From across the sea - how the Brits REALLY see us spinning around the Beltway

Hmmmm -- paging Toby Young!

America - Andrew Stephen reveals how Bush nobbled the press - Andrew Stephen - AmericaMonday - 18th April 2005

The new style of government here involves paying journalists and broadcasters to mention Bush policies favourably and paying PR companies to plant fake "news reports" [surprise!] By Andrew Stephen

Hillary Clinton, I hear, is so left-wing that she will be unable to win the Democratic nomination for the presidency in 2008. The UN is in chaos and Kofi Annan will have to go because it has been proved beyond doubt that he is corrupt. Senator Ted Kennedy is a beyond-the-pale lefty who should not be taken seriously in American politics.Virtually every day, I find decent people telling me this sort of thing. Such pearls have become accepted wisdom in all social classes and across the political spectrum. In fact, Hillary Clinton's record fits quite comfortably with the Democratic mainstream. The UN oil-for-food scandal is nothing compared with that of the disappearing $4bn during the first weeks of the Iraq occupation, and there is no evidence whatever that Annan is anything but a man of deep principle. Kennedy would fit easily into the left of the Tory party.

So why do most Americans believe these statements to be true? The answer, I think, is that the Bush administration has consciously decided to wrest control of large slices of the American media - not just in its editorialising, but in its reporting as well. It comes naturally to the present White House to lie, bully and intimidate, and the result is that the media are now exactly where the administration wants them to be: cowed, more right-wing, and on the defensive.The process started in the administration's first term.

"Reporters" without proper press credentials were planted in White House press conferences; they duly asked what Americans call softball questions. Fake TV news reports, written and produced by government departments or even PR companies paid to work on their behalf, were frequently broadcast by stations that passed them off as their own legitimate news.Take Jeff Gannon, a man with a shaven head who was always asking contrived questions at White House press conferences. The administration gave him press credentials almost as soon as it took power in 2001, at a time when it was turning away many critical journalists, such as the Pulitzer-winning New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd. Not long ago, Gannon asked President Bush: "How are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?" He was also given a secret government memo that outed a woman as a CIA agent - information the administration wanted to leak.Gannon worked for a political website called Talon News, the White House said. In fact, Talon News was a front organisation; the man funding Talon was Robert Eberle, a 37-year-old Texas Republican who also supports a right-wing website called [http://www.gopusa.com%20(the%20letters%20gop%20standing%20for%20grand%20old%20party,%20the%20traditional%20nickname%20for%20the%20republican%20party/]). Gannon's real name is James D Guckert. Guckert was the name on the driving licence he presented to the US Secret Service every day when he arrived at the White House - a clear indication that the machine was in cahoots with the deception. He was also behind gay "escort" websites such as [http://www.hotmilitarystuds.com,%20%20http://www.workingboys.com%20and%20%20http://www.militaryescorts.com,%20which%20advertised%20him%20as%20somebody%20who%20is][sic]".

Members of the Bush administration certainly would not want publicly to be associated with sleaze and fabrication, but such things do not matter if they are kept under wraps; being found out is what counts. Guckert subsequently "resigned" as White House correspondent for Talon News because of the pressure on him and "my family" - apparently a reference to his elderly mother. Talon News has now disappeared altogether, and this particular wheeze by the Republicans is over. But others proliferate. I would have thought that the Fox News network - by far the most-watched news channel in the country - would not need anyone to serve up propaganda to it for broadcasting. A report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism said last month that 73 per cent of Fox news items about Iraq contained the opinions of reporters and anchors, apparently provided voluntarily. But its stations in Louisville and Memphis have still broadcast "news reports" that have been faked by government departments or PR agencies to promote the Bush agenda - without telling viewers of their origin. Typical are highly contentious "reports" about the proposed changes in social security, which end with the convincing sign-off "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting".The reporter in a similar piece, hailing what was described as "another success" in "the drive to strengthen aviation security", was a PR operative working under a false name. Reports highlighting the training of interrogators such as those at Abu Ghraib Prison were produced by the Pentagon and transmitted by at least 34 television stations. The administration paid $254m to PR companies in its first term, $97m of which went to a public relations firm called Ketchum. This company was involved in yet another wheeze: secretly paying journalists to drop favourable mentions of the administration into their writings and broadcasting. Armstrong Williams, a man the Washington Post described as "one of the most prominent black conservatives in the media", was paid $241,000 to comment on the administration's schools policies during his broadcasts and in his syndicated columns.The way the administration reacted when news of this came out was, again, typical: Rod Paige, in charge of education when his department contracted Williams to spew out support masquerading as honest comment, pronounced himself shocked and ordered an inquiry into "perceptions and allegations of ethical lapses". Not real ethical lapses, you notice, just perceptions. "This happens all the time," Williams says of his paymasters' tactics. "There are others."Newspapers and TV stations have started to buckle under pressure. Right-wing administration policies are presented as mainstream; the US media like to see themselves as occupying the noble middle ground, and have been coerced to see the middle as further to the right. In the election campaign last year, for example, George Bush's claims were far more outrageous than John Kerry's - but the media convinced themselves that, by seeing each side as equally guilty, their coverage would be (to use Fox's cynical phrase) fair and balanced. The tactics of the Bush administration have thus become like those of Richard Nixon: it uses any opportunity to paint opponents as dirty and unprincipled, while claiming the high moral ground for itself.

Perhaps my favourite indicator of how the president and his team view the media came in September 2000 when Bush and Dick Cheney were speaking at an election rally in Naperville, Illinois. Microphones picked up Bush saying: "There's Adam Clymer, major-league asshole from the New York Times." To which Cheney responded: "Oh yeah, he is, big time."Which probably explains why the administration then refused a press pass to Maureen Dowd (but gave one to the wretched Guckert), and why it banned New York Times reporters from the vice-presidential plane. Give no quarter, show no quarter, unless it becomes the only political way out; pay and manipulate for good coverage even though it may be downright dishonest: that is the new way of government here.

