Fox News gets okay to misinform public, court ruling

03/09/10 11:48
Filed in: Media Reform

UPDATED:Many news agencies lie and distort facts, not many have the guts to admit it...in court...positioning the First Amendment as their defense!

The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, successfully argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves. We are pushing for a consumer protection solution that labels news content according to its adherence to ethical journalism standards that have been codified by the Society of Professional Journalists (Ethics: spj.org).
A News Quality Rating System and Content Labeling approach, follows a tradition of consumer protection product labeling, that is very familiar to Americans. The ratings are anti-censorship and can benefit consumers.

Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie.
By Mike Gaddy. Published Feb. 28, 2003
On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.

On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy cows.

The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers. Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news.

The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves.

In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation. Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by the verdict.

http://ceasespin.org/ceasespin_blog/ceasespin_blogger_files/fox_news_gets_okay_to_misinform_public.html

The Taliban and al-Qaeda: Not ideaological allies

Report exposes lie behind U.S. war and occupation in Afghanistan

February 28, 2011


The popular Afghan resistance is fighting to drive out foreign invaders.

The following was written anonymously by a March Forward! member who is an active-duty GI.

A new report published by New York University calls into question one of the central premises justifying the United States war on the people of Afghanistan.

The study is entitled  Separating the Taliban from al-Qaeda: The Core of Success in Afghanistan and was produced by NYU’s Center on International Cooperation. Though it is generally supportive of the goals of the United States and NATO in Afghanistan, it reveals that the Taliban and al-Qaeda are not ideological allies, but rather have developed a pragmatic political alliance in the face of a common enemy – U.S.-led imperialism.

According to the study, the Taliban and al-Qaeda are “caught in a marriage of convenience” forced upon them by the U.S./NATO-led International Security Assistance Forces occupying Afghanistan. The two groups are sharply distinct and have radically different goals. They share neither ideology, social or cultural backgrounds, nor national origins. To date no Afghan nationals have ever been proven members of al-Qaeda. Even before September 11, 2001, there was “considerable friction between them … and today that friction persists.”

The study goes on to say that existent relationships between the Taliban and al-Qaeda come in three main varieties: “personal/ individual ties, a shared religion, and their circumstances, a shared location and enemy.” While al-Qaeda has provided some financial and training assistance to the Taliban, the organization has had absolutely no influence on the native Afghan resistance movements.

Matthew Hoh, a Former State Department official who resigned in protest of the way the war was being carried out, has said that possibly thousands of resistance groups in Afghanistan fight entirely independent from any affiliation, but are instead motivated solely by the common desire to remove foreign occupiers from their homes.

The Taliban’s leaders have repeatedly maintained that they have no interest in launching international attacks against the United States. Their goals, unlike al-Qaeda, are exclusively national in scope – they seek to drive out a colonial-type occupation by foreign invaders. Their actions have been entirely defensive and limited to Afghanistan’s national borders, unlike the United States, which invaded and occupied a country that has never committed a single act of aggression against it.

The NYU study additionally claims that the 2009 Obama administration troop surge is actually undermining the over-all U.S. strategy by alienating both the broader population of Afghans and the Taliban. U.S/NATO actions, particularly the increased frequency of night raids on Afghan homes, are further radicalizing the resistance and unifying opposition to the foreign occupation forces.

Furthermore, a public opinion poll taken last fall in Kandahar and Helmand provinces—the focus of the troop surge and the scene of the great majority of bloodshed in the country—found that only a miniscule 8 percent of young men even know about the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States.

Even the Taliban leadership did not know in advance about the September 11 attacks, according to the NYU study. Their statements immediately afterwards condemned the attacks while expressing disbelief that they were the work of bin Laden.

In fact, there is no evidence that the Taliban had a role in the 9/11 attacks. They even offered to extradite bin Laden to face trial, but in response were arrogantly told that the United States “will not negotiate with terrorists.”

