- into our own detention center, one so rife with abuses that it was labeled "Gitmo on Steroids" by Salon.

When the Western media reported that US contractors escorting a convoy near Falluja had been attacked, murdered, their bodies hacked to pieces, burned and strung up on a bridge, few noticed that Abu Ghraib prison was near by. As the revenge attack on Falluja unfoldeded few asked, "Why those particular guys?"

Nor did many ask why when, in mid-April, the media reported that guerrillas had bombed Abu Ghraib, killing 22 of thousands of Iraqis detained there and wounding nearly a hundred more (though General Zinni speculated the bombings served to warn detainees to keep their mouths shut).

But now, a year later, CBS has reported on Abu Ghraib again. Now we have seen proof in pictures of the abuse we have inflicted on detainees held there.

And though the US media has yet to report it, we know something else. Much of Abu Ghraib prison is under the jurisdiction of mercenary contractors who do the interrogating and directly influence government military personnel. And the contractors? They're under no one's jurisdiction at all . . .

War games . . .

Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.), who did not serve in the military, plays GI Joe for PR points on the steps of the Capitol. A picture worth a thousands words: this man is clearly nuts.

What's the rush?

At Howling At A Waning Moon, my favorite environmental blog, Bob Whitson posted this article from the LATimes on stiffer clean air standards called for in EPA chief Michael Leavitt's new plan. Unfortunately, the article seems to suggest that this is another example of the ol' BushCo bait-'n-switch. Yes, the standards are more strict, classifying air as unhealthy based on average ozone levels over an 8 hour period rather than for a single hour. But Leavitt wants to give counties that fail to meet his standards multiple time extentions to figure out how to do so. Only after they fail, through several multi-year extentions, will they risk penalties. So big deal if the standards are more strict; if counties can fail to meet them, then dilly-dally around making plans without risking punative actions, that's what they'll do . . .

(Tweaked 4/29/04, 7 pm: Way too many tabs open; accidentally posted w/o proofing)

Strong stuff . . .

Just a couple of excerpts from Robert Bowman's statement published at Dissident Voice on Tuesday (via comments section to this post at Whiskey Bar):

Some Dare Call It Treason: Wake Up America!

By

Dr. Robert Bowman, USAF Ret.*

I feel an affinity for the troops over there in Iraq. They are my comrades in arms. I admire their sense of honor and sacrifice. I understand why some of them believe they should be there. They have neither the experience nor the wisdom to see past the lies they have been told. The truth is, they are not over there protecting our freedoms. Our freedoms are not under attack from Saddam Hussein or the remnants of his Baathist party. Our freedoms are under attack by John Ashcroft. They are threatened by John Poindexter. They are trampled by Donald Rumsfeld. They are disdained by Dick Cheney. And they are not even understood by George W. Bush.

. . .

It is we, here at home, who are the foot soldiers battling to preserve our cherished freedoms by exercising them, in spite of opposition and ridicule. It is we who protect our civil rights through speaking out. We are the Minutemen sounding the alarm against tyranny. We are upholding the spirit of the American Revolution. We are preserving the freedoms that the troops in the desert have a right to come back to. The troops getting shot at in Iraq are not protecting us. We are protecting them, and their honor and their freedoms . . . Let us do it loudly and fearlessly and courageously and joyfully, for we are the true patriots!

. . .

I joined the Air Force to protect our borders and our people, not the financial interests of Folgers, Chiquita Banana, and Exxon. We've had enough corporate wars. No more Iraqs. No more El Salvadors. No more Kosovos. No more Colombias. These are not isolated incidents of stupidity. They are part of a long, bloody history of foreign policy being conducted for the financial benefit of the wealthy few. It is a new colonialism. It violates our Constitution. It endangers our people. And it is TREASON.

Go read the rest . . . And visit the Veterans for Peace website to learn more their positions and anti-war activities.

Veterans for Peace (click image)

* Dr. Robert Bowman was a colonel in the US Air Force and was Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under President Jimmy Carter. He is Presiding Archbishop, United Catholic Church. He has been president of the Institute for Space and Security Studies since 1982. Before that he was vice-president of Space Communications Company; manager, Advanced Space Programs for General Dynamics; and director, Advanced Space Programs Development for the Department of Defense, directing the "Star Wars" programs. He is also a progressive populist candidate for President of the United States. He may be reached via email at: isss@rmbowman.com. See also his web site: http://www.rmbowman.com.

In my opinion, Knight-Ridder's journalists have been doing far-and-away the best job of covering the administration lately. Mainly, they just seem much more objective and professional than reporters for the major dailies and wire services. And attempting objectivity with these guys means that, now and then, K-R stories are a down-right hoot. Like this sketch of Bush and Cheney on the eve of their appearance before the 9/11 Commission by Ron Hutcheson and William Douglas. Taking the compare/contrast approach to profiling our dear leaders, here's what Douglas and Hutchinson see as their similarities:

Both attended Yale, where they were known more for drinking beer than studying. Cheney dropped out, but later graduated from the University of Wyoming. Both managed to stay out of Vietnam; Bush by joining the Texas Air National Guard and Cheney by getting a series of deferments.