This article first appeared in the New Statesman. For the latest in current and cultural affairs subscribe to the New Statesman print edition.

WP - Stephen Barr - Good News for Bunny Greenhouse!

Senate Committee Approves Greater Protections for Whistle-Blowers
By Stephen Barr - Thursday, April 14, 2005; Page B02

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51335-2005Apr13.html?referrer=email

These are tough times for federal employees who blow the whistle on waste, fraud and abuse. Their cases take months to investigate; they often face reprisals from bosses, and once in court, they find that the protections granted by Congress are not all that strong.

In an effort to strengthen those protections, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved a bipartisan bill that supporters hope will encourage employees to step forward when they spot wrongdoing in government offices.

"Strengthening whistle-blower protections is more than just an employee protection issue. It promotes good government," Sen. Daniel K. Akaka (D-Hawaii), a chief sponsor of the bill, said in a statement.

"If federal employees fear reprisal for blowing the whistle, then we not only fail to protect the whistle-blower, but we fail to protect taxpayers and . . . national security," Akaka said.

Among those sponsoring the bill are Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa).

The legislation would clarify congressional intent as to what type of whistle-blowing is protected and where it may take place. It also reinforces the right of whistle-blowers to turn over classified information to Congress, but only to members and aides who hold security clearances and who are authorized to receive the information.

The bill would prohibit federal managers from suspending or revoking an employee's security clearance in retaliation for whistle-blowing. The Merit Systems Protection Board would be able to conduct expedited reviews in disputes over security clearances but would not have the power to restore a security clearance, according to the bill.

Under the bill, federal employees would be required to offer "substantial evidence" in court to support disclosures of improper activities. That would make clear that employees did not have to provide "irrefragable proof" of official misconduct, a standard used in a 1999 court ruling and one that watchdog groups contend is impossible to meet.

The bill also would suspend the monopoly held by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on whistle-blower retaliation cases and permit multi-circuit review for a period of five years.

E-mail: barrs@washpost.com

PR EXECs Undeterred by Fake News "Flap" - manufactured news marches on--->

HVPR questions: If an industrial video is made, it is not "fake news". If an independent report is distributed, is it to be looked upon as "fake news"? But the White House hiring firms? It has been done for years. Is there a problem with that?

from the Center for Media and Democracy
Publishers of PR Watch


PR Execs Undeterred by Fake News "Flap"

Analysis Submitted by John Stauber on Wed, 03/16/2005 - 21:50.
Topics: U.S. government public relations

This afternoon I listened in on a conference call among some of the top PR execs in the business of producing video news releases (VNRs), more honestly called fake news. I can report they are proud and confident that the recent about the Bush administration's use of fake news will amount to nothing at all. These PR executives are elated that the New York Times piece was about government propaganda, and not about their much more widespread and lucrative production of corporate VNRs, the biggest and richest part of the fake news business.

The conference call was arranged by PR trade press maven Jack O'Dwyer. It featured top PR executives in the fake news business, including Doug Simon of D S Simon Productions, Stan Zeitlin of West Glen Communications, Larry Moskowitz of Medialink Worldwide and KEF Media's Kevin Foley. These are the companies that are producing and distributing the thousands of VNRs sent to TV networks and stations each year. The VNRs are fake news stories, paid for by clients ranging from the Pentagon to Monsanto, that are aired by TV news producers as if they were independent reporting and the work of real journalists, rather than PR operatives who used to be real journalists.

The real journalists at the TV networks and stations are engaging in fraud and plagiarism on a massive scale when they pawn off these VNRs as real news. If you were a journalism student with an assignment to produce a TV news story, and your professor discovered that someone else had done all your work for you and given the story to you to pass off as your own, you should be expelled. But in the real world of TV journalism, you would just collect your paycheck and go home.

There is also payola involved. Money flows from the VNR producing PR firms to the TV networks for "distribution costs," and the networks send the VNRs out to their affiliates for use on the air.

Listening to the PR executives today was both amusing and infuriating. These fellows are whistling past the graveyard, assuring themselves that this all is no big deal. There was no hint of shame, certainly no apologizing, just apparent disdain for having their business practices dissected on the front page of the New York Times. They are proud of their work.

Frankly, why would these PR execs worry? In the eleven years that our organization has been exposing fake news, the New York Times article is the first major mainstream coverage that I can recall. This "flap" could simply dissipate. It might even publicize and promote the fake news industry resulting in more business for these PR firms. Rob Zaleski of Madison, Wisconsin's Capital Times, interviewed me about this for his column today. Here is part of his report:

"The Times article just confirms everything we've found [said Stauber], including the fact that when you actually go out and confront TV news producers and news directors on their use of video news releases, they'll deny it. And you don't know if they're lying or they're honestly ignorant, because now, as the article points out, this stuff is fed through the networks."
Question is, will the Times' expose be a turning point? Or, once the controversy dies down, will TV stations merely revert to their old habits?

"I think it could be either," Stauber says. "The New York Times is still the paper of record. And when they give something this much play, it has an impact.

"But it could be just a little blip and we're not going to see another major story about this for another decade. Certainly the TV media aren't going to go anywhere near this, because it's a story of the corruption of TV in particular."

However, Stauber says there are definite indications that the public's disgust with the Bush administration is growing. And he thinks there's an opportunity now - thanks in part to the Times article - to pressure Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to toughen and enforce laws against "covert propaganda" and demand that broadcasters "come clean with viewers about using government-produced news."

To that end, Stauber says his group has joined with the nonpartisan public interest group Free Press in an effort to gather 250,000 signatures on petitions aimed at stopping such deplorable tactics. "Unless we act now," he says, "the White House will continue to act with impunity - taking advantage of understaffed and incautious local news operations to manipulate public opinion."