NYU study shatters U.S. justification for war on Afghan people

Considering that the alleged pretext for the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was in response to the Sept. 11 attacks, the findings in NYU’s study completely shatter the main justification for the war. The official justification for the U.S. military invading Afghanistan in 2001 was, in the words of then-President George W. Bush, to “smoke out” the enemy – al-Qaeda.

But if the Taliban does not share a common ideology or goals with al-Qaeda, had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and even offered to extradite bin Laden, what was the true reasoning behind the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan?

Another pretext for the invasion of Afghanistan was the Taliban’s reactionary social policies. As this propaganda line went, the United States invaded Afghanistan to save its women. There is no question that the Taliban regime had reactionary social policies. But that had not prevented the United States from organizing and funding reactionary extremist forces like the Mujahedeen when it was plotting to overthrow Afghanistan’s progressive and secular government. Social problems have only intensified since the U.S. invasion, and can never begin to be overcome as long as the Afghan people live under occupation.

The true motive behind the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was to maintain and expand its global hegemony and empire. Afghanistan is home to strategic natural gas and oil pipelines and is a critical crossroads to deal with the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, as well as Pakistan and Iran. Raising the stakes still further, in June of 2010 the United States discovered untapped mineral deposits worth upwards of a trillion dollars. Among those minerals is lithium, the metal used in cell phone and computer batteries, an enormous strategic prize.

However, it becomes clearer every day that, in spite of overwhelming military and technological superiority, the United States cannot win the war. Due to the valiant resistance of the people of Afghanistan, the United States has been forced to replace its goals of all-out domination with the avoidance of the appearance of defeat to stave off inspiring further resistance among other targets of the U.S. empire. 

We have nothing to gain from this occupation. The Afghan people have the right to self-determination. The only solution to this quagmire that is in the interests of us, our families, and the vast majority of people in the U.S. and Afghanistan, is the complete and immediate withdrawal of all U.S. and NATO forces from the region.

http://www.answercoalition.org/march-forward/statements/the-taliban-and-al-qaeda-not.html

Libya oil production to shut down completely-BofA

LONDON | Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:38pm EST

LONDON Feb 24 (Reuters) - Oil production in Libya is expected to shut down completely and could be lost for a prolonged period of time, Bank of America Merrill Lynch said on Thursday.

"We expect Libyan production to be shut down completely and we might lose sweet crudes from Libya for a prolonged period of time," Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst Sabine Schels told Reuters.

Schels said that the world faced the prospect of real supply shock in which the loss of 1.6 million barrels per day of sweet oil could potentially trigger a steep rise in prices and force a sharp reduction in demand to balance the system.

"Some of the supply can be replaced with Saudi light crude and some from SPR, but if the disruption is prolonged, we will need demand to drop to balance the system," Schels said.

The bank is currently discussing scenarios and outlooks, and will publish a report on its findings in the coming days.

"We already faced a demand shock last year with global demand increasing by 2.8 million bpd and on top of that, what we have now is a real supply shock," Schels said.

"In a price shock scenario whereby we lose 1.6 million bpd, the rise in prices can be a lot greater than in the case of a demand shock. (Reporting by Jessica Donati; editing by Marguerita Choy)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/24/libya-merrill-idUSLDE71N2I720110224

Wisconsin Radio Station Explains Why It Dropped Beck's "Unacceptable" Show

February 25, 2011 5:24 pm ET by Joe Strupp

The Madison, Wisconsin, radio station that dropped Glenn Beck's program this week issued the following statement to Media Matters when asked why the decision was made:

WTDY can no longer carry the Glenn Beck program. Over the last 12 months, the show has devolved into plugs for Fox News (the radio version of which is aired by our direct competitor), his books, and other personal endorsements. The lack of actual content becomes more apparent daily. Monday's program was the final straw; his unabashed deriding of Madison is unacceptable for broadcast in our community.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102250040

Koch Brothers “Prank” No Laughing Matter

Published on Thursday, February 24, 2011 by PR Watch
by Mary Bottari

Embattled Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker came under fire today after news broke about statements he made in a 20-minute phone call from a Boston-area alternative news reporter posing as David Koch, a billionaire whose PAC directly supported Walker and who has given millions to groups that have run ads to aid Walker's rise to the state's highest office. (Listen to the call here.)