"I had other priorities than military service in the '60s," Cheney explained years later, during his confirmation hearing to become defense secretary.

Like Bush, Cheney went through some rootless years, when he was unsure what to do with his life. Both have citations for driving under the influence on their records. Both can credit their spouses with helping to straighten them out.

Atrios concurs with the Howler and links to his post on Jodi Wilgoren's RNC talking-points-littered piece on John Kerry's personal aide, Marvin Nicholson.

I was up into the wee hours this morning and read Wilgoren's vacuous story, too, and like fellow trackbacker The Target Demographic, I agree. What kind of incompetent editor allows lines like "Mr. Kerry is comfortable being catered to. He has his moods and his myriad personal needs. A social loner, he is happy with an aide half his age" to stay in? Did Wilgoren ask John Kerry if he's comfortable being catered to? Or if he describes himself as a loner? Or if age has anything to do with whether or why he's happy with his aide? This is just just plain crappy journalism. I worked as a proof-reader for a small-town newspaper when I was young (I'm old now), and even in that small publisher's fiefdom the standards were higher back then.

But here's the thing . . . Wilgoren writes that, while voters won't learn about "tidbits" like Kerry's penchant for peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches on his website, such details comprise the "portfolio" of Marvin Nicholson, "the man literally behind the man, ready with an uncapped bottle of water whenever Mr. Kerry's throat runs dry."

Hmmm, maybe not the website, but Wilgoren sure ripped a lot of stuff from a Boston Globe profile of Nicholson posted on Kerry's blog.

Like, for instance, that focus on the duffle bag Nicholson schleps around and the bottled water he keeps on hand for the candidate? Glen Johnson zeroed in on both of those touches of color in his piece for the Globe back in September 2003. All Wilgoren added were the PB&Js on whole wheat bread, a sticky sandwich bag and a screwed-off bottle cap. And that "chief of stuff" description? Johnson gives credit for that line to the inventor of the moniker, Nicholson himself; but not Wilgoren. The way she uses it -- in the stand-alone, single-sentence graph, "Meet Marvin Nicholson Jr., chief of stuff." -- makes it seem like she made it up.

That certainly looks like plagiarism to me. And what Wilgoren skipped over as she harvested the fruit of Johnson's profile is as interesting as what she gleaned. Johnson writes:

Every campaign has its version of the body man, a position envied for the constant access it gives to the candidate.

Which Wilgoren lifts, spices up and twists into:

Every modern presidential candidate has a factotum, or "body man," typically an ambitious Washington junkie, overqualified to schlep bags but eager to shake high-powered hands.

However, in Johnson's piece the next line is, "Blake Gottesman fills the role for President Bush." And here the NYTimes' reportorial thief departs. Instead, Wilgoren identifies Carter, Clinton and Gore's personal aides but never mentions Gottesman. I wonder why that is . . . Could it be that Brett, who is also quite clearly "the man literally behind the man", and whom the ersatz prez seems "comfortable" to have read over his shoulder, is quite a bit younger than "half his age"? Or maybe Wilgoren and her editor were concerned that the White House attitude toward Bush's young aide has been, well, less than respectful in the past. Like that time Ari compared him to a dog riding in the back of a pick-up truck . . . Oh, yeah. There's another "tidbit" from Johnson's article that Wilgoren left unpicked: like John Kerry (but unlike George Bush and young Mr. Gottesman), Marvin Nicholson is really tall . . .

(Tweaked: 4/28/04, 10:40 pm -- In rush to catch West Wing, forgot to finish image layout before posting; 1:04 am -- Read Atrios trackbacker post at The Target Demographic and added link)

Our friends Down Under at The Road to Surfdom seem to await with less-than-bated breath the GeorgeDickCheneyBush appearance before the 9/11 Commission Thursday. The Onion, however, expects it to be very entertaining . . .

For the past week Bush's surrogates have been smearing Kerry' service records and deeds as an anti-war activist after he returned from Viet Nam. Kerry responded by putting his military records online and by explaining his actions in anti-war demonstrations during interviews. Now he'd like to see Bush make the same effort to set the record straight by responding to key unanswered questions about his service in the Texas Nation Guard.

I take some comfort from the Kerry campaign's warning that if BushCo adopts smear tactics like those used against Dukakis in 19898, then "everything is on the table. Everything." I'm just not sure what that means . . .

Two of a kind . . .