Stauber, by the way, says that he too is amazed that the Bush administration doesn't seem the least bit embarrassed by all the revelations of the last few months. Then again, "at this point, who would they be accountable to?" he says with a laugh. "We haven't really seen a high level of accountability within the administration on a single issue. I mean, who's walked the plank on anything?"

Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.prwatch.org/trackback/3374

Fake News and PR Firms
from On Message From Wagner Communications (trackback)

Helen Thomas: Who is a Journalist?

Who [are] You Calling A Journalist?
Search For Truth More Important Than Title
Helen Thomas, Hearst White House columnist
POSTED: 5:57 pm EDT April 13, 2005

Who is a journalist?

That is the question that Jeff Gannon, alias James Guckert, asked in his own defense during a National Press Club panel last week.

The club sponsored the discussion to illuminate the differences between legitimate journalists and bloggers -- or imposters.

Gannon and a couple of bloggers were on the panel.

Gannon made news recently after some liberal bloggers began investigating him when he asked President George W. Bush a question that had as its premise the assertion that congressional Democrats were "divorced from reality."

Bush comes to his rare news conferences armed with a list of reporters his staff has designated for him to call on. In giving Gannon the nod, he passed over some of the regular White House journalists -- including yours truly -- all with our hands up.

Gannon had attended White House briefings over a two-year period by getting a regular flow of one-day press passes that allowed him to enter the White House grounds. He did not qualify for a permanent White House press pass or a congressional press pass because he failed to meet the accreditation rules, which include the requirement that the applicant work for a news publication or broadcast outlet.

Gannon was known in the press room for asking softball, right-leaning questions. The digging bloggers revealed him to be a Republican operative, employed by the Talon News Web site, run by volunteer GOP activists and linked to GOSPUSA, a Republican consulting group, owned by Bobby Eberle of Houston.

Once that was established, questions arose as to why he was allowed to attend the daily press sessions.

Gannon complained that he had been targeted by liberal bloggers who did not like his "pro-administration" questions and argued that the harsh treatment he was getting in the mainstream media would have a "chilling" effect on other conservatives in the media.

"I was about the only news source providing ... information without a filter," he said in defending his use of White House press releases verbatim in his so-called "news" reports.

"There is nothing wrong with reporting what the administration says about a particular issue," he said. "Why does everything have to be looked at through a lens that represents every point of view?"

In the ensuing hullabaloo, Gannon resigned from Talon, telling Editor & Publisher magazine -- a news industry trade publication -- that he felt he was a "legitimate" correspondent.

One does wonder where the lines are these days that distinguish between legitimate reporters and anyone who has a laptop computer or a Web site.

Where do the bloggers fit in? They may have something to say -- and nobody is stopping them. Still, the description "journalist" does not apply to what they do.

Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington & Lee University, defines a journalist as someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking." He conceded that although the whole job description "has gotten muddied," Gannon shouldn't be considered a journalist.

Gannon was a propagandist, a flack for the White House. Thus, he fails to meet the requirement -- as Wasserman wrote in the Miami Herald last September -- that "anybody who enters the (journalism) profession makes a core commitment to do his or her best to determine and tell the truth."

Tom Rosenstiel, head of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, said the proper question is not whether you call yourself a journalist, but whether your work constitutes journalism.
"A journalist tries to get the facts right" and tries to get close to a "verifiable truth," not to take sides but "to inspire public discussion," he said.

This isn't a requirement for bloggers with axes to grind. Professional reporters and editors are trained to understand the need for neutrality in straight news stories. They also have been trained in the ethics that distinguish their profession. It's in the nature of our work that the public has every opportunity to scrutinize what we do. No one lasts long in the news business if there are deliberate distortions of the news.

The late Martha Gellhorn, a legendary foreign correspondent, said: "In all my reporting life, I have thrown small pebbles into a very large pond, and ... have no way of knowing whether any pebble caused the slightest ripple. I don't need to worry about that. My responsibility was the effort."

Fortunately, most newspapers in this country are still devoted to delivering impartial news stories. The editors and publishers see it as an indispensable public service.
(Helen Thomas can be reached at the e-mail address hthomas@hearstdc.com ).

Discuss Helen Thomas' Opinion

Below is part of the discussion:

Truth in journalism would be reporting that reporters ask loaded questions or make up news and report it as if they got it from a known, truthful source or that they report an action by a member of one party as shocking at the same time they don't even report the same action by the party they prefer.

Truth in journalism would be reporting the ethical shortfalls in journalism rather than letting agenda driven reporters off the hook, or worse, picking up their slanted news and rereporting it with even greater bias.

Edward R. Murrow's credibility was not due to a basso profundo voice or good looks or wardrobe. He reported what happened and let listeners decide why it happened.
News agencies that decide what they want to report and how they want to report it based on a political agenda or ratings are shameful. If they would report the unbiased news when and where it happens the public would consume it as a thirsty man consumes water.
Web sites that block posts based on politics are also shameful.

WoodynBalt
04-13-2005, 3:55 PM

Helen Thomas is and has been for decades, the most tenacious and honest journalist covering Washington. She has never been accused by a credible colleague (liberal or conservative) of being anything less than a professional and someone to whom many younger journalists have looked to as a mentor over those years.

It is indeed sad to see some of the postings here that denegrate her. As for "that old Arab Helen Thomas" comment DOCUMENTED as made by the vicious blond opportunist Coulter, the terms old and Arab were meant as incendiary, I care not how any of her "supporters" wish to lighten it up.

WoodynBalto
surfer1104
04-12-2005, 9:00 PM

Dear Helen, I wish you can describe to me what your meaning of "truth in journalism is" . A free society is one which information flows freely without any filters or so called " professional journalism". Lets review professional journalism based on CNN reporter in Bagdad which did not report the true facts of Sadam Husian.. Let look at New York Times which fabricated stories of recent events are merely sweeped underneath the rug.. and than there is Dan Rather who so innocently reported a fabricated story on our President. Yet you yourself spin a web of communication deceit to convince your reader ship that all this is ok as long it is done to protect the media establishment. One reassuring fact is that most of the media darlings are becomming mere names on grave stones as age creeps upon there life cycle. And one day as the past news is reveiwed and analized by a new generations with the truth to be known how much power the media elite use to control the information to promote the elitest agenda.. The internet has level the playing field and I enjoy watching past media darling wallow in there misery of self indignation , hatred and contempt for the free flow of information among the masses and the great changes that are moving our society to a great bastion of freedom and independence.