As the Center for Media and Democracy has reported, the Koch PAC not only spent $43,000 directly on Walkers race, but Koch personally donated $1 million to the Republican Governor’s Association which spent $5 million in the state. Besides the Governor, Koch Brother’s has other “vested interests" in the state.

They include Koch Pipeline Company, which operates a pipeline system that crosses Wisconsin. It also owns Flint Hill Resources, which distributes refined fuel through pipelines and terminals in Junction City, Waupun, Madison and Milwaukee. Koch Industries also owns the C. Reiss Coal Company, a power plant company located in Green Bay, Manitowoc, Ashland and Sheboygan.

The Koch brothers opened a lobby shop in Wisconsin two days after Walker was elected, and many protesters have suspected that the “budget repair bill” provisions allowing the no-bid sell-off of any state-owned heating, cooling, or power plant, plus new rules on pipeline transport may be of interest to Koch. The company has denied any interest in these assets. Transcript Raises Legal and Ethical Concerns.

Pink Slips as Poker Chips Raises Legal Concerns

At the start of the conversation Walker eagerly reports on all he is doing: 

 First, he tells the fake Koch brother about a plan to change Senate rules on pay to reel-in the out-of state Democratic senators who are holding out to protect collective bargaining. The new rule would force the Senators to pick up their paychecks in-person. This rule was passed in a partisan vote in the Senate yesterday--a move that went unnoticed by the mainstream press. 

The fake Koch asks Walker how they might get others in Senate to vote to stop collective bargaining. Walker responds that he's involved the Justice Department in investigating whether the union is paying the absent Democratic senators to remain out of state, or providing them with food, shelter, etc., saying it would be an ethics violation or potentially a felony. Wisconsin legislators are well aware of these rules and have already stated they are using their own money while they are out of state.


But the Governor also explains how he is going to layoff thousands of Wisconsin workers as a tactic to get the Democrats to cooperate:  “So, we’re trying about four or five different angles. Each day we crank up a little bit more pressure. The other thing is I’ve got layoff notices ready, we put out the at-risk notices, we’ll announce Thursday, they’ll go out early next week and we’ll probably get five to six thousand state workers will get at-risk notices for layoffs. We might
ratchet that up a little bit too.”

The move has been called “despicable” and “ruthless “ and “sickening.” But most importantly, if he is choosing to lay off workers as a political tactic when he wasn’t otherwise planning to do so then it is not just morally repugnant but legally questionable. State and federal contract and labor law has protections against this type of abusive behavior and inappropriate quid pro quo.



This morning the Capital Times quotes the state’s former Attorney General: “There clearly are potential ethics violations, and there are potential election-law violations and there are a lot of what look to me like labor-law violations,” said Peg Lautenschlager, a Democrat who served as Wisconsin’s Attorney General after serving for many years as a U.S. Attorney. The head of the state teacher's association, Mary Bell, reminds us: “he literally planned to use five to six thousand hardworking Wisconsin taxpayers as political pawns in his political game. He actually thought through a strategy to lay people off – deny them the ability to feed their families – and use it as leverage for his political goals."

Kids and Hired Thugs

Walker also says he considers then rejected the idea of hiring trouble makers to disrupt the rallies which have been packed with elementary school children and highs schoolers. When fake Koch says “We’ll back you any way we can. But what we were thinking about the crowd was, uh, was planting some troublemakers.” Walker says: “we thought about that," but he rejected the idea in case it back-fired. He didn’t want to  “scare the public into thinking maybe the governor as to settle to avoid all these problems.” 



Wisconsin Ethics Rules



Wisconsin has the toughest ethics law in the nation. Public officials are prohibited from soliciting or receiving anything of value if it could reasonably be expected to influence or reward official actions. The rules against “pay to play politics” say a public official is prohibited from taking official action in exchange for political contributions or anything else of value for the benefit of a candidate, political party, or any person making certain candidate-related communications. You can’t even take a cup of coffee from a lobbyist.