In my opinion, Knight-Ridder's journalists have been doing far-and-away the best job of covering the administration lately. Mainly, they just seem much more objective and professional than reporters for the major dailies and wire services. And attempting objectivity with these guys means that, now and then, K-R stories are a down-right hoot. Like this sketch of Bush and Cheney on the eve of their appearance before the 9/11 Commission by Ron Hutcheson and William Douglas. Taking the compare/contrast approach to profiling our dear leaders, here's what Douglas and Hutchinson see as their similarities:

Both attended Yale, where they were known more for drinking beer than studying. Cheney dropped out, but later graduated from the University of Wyoming. Both managed to stay out of Vietnam; Bush by joining the Texas Air National Guard and Cheney by getting a series of deferments.

"I had other priorities than military service in the '60s," Cheney explained years later, during his confirmation hearing to become defense secretary.

Like Bush, Cheney went through some rootless years, when he was unsure what to do with his life. Both have citations for driving under the influence on their records. Both can credit their spouses with helping to straighten them out.

Is Jodi Wilgoren a plagiarist?

Atrios concurs with the Howler and links to his post on Jodi Wilgoren's RNC talking-points-littered piece on John Kerry's personal aide, Marvin Nicholson.

I was up into the wee hours this morning and read Wilgoren's vacuous story, too, and like fellow trackbacker The Target Demographic, I agree. What kind of incompetent editor allows lines like "Mr. Kerry is comfortable being catered to. He has his moods and his myriad personal needs. A social loner, he is happy with an aide half his age" to stay in? Did Wilgoren ask John Kerry if he's comfortable being catered to? Or if he describes himself as a loner? Or if age has anything to do with whether or why he's happy with his aide? This is just just plain crappy journalism. I worked as a proof-reader for a small-town newspaper when I was young (I'm old now), and even in that small publisher's fiefdom the standards were higher back then.

But here's the thing . . . Wilgoren writes that, while voters won't learn about "tidbits" like Kerry's penchant for peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches on his website, such details comprise the "portfolio" of Marvin Nicholson, "the man literally behind the man, ready with an uncapped bottle of water whenever Mr. Kerry's throat runs dry."

Hmmm, maybe not the website, but Wilgoren sure ripped a lot of stuff from a Boston Globe profile of Nicholson posted on Kerry's blog.

Like, for instance, that focus on the duffle bag Nicholson schleps around and the bottled water he keeps on hand for the candidate? Glen Johnson zeroed in on both of those touches of color in his piece for the Globe back in September 2003. All Wilgoren added were the PB&Js on whole wheat bread, a sticky sandwich bag and a screwed-off bottle cap. And that "chief of stuff" description? Johnson gives credit for that line to the inventor of the moniker, Nicholson himself; but not Wilgoren. The way she uses it -- in the stand-alone, single-sentence graph, "Meet Marvin Nicholson Jr., chief of stuff." -- makes it seem like she made it up.

That certainly looks like plagiarism to me. And what Wilgoren skipped over as she harvested the fruit of Johnson's profile is as interesting as what she gleaned. Johnson writes:

Every campaign has its version of the body man, a position envied for the constant access it gives to the candidate.

Which Wilgoren lifts, spices up and twists into:

Every modern presidential candidate has a factotum, or "body man," typically an ambitious Washington junkie, overqualified to schlep bags but eager to shake high-powered hands.

However, in Johnson's piece the next line is, "Blake Gottesman fills the role for President Bush." And here the NYTimes' reportorial thief departs. Instead, Wilgoren identifies Carter, Clinton and Gore's personal aides but never mentions Gottesman. I wonder why that is . . . Could it be that Brett, who is also quite clearly "the man literally behind the man", and whom the ersatz prez seems "comfortable" to have read over his shoulder, is quite a bit younger than "half his age"? Or maybe Wilgoren and her editor were concerned that the White House attitude toward Bush's young aide has been, well, less than respectful in the past. Like that time Ari compared him to a dog riding in the back of a pick-up truck . . . Oh, yeah. There's another "tidbit" from Johnson's article that Wilgoren left unpicked: like John Kerry (but unlike George Bush and young Mr. Gottesman), Marvin Nicholson is really tall . . .

(Tweaked: 4/28/04, 10:40 pm -- In rush to catch West Wing, forgot to finish image layout before posting; 1:04 am -- Read Atrios trackbacker post at The Target Demographic and added link)

Breaking in the act . . .

Our friends Down Under at The Road to Surfdom seem to await with less-than-bated breath the GeorgeDickCheneyBush appearance before the 9/11 Commission Thursday. The Onion, however, expects it to be very entertaining . . .

Kerry has a few questions . . .

For the past week Bush's surrogates have been smearing Kerry' service records and deeds as an anti-war activist after he returned from Viet Nam. Kerry responded by putting his military records online and by explaining his actions in anti-war demonstrations during interviews. Now he'd like to see Bush make the same effort to set the record straight by responding to key unanswered questions about his service in the Texas Nation Guard.

I take some comfort from the Kerry campaign's warning that if BushCo adopts smear tactics like those used against Dukakis in 19898, then "everything is on the table. Everything." I'm just not sure what that means . . .