Regards, DJ
pesce9991
04-12-2005, 5:54 PM

Groenhagen,
By stating that Helen Thomas is a liberal version of Jeff Gannon (aka, James Dale Guckert, Bulldog,etc.) you make my case that liberals are far superior!
Helen is known as the 'dean of the Washington Press Corps'. She was the only journalist to travel with Nixon to China in 1972. She covered every economic summit in her nearly 60 year career. She traveled the world with Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, and Clinton. Quotes: "we (reporters) are not here to curry favor, nor can we respond to efforts at presidential intimidation"...."our priority is the peoples right to know." She usually sat front and center dressed in red and was treated with dignity a respect.... that is, until this president came along.
Now what about Jeff Gannon? His past is veiled in mystery but some things have come to light. His credentials came from a two day journalism seminar. He was known as "Bulldog" on his gay prostitute websites. When he applied for a press pass he did not qualify because the news service he worked for, Talon News, was not considered legit. He is under investigation for his possible connection to the Valerie Plame outing. Nice comparison!
velkyn
04-12-2005, 3:27 PM

Helen is correct. There aren't any reporters anymore who actually ask follow up questions to get to the real story.
The true heir to Murrow is Jon Stewart and the Daily Show. They are still willing to yell that the Emperor has no clothes, no matter what political party he might belong to.
jccalzada
04-12-2005, 12:32 PM


rebel7:
What racial slur did Ann Coulter launch against Helen Thomas? Thomas is a Syrian and an Arab, is she not? If I called Margaret Thatcher an old European, would that also be a racial slur?
The most outrageous part of your post was Rep. Dingell claiming Helen is unbiased.
Exposing the liberal liars
rebel7
04-11-2005, 9:02 PM

The Jewish Forward: Lobbyist Denies Newsweek Story on DeLay

Update

Lobbyist Denies Newsweek Story on DeLay
By E.J. Kessler
April 12, 2005

Embattled Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff is denying Newsweek’s story that he told a lunch companion that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay knew about the financing for several trips abroad that have raised ethical questions.

DeLay, a Texas Republican, has been taking fire in the press and from Democrats over three trips abroad that allegedly were paid for by lobbyists, which would violate House ethics rules. At least two of the trips, a 1997 visit to Russia and a 2000 trip to England and Scotland, allegedly were financed by entities with links to Abramoff, according to press reports. DeLay has denied knowing that any lobbyists funded the trips.

He has said the trips were sponsored by a Washington-based conservative think tank, the National Center for Public Policy Research. Abramoff served on the center’s board.

Abramoff is being investigated by the FBI, the IRS, the Senate Indian Affairs Committee and a federal grand jury over alleged fraud and overcharges in $66 million in fees he was paid by Indian tribes involved in casino gambling. A story in the April 18 edition of Newsweek quotes an upset Abramoff railing at DeLay and his aides for maintaining that they did not know about Abramoff’s "behind the scenes” financing role in regard to the trips.

"Those S.O.B.s,” Newsweek quotes Abramoff as saying about DeLay and his staffers. "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details.”Newsweek sourced the remark to an unnamed companion with whom Abramoff lunched last week. Abramoff, however, is denying the story.

"Mr. Abramoff strongly denies making the comments attributed to him in the April 18 issue of Newsweek,” Abramoff spokesman Andrew Blum wrote in an e-mail to the Forward. "He is furious that in the media’s latest attempt to create a story where none exists, it now seeks to pit him against those that he has known and supported for years. Even Mr. Abramoff’s unidentified lunch companion referred to in the Newsweek article has flatly denied ever stating that Mr. Abramoff said these things. He can only hope that those who know him best know better than to believe everything they read.”

Newsweek counterpunched.

"We stand behind our story,” said Newsweek spokesman Ken Weine.

NYT OP-ED Pentagon should remain dedicated to fighting for research dollars, funding

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Research Worth Fighting For

By JOHN M. DEUTCH and WILLIAM J. PERRY
Published: April 13, 2005

IF the Pentagon's $419.3 billion budget request for next year, only about $10.5 billion - 2 percent - will go toward basic research, applied research and advanced technology development. This represents a 20 percent reduction from last year, a drastic cutback that threatens the long-term security of the nation. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld should reconsider this request, and if he does not, Congress should restore the cut.

These research and development activities, known as the "technology base" program, are a vital part of the United States defense program. For good reason: the tech base is America's investment in the future. Over the years, tech base activities have yielded advances in scientific and engineering knowledge that have given United States forces the technological superiority that is responsible in large measure for their current dominance in conventional military power.
Research into basic understanding of methods for reducing radar signatures in the 1970's, for example, gave rise to "stealth" technology. Advances in electronic sensor technology enable the vast collection of information from satellites, and past work on computer systems permits distribution of this information in near real-time to military commanders. The combination of near-real-time intelligence and precision munitions are the heart of the so-called "revolution in military affairs" that avoids large and costly systems and approaches.

These advances require years of sustained effort by university, industry and government researchers. If the Pentagon does not make the required investments today, America will not have dominant military technology tomorrow.
The technology base program has also had a major effect on American industry. Indeed, it is the primary reason that the United States leads the world today in information technology. American companies not only draw heavily on the Pentagon's work, but they have also come to depend on it. The research and development programs of many of America's major information technology companies are almost exclusively devoted to product development.