Earlier in the call, Walker had asked the fake Koch for help “spreading the word,” especially in the "swing districts," in defense of his determination to break the unions and help get calls in to shore up his Republican allies in the legislature. Walker benefited from a high-dollar "issue ad" campaigns by groups funded by Koch group before the election. Americans for Prosperity, which Koch chairs, promoted and funded a couple thousand counter-protestors last Saturday.

On the same day that the scandal broke here in Wisconsin, Americans for Prosperity went up with a $342,000 TV ad campaign in support of Walker – an enormous sum in a state like Wisconsin.  If such ads are effectively coordinated with the Governor's office they may be subject to rules requiring greater disclosure of expenditures and contributors.




Toward the end of the call, the fake Koch offers to fly Walker out to California, after they "crush the bastards," and show him "a good time," to which Walker responds with enthusiasm in his voice "All right, that would be outstanding." But, Wisconsin rules bar state officials from taking action for something of value.  After Walker agrees to the junket, the fake Koch adds, "And, you know, we have a little bit of a vested interest as well" to which Walker responds, "Well that's just it."



Conclusion

So, while Walker did not apparently not recognize Koch's voice, he certainly recognized his name, eagerly recounting his efforts to crush collective bargaining in Wisconsin to an out-of-state billioniare backer and thanking him for all Koch had done for him. The entire conversation raises ethical concerns that warrant much closer examination, especially with Wisconsin's tough pay to play rules. A week ago the Center for Media and Democracy filed an open records request for the Governor's phone records, email records, and other communications. Perhaps these records will help us understand all the influences behind the Governor's recent radical actions.

Wisconsin is not Illinois, it has a reputation for being a squeaky clean state and lesser scandals have brought down political officials. Governor Walker likes to complain of “outside agitators.” Hard to imagine an agitator with more influence and money than the Koch-family.

© 2011 Center for Media & Democracy

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/02/24-6

Oil soars close to $120 on Libya fears

By Agence France-Presse
Thursday, February 24th, 2011 -- 4:27 pm

LONDON – Oil prices rocketed close to $120 on Thursday, levels unseen since mid-2008, as growing instability in Libya stoked supply jitters across the Middle East and beyond.

Brent North Sea crude for delivery in April rallied as high as $119.79 per barrel, the highest since August 22, 2008. It breached $110 easily on Wednesday as Libya was gripped by a fresh wave of violence and other protests continued across the Middle East.

New York's light sweet crude for April, known as West Texas Intermediate (WTI), jumped to $103.41, a level last seen in late September 2008.

"Oil prices continued to surge higher as events in Libya dominate the headlines and the oil market," said Westhouse Securities analyst David Hart.

"The country's output of high-quality crude is being significantly impacted due to the exodus of foreign personnel."

The oil market has spiked higher this week as foreign energy companies have halted or cut output from Libya as a result of the violence.

Spain's biggest oil company, Repsol, stopped production there earlier this week as anti-government protests spread.

Italy's ENI, the biggest foreign energy major in Libya, said Thursday that it has cut oil production in the country by over 50 percent due to the ongoing unrest while British giant BP evacuated all expatriate staff from the restive country.

"Crude prices held up over the past week, underpinned by persistent geopolitical concerns amid ongoing tensions in the Middle East and North Africa," said VTB Capital commodities analyst Andrey Kruchenkov.

"Violence in Libya escalated with the country's Eastern provinces allegedly (escaping from) government control and reports of shutting down production capacity by oil majors."

In later afternoon deals on Thursday, Brent stood at $113.94, up $2.69 from Wednesday's closing level, while New York was $1.31 higher at $99.41 per barrel.

Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi spoke Thursday to the elders of a town west of the capital where he said a drug-crazed mob of youths spurred on by Al-Qaeda had killed four policemen, urging them to bring their children under control.

Speaking on state television by phone from an undisclosed location, the embattled 68-year-old former colonel fretted about unrest in Az-Zawiyah, 50 kilometres (30 miles) west of Tripoli as the battle to unseat him began to encircle the capital.