It was the investment of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in a network known as ARPA-net in the 1960's and 70's, for example, that gave rise to the Internet. The JPEG file format for digital images is based on software and standards developed by the Pentagon. The global positioning satellite system, first developed for precision-guided munitions, is now used in many cellphones and has the potential to revolutionize our air traffic control system. America's ability to translate the Pentagon's technology base into commercial achievement is the envy of the world.

Of course, the administration and Congress need to make tough budget choices. But to shift money away from the technology base to pay for Iraq, other current military operations or research on large, expensive initiatives, is to give priority to the near term at the expense of the future. This is doubtful judgment, especially at a time when the nature of the threat confronting America is changing. New threats, like catastrophic terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction, urgently call for new technology.

There should be no doubt that basic research will continue to make a contribution. Robotics, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, brain and cognitive sciences, nanotechnology, large-scale modeling and simulation: all these fields can have a huge impact. If properly supported, basic technology work is likely to lead to unprecedented results.

Mr. Rumsfeld has long championed the need to transform the military and exploit new technology. He has supported the technology base in the past and has urged the adoption of a more long-term view of security needs. He should, then, be willing to review and reverse the Pentagon's request for reducing its technology base. He should understand that short-term budget requirements for the armed services always tend to push out the technology base program - unless the Pentagon leadership supports it.

Perhaps the reason for this year's reduction is the mistaken belief that a one-year gap in financing does not matter, because innovation takes so long. But tech base advances occur because of stable financing. Fluctuating budgets cause wasted effort.
It is possible that Congress will restore the cuts in technology base programs and correspondingly reduce some other part of the defense budget. But Mr. Rumsfeld should not depend on Congress. It would be vastly better if the Pentagon understood the importance of the tech base effort, and acted on that understanding.

The Department of Defense's technology base programs have been an important factor in giving America the dominant military force in the world. They have also helped many American information technology companies become successful. The Pentagon should maintain its dedication to these programs, and that will require leadership from the secretary of defense - as well as support from Congress.

John Deutch, a professor of chemistry at M.I.T., was deputy secretary of defense from 1994 to 1995. William J. Perry, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, was secretary of defense from 1994 to 1997.

Comic Relief - but he takes it all so seriously!

gannon_talk
Originally uploaded by highvizpr.

Well, it didn't hurt Howard Dean, did it? Digby nails the PR advice that I gave to Gannon just last night, from the glorious Beltway + 66 --- Kilroy2005

New Star

Digby: For those who didn't see the NPC blogging, ass-fucking and journalism panel this morning, the great Crooks and Liars has the highlights for you right here. Gannon has quite the schtick going for him. I don't know if it's a natural gift or if he has had help, [hint-hint], but he handled it all quite deftly, I thought. He makes absolutely no sense, wanders off into unrelated subjects, claims victimhood at every turn, avoids questions like a pro and appears to me to be incredibly stupid, arrogant and deluded all at the same time. A clown that nobody in their right mind could take seriously. In others words, meet the next GOP nominee for President of the United States. I spent years right on this old blog screeching about George W. Bush being just as I described, assuming that any sentient person could see that he makes no sense, that he speaks in riddles that he is coached (badly) and that he has absolutely no idea that he is an idiot. It took me a long time realize that that is exactly what a lot of people like about him. He doesn't need to make sense as long as he claims to represent the "real" people who are predisposed to support him against the pointy headed know-it-alls who lord over them. I have little doubt that they think Gannon really kicked ass. "And why shouldn't the president have one person who will tell his side of the story? Fox is fair and balanced, they have to tell all sides. It's not right that president Bush has to spend tax payer money just to get his story told. I'm so sick of this liberal media." "You know he was a marine don't you, Ethel?" "I heard that. He looks like one too." I think Gannon's assertion that FOXNews is not conservative was his "Christ, he changed mah heart moment." I expect that he's on his way to a comeback. The right takes care of its own, even if they sell out the country to the Russian mob or advertise their prositution services with pictures of themselves pissing on the internet. It's all good. Matt Yglesias was just great and I especially enjoyed his incredulous amusement at Gannon's nonsense. [He made a great straight man! I said to Gannon, "you could be the next Tony Randall"] It is always difficult to argue with aliens from other planets, but I thought that Matt did it very well. It remains important that as we go into this bizarre new era of elastic truth and contrived alternate storylines that normal, intelligent people continue to operate within the bounds of verifiable reality. Somebody's got to keep score. And Wonkette was a big surprise. She was unrelenting with old JG and she came the closest to rattling his bizarre robotic composure. Maybe it takes an aggressive, unflappable female with a sense of humor to get to wierd gay Republicans like Guckert. I saw a little bitchy sneer on his face come forth as she was questioning him and it would have been interesting if she'd been allowed to continue. Unfortunately, all the timorous and delicate old ladies of the DC press club were willing to host a panel featuring a real mediawhore, [on line!] but they weren't willing to let the discussion go where it would naturally lead. I'm not saying that they needed to spend the hour addressing the fact that Guckert has his pictures plastered all over the internet illegally selling his body for money, but it is such an amazing turn around from just a few years ago when the DC press corp had no compunctions whatsoever about spending month after month speculating about the sex lives of the president, first lady and Monica Lewisnky (plus all of her former lovers) without a minute spared as to whether the details were relevant to any particular public discussion. And to the best of my knowledge, there weren't even any naked pictures. It's very nice that they have now decided that these private matters are off limits when it comes to male prostitutes in the white house press corps with connections to Republican operatives and born again Christians who believe that sexual morals should be policed by the federal government. It will be interesting to see if they hold to this new regard for personal privacy when the next GOP pimped sex scandal pops up. In the end, these panels about "what constitutes journalism" will probably become perennial just as the "why can't we stop ourselves from only covering the horserace" panels that crop up after every election. The internet is changing all of it and nobody knows where it's going. All the talking in the world isn't going to make a lick of difference. Everybody's just along for the ride --- bloggers, journalists and Republican male hookers alike. .digby

[MORE]

Jeff Gannon says he was threatened by Rogers. As I was boarding an elevator to exit the building, this same person made a dash for me with unknown intent...If you saw this person's behavior, you would realize that the threats against my person, property and family have not been exaggerated. [Now, he really believes this --LAWSUIT! LAWSUIT!]