Al-Jazeera television reported heavy fighting there between pro- and anti-government forces and said there had been an undetermined number of casualties.

"Increasing unrest in North Africa and the Middle East has been a key driver of the latest spike (in prices)," said Shane Oliver, chief economist at AMP Capital Investors.

He said in a research note that Libya accounts for 1.8 million barrels a day of oil production, while Algeria, which has also seen protests, accounts for 2.1 million barrels.

Libya has Africa's largest oil reserves, is the continent's fourth largest producer and is a member of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the cartel that produces about 40 percent of global supplies.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/24/oil-soars-close-to-120-on-libya-fears/

‘Big Oil’ lobby to begin donating to political candidates

By Eric W. Dolan
Thursday, February 24th, 2011 -- 8:23 pm

The American Petroleum Institute (API), which represents more than 450 oil and natural gas companies, has announced it will start donating to political candidates this year as President Obama aims to cut subsidies to energy companies and expand environmental laws.

"This is adding one more tool to our toolkit," Martin Durbin, API’s executive vice president for government affairs, told Bloomberg in an interview. "At the end of the day, our mission is trying to influence the policy debate."

The API spent $6.7 million to lobby Congress and the White House last year, ThinkProgress reported, making it the seventh most prolific spender in the oil and gas industry, following ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Koch Industries and BP.

API President and CEO Jack Gerard sharply criticized President Obama proposal to cut billions in subsidies to energy companies, saying it would eliminate thousands of new jobs.

"It’s no surprise the administration is proposing yet again to raise taxes on the U.S. oil and natural gas industry," he said. "But it’s still a bad idea and comes at one of the worst times in our economic history."

In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama called for investments into clean energy, declaring they should be paid for in part by cutting federal subsidies and tax breaks for the oil industry.

Obama said the United States should get 80 percent of its electricity from clean energy sources by 2035, though he included nuclear power, "clean coal," and natural gas as part of that standard, in addition to wind and solar.

On Thursday, Richard Ranger, a senior policy adviser at API, called on President Obama to lift drilling restrictions on Alaska's outer continental shelf.

In July 2010, Greenpeace obtained an internal memo from the API that showed the institute funded and developed a fake grassroots campaign to attack environmental legislation.

"API will provide the up-front resources," the email said. "This includes contracting with a highly experienced events management company that has produced successful rallies for presidential campaigns."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/24/big-oil-lobby-to-begin-donating-to-political-candidates/

Fox host: Wisconsin clash is about busting unions, not budget

Labor Protesters Chant "Fox Lies," "Tell The Truth" During Live Fox Reports

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes

Tue, Aug 12 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Most U.S. and foreign corporations doing business in the United States avoid paying any federal income taxes, despite trillions of dollars worth of sales, a government study released on Tuesday said.

The Government Accountability Office said 72 percent of all foreign corporations and about 57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes for at least one year between 1998 and 2005.

More than half of foreign companies and about 42 percent of U.S. companies paid no U.S. income taxes for two or more years in that period, the report said.

During that time corporate sales in the United States totaled $2.5 trillion, according to Democratic Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, who requested the GAO study.

The report did not name any companies. The GAO said corporations escaped paying federal income taxes for a variety of reasons including operating losses, tax credits and an ability to use transactions within the company to shift income to low tax countries.

With the U.S. budget deficit this year running close to the record $413 billion that was set in 2004 and projected to hit a record $486 billion next year, lawmakers are looking to plug holes in the U.S. tax code and generate more revenues.

Dorgan in a statement called the report "a shocking indictment of the current tax system." Levin said it made clear that "too many corporations are using tax trickery to send their profits overseas and avoid paying their fair share in the United States."

The study showed about 28 percent of large foreign corporations, those with more than $250 million in assets, doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes in 2005 despite $372 billion in gross receipts, the senators said. About 25 percent of the largest U.S. companies paid no federal income taxes in 2005 despite $1.1 trillion in gross sales that year, they said.

(Reporting by Donna Smith, Editing by David Wiessler)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/08/12/us-usa-taxes-corporations-idUSN1249465620080812