But here's another side of the story: Mike Rogers at blogActive tried to get Gannon to answer some questions after the meeting and responds to the charges by Gannon: I joined Gannon on the elevator heading to the lobby. Gannon raised his fists at me as if to threaten me (some people will do anything to stop a story, huh?) and attempted to intimidate me off of the elevator. read on

Is a Politcal Personality a "pundit"? A comic figure? Surely NOT a journalist! [---Hmmmmm...maybe I need to watch --no --study this video...]

C-SPAN Videos Public Affairs Event Future of the Political Pundit

Future of the Political Pundit

Product ID: 185774-1
Format: Forum
Event Date: February 12, 2005
Location: Aspen, Colorado, US Comedy Festival
Last Aired: March 21, 2005
Length: 1 hour, 3 minutes

Sponsors:
Center for American Progress
U.S. Comedy Arts Festival

Appearances:
Alterman, Eric - Columnist, Nation, The
Garofalo, Janeanne - Actress - Comedian
Ingraham, Laura - Talk Show Host
Karlin, Ben - Executive Producer
Lockhart, Joseph - Senior Adviser, Kerry Presidential Campaign
Podesta, John - President and CEO, Center for American Progress
Scarborough, Joe - Talk Show Host, MSNBC, Scarborough Country
Underwood, Sheryl - Comedian

Summary:

Panelists talked the future of political analysts, or “pundits,” in an increasingly competitive news and entertainment market. Among the topics they addressed were the place of media commentary within television journalism, the impact of television news discussions on the quality of public and political discourse, and the degree to which political debate had been reduced to entertainment. They also responded to questions from the audience. Language used by participants may not be appropriate for all viewers. Mr. Karlin’s name was misspelled in the first portions of the program.

Please Choose:
Media Format:
DVDVHS

All videos are produced on demand after the order is placed. Programs airing within the last two years ship within one week. Programs airing before 2003 ship in two weeks. Orders ship only after all programs have been produced.
Was $29.95 Now $24.95

Quantity:
Note: This is a copyrighted duplication of the program as it aired on C-SPAN. The media can be purchased for viewing at home, education, or research. Any other use requires a license and permission from C-SPAN.

Current Reviews: 0

Customers who bought this product also purchased...
Constitutional Interpretation
Shopping Cart >>
0 items

If you asked Jeff Gannon*James D. Guckert "Are you a journalist?" He would say no. Absolutely not. I am a political personality.

But really, The Hill's Byron York asked last month, what is the big deal? So he lied. So he was a hooker. So he was an operative. [BFD!]

EDITORIAL
SLAUGHTER'S GANNONGATE INVESTIGATION MOVES ON
Congresswoman Louise Slaughter made some headway last week in her battle to find out how a homosexual prostitute operating under an assumed name was able to get security clearance and attend White House press briefings on an almost daily basis for a period of two years.

http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/editorial196.html


SLAUGHTER'S GANNONGATE INVESTIGATION MOVES ON

Congresswoman Louise Slaughter made some headway last week in her battle to find out how a homosexual prostitute operating under an assumed name was able to get security clearance and attend White House press briefings on an almost daily basis for a period of two years. James Dale Guckert, using the alias Jeff Gannon, was frequently called on by White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan and President George Bush during the briefings. He worked for a Republican Party front organization called Talon News. In addition to lying about his name, Guckert also lied about his military background and his education. He claimed to be an ex-Marine and a graduate of the Pennsylvania State University system, but records checks of those institutions have shown his claims to be false.

Last week, the Department of Homeland Security wrote Slaughter to say they would begin compiling documentation on Guckert in order to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request she and Rep. John Conyers made six weeks earlier. It's about time. Bush has not even dignified our congresswoman's query with a response, which tells you all you need to know about his feelings toward the state of New York. Still, Slaughter vowed to continue her investigation."While I remain deeply disappointed that the President and the White House continue to stonewall Congress and the American people by not providing any details on the nature of their relationship with this disgraced, discredited 'reporter,' I am pleased to see the Department of Homeland Security complying with our request for more information," Slaughter said. "Maybe now we will finally get to the bottom of this disgusting display of media manipulation.

Bunny, blogged

1) "Bunny" Greenhouse is known by the Contracting folks in the other districts as being tough but fair. Realize, any Contracting Officer in any Corps District that plays by the book is looked upon as a thorn in the side of the Project Managers, upper Mgt, etc...because she makes them follow regulations. She won't let them do what they want or makes them do something they don't want. Bunny is very good at backing her people.

2) Bunny initially tried to be a "good soldier" and do the "right thing" by taking this all through the chain of command. However, as others of us have discovered, if the chain of command feels threatened they will close ranks against you using their favorite weapon, the poor performance evaluation. They kept trying to destroy her career until she finally had to go public. She is exactly the person that folks should believe.

3) The Corps folks serving in Iraq knew that something was going wrong with KBR. I understand that it was a topic of discussion on many an email. Not surprisingly, last year the government seized many of their hard drives.

Anonymous - email - url

He--Rev. AL-- did what???????

Sharpton Denies Pocketing Campaign Funds

New Charges Grow Out of Philadelphia Corruption Probe
Apr 12, 2005 10:58 am

US/Eastern NEW YORK (AP) The Rev. Al Sharpton is disputing allegations that he failed to report campaign donations for his failed 2004 presidential bid from two businessmen who were accused in an unrelated corruption scandal in Philadelphia. The Philadelphia Inquirer, citing unidentified sources, reported Monday that the FBI in New York had begun a separate investigation into Sharpton's fund-raising as a spinoff of the Philadelphia probe.

"Nobody has come to me to ask about this report of funds and this is almost two years later,'' Sharpton told The Associated Press on Tuesday.The FBI declined to comment.In the Philadelphia corruption investigation, local Democratic fund-raiser Ronald A. White and fast-food mogul La-Van Hawkins reportedly were wiretapped having a conversation about Sharpton failing to report a large amount of campaign contributions.At the time, White and Hawkins were suspected of conspiring to defraud New York City's pension fund -- an assertion which prosecutors later admitted was wrong.The New York Post reported Tuesday that the FBI had videotaped Sharpton "pocketing campaign donations'' from the two men and "then asking for more.'' Sharpton told the AP that White and Hawkins did give him campaign checks."Everything given was reported,'' Sharpton said. "The idea of getting matching funds is to show that you are raising money. It would have been a contradiction not to report the money.'' He also reiterated that no wrongdoing was committed in his business dealings with Hawkins and White."They asked me to introduce them to several business officials,'' but he did not help to broker any deals, Sharpton said in a telephone interview. "Networking is what leaders do; there is no crime to do that. The FBI found there is no wrongdoing in that.''Hawkins is currently on trial in Philadelphia on charges of helping White to funnel a $10,000 payment to Philadelphia's ex-treasurer Corey Kemp in an attempt to influence government contracts. White, who also was indicted, died last November.

(© 2005 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

Bunnatine Greenhouse will be back in the news

Who is Bunny Greenhouse?

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=bunny+greenhouse&num=
10&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&l
r=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_
sitesearch=&safe=images

Summary (from Guerilla News Network: left-wing, yes. Correct, yes, too):
Halliburton subsidiary KBR got $12 billion worth of exclusive contracts for work in Iraq. But even more shocking is how KBR spent some of the money. Former U.S. Army Corps of Engineers official Bunnatine Greenhouse has blown the whistle on the Dick Cheney–linked company’s profits of war.

By Michael Shnayerson - Republished from Vanity Fair

This time, she was sure, they were going to get her.

Bunnatine Greenhouse had been a huge nuisance since the buildup to the war in Iraq—questioning contracts, writing caveats on them in her spidery script, wanting to know why Halliburton and its subsidiary KBR (formerly known as Kellogg, Brown and Root) should be thrown billions of dollars of government business while other companies, big and small, were shut out...

ann coulter has a point to make

ann coulter
Originally uploaded by highvizpr.

Missed me! ha ha! www.anncoulter.com - www.one.org - www.oprah.com - www.custardpie.com - www.hit.ann.and.win.a.prize.com

Matt, you publicity hound, you! Walter Winchell would kiss you smack on the mouth!

ThinkProgress is on the case:

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=622

Drudge Invents Story for DeLay

The Drudge Report (a popular website run by right-wing activist Matt Drudge) has posted an image of an offensive t-shirt, along with a headline “Liberals Sell ‘DeLay Suicide T-shirt" It’s clearly a vicious, organized effort to demonize Tom DeLay.

Or not.

The “liberals” selling the shirt are actually…just one random guy named Christopher Goodwin. Christopher runs “Ye Olde Christopher Goodwin Art Shoppe,” an online store (hosted for free by CafePress.com) where he sells drink coasters, tote bags, and throw pillows emblazoned mostly with images of his own “abstract and representational art"; only two of his featured items are political in nature, the DeLay shirt and a set of shirts that say “Bush Is Vile". Christopher’s profile explains that he lives in Washington and “enjoys attending Small Claims Court hearings, interrogating his cats, and taking brisk walks on the roof.” According to Alexa.com, Christopher Goodwin’s website is the 2,071,537th most visited site on the Internet; to put that in perspective (and to make clear Goodwin’s profound obscurity) consider that the homepage for Chicken of the Sea tuna is ranked 163,081.

In other words, Drudge made a concerted attempt to find absolutely anything to take the heat off Tom DeLay’s various corruption charges, [~~~save Tom DeLay ~~~get Limbaugh's attention~~~Liberals R bad!~~~ ] and the very best he could come up with was a stupid t-shirt from “Ye Olde Christopher Goodwin Art Shoppe.” L-a-m-e.

My postcard - shameless self promo from the past

This is me, Kilroy2005, 20 years ago and I will NEVER look like this again. No. Age, time and plain old fat. That's that.

Now, about Kirstie Alley's self-parody (Mockumentary? -- that is too good for her)

FAT actress

The girl can't -- won't help it. and f*** Jenny Craig.

SEE: http://www.sho.com/site/fatactress/home.do

The show is waaaaaaay over the top. And Merv Griffin is a hottie? Is someone nuts?

Howard Kurtz's take on Jeff Gannon

--from the Washington Post:

Gannon's Poor Memory

Jeff Gannon surfaced Friday at a National Press Club forum, and Editor & Publisher was there:

"The panel had closed with Gannon refusing to say, under repeated questioning, how long it had taken him to get his credentials to the White House, something for which others have had to fight. Another panelist, Matthew Yglesias of The American Prospect, commented: 'I have a hard time believing that you don't have a recollection of how long it took you to get access to the White House.' Gannon replied: 'I guess they felt it was my turn.'

"Although often under attack, Gannon rarely raised his voice, although at one point he boomed, 'I'm not the one who was waving documents at the president saying, "Hey you were not serving your time in the Texas National Guard!" ' "

John Aravosis at Americablog who exposed Gannon/Guckert's X-rated past, says Wonkette carried the day:

"Wow. She blew me away. The woman totally kicked his $200 an hour [butt]. It was incredible theatre. I'm a truly truly truly impressed. . . .

"Not to rehash the entire saga, but there's been some concern among liberal political bloggers that the mainstream media always picks Wonkette to represent serious political blogging at panel discussions, etc., when she's not a serious political blogger, rather she's a raunchy political humorist. A very, VERY funny raunchy political humorist, but still, if you're a serious political commentator, it's understandable that you'd get tired of people always having you represented by a comedienne, even a very funny one. . . .

"Relentless. I think he ticked her off when he started defending Armstrong Williams by saying the administration had to pay him because none of the mainstream media would report fairly on No Child Left Behind. I get the feeling that while she plays one on the Web, this is a woman who tolerates no fools."

Jeff Gannon, for his part, revises and extends some of his remarks, such as:

"Fox News -- 'I really don't consider Fox News to be conservative.' Two points here:
"1. Fox is closer to the middle in terms of stories covered, much to the dismay of its conservative viewers. They'd like more stories about judicial nominees, pro-life issues, tax reform, education, religion and immigration. Fox doesn't really stray too far from the herd in topics, but it certainly approaches them from the right.

"2. Media establishment types like to cast Fox as conservative but would never describe CBS and CNN as liberal. That is simply dishonest."

I somehow doubt that journalists want to be lectured about honesty by a guy who wasn't even using his real name.

NYT: Inquiries of Top Lobbyist Shine Unwelcome Light in Congress

Day 397 (since first Washington Post article: "A Jackpot From Indian Gaming Tribes" Lobbying, PR Firms Paid $45 Million Over 3 Years - By Susan Schmidt, Washington Post Staff Writer -Sunday, February 22, 2004; Page A01)

By PHILIP SHENON
Published: April 11, 2005

WASHINGTON, April 10 --Jack Abramoff, one of Washington's most powerful and best-paid lobbyists, needed $100,000 in a hurry. [more]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/11/politics/11lobby.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th

Fate-appointed: Mitch Albom goes way of Jayson Blair, and is only human

chicagotribune.com >> Sports >>
No one's defending renowned journalist
Peers, educators critical of Detroit's Mitch Albom for reporting something that didn't happen

By Michael Hirsley, Tribune staff reporter.
Tribune staff reporter Ed Sherman and columnist Mike Downey contributed
Published April 10, 2005

Mitch Albom, one of Detroit's most prominent figures, is a one-man multimedia entity as a nationally known sports columnist, radio and TV personality, best-selling author and playwright. He added another role this week--one no journalist wants.

Albom is making news rather than reporting it, under suspension from the Detroit Free Press until the newspaper completes an investigation of a fabrication in an Albom column that ran last Sunday.Reaction in the journalism community, from columnist peers to college instructors, ranged from harsh to empathetic. But no one excused or forgave Albom's or his copy editors' errors in judgment. And no one dismissed those mistakes as insignificant.

Randy Harvey, the Baltimore Sun's assistant managing editor for sports, admires Albom's talent, but expects him to lose his job over the incident."I don't see how they will have any choice at the end of their investigation but to fire Mitch and the editor or editors who read the column before it was published," Harvey said."I think it's very sad, very serious and very disappointing," said Karen Brown Dunlap, president of the Poynter Institute, a think tank for professional journalists. "And this was done by a very fine writer with a great reputation and a lengthy career. This was not a new reporter in journalism."

What Albom did was write a column as if his two interview subjects were at the Michigan State-North Carolina NCAA tournament Final Four game in St. Louis on April 2. In earlier interviews, former Michigan State players Jason Richardson and Mateen Cleaves told Albom they planned to attend the game, but they did not.Filing on Friday for a section that was printed by Saturday morning, several hours before the game, Albom wrote, and copy editors did not change, that Richardson and Cleaves had flown in for the game and were in the stands wearing Michigan State clothing.The column emphasized how much Cleaves and Richardson missed their college experiences. It turned out schedule conflicts kept both players from attending the game."It's not viewed as a minor infraction because in the minds of the editors, it was a fabrication," Free Press public editor John X. Miller said of the column gaffe. "More than being factually wrong, this was something reported that did not happen."He said the investigation of the column will include "whose hands it traveled through" and might include looking at other columns. "Mitch is not the only one who is culpable," he said. Albom's copy is usually handled by the same few editors, unlike stories written by Free Press reporters, Miller said. He said he did not know precisely when the section featuring Albom's column was printed, along with other preprint sections that are part of the Free Press' contribution to a Sunday paper co-produced by the Detroit News. But Miller said the section was printed and "out of the newsroom's hands" by Saturday morning. Miller said he did not know how long the investigation would take, but that "Mitch Albom's work will not appear in the newspaper while the investigation is ongoing."

The Free Press printed an apology from Albom and a front-page letter from publisher and editor Carole Leigh Hutton promising an investigation. The Detroit News quoted Hutton as being "furious" at the "ridiculous" mistake. Loren Ghiglione, dean of the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, said the error "doesn't sound ethical to me. When professors at Medill read a student's story and find something in it is untrue, it gets an `F.' "But Ghiglione empathized with Albom. "A lot of us make mistakes under deadline pressure," he said. "I hope that we'll not decide that everybody needs to lose their job, or end their career, over a mistake."Rebecca Ann Lind, an associate professor of communication at University of Illinois-Chicago whose specialty is media ethics, said pressure to be "up to the minute" causes mistakes such as Albom's. If it continues, she said, "Where is the line between making something up that you think will happen and simply making something up?"John Feinstein, author of many sports books, including "A Season on the Brink," said he understood "how Mitch got trapped" after he talked to the players. "But you cannot write that something happened that hasn't happened yet. If a game is not over before deadline, and one team is ahead 8-2 in the seventh inning, you can't write they won."Don Wycliff, the Chicago Tribune's public editor, said writing copy in advance of an event is frequently done at newspapers, "but you always tell the desk to make sure it happens before they use it, and to `hold it until I tell you it's happened.'--"But what happened with the Albom column is different, Wycliff said. "I don't see how you can distinguish this from fabrication. . . . like Jayson Blair, Jack Kelley or Uli Schmetzer."High-profile ethical missteps including fabrications and plagiarism ended the careers of reporters Kelley at USA Today, Blair at the New York Times and Schmetzer at the Chicago Tribune.

[And what did Mitch say about Jayson Blair: OH, NO! Say it isn't so!! ALL OF MY ILLUSIONS ARE SHATTERED! ]

In 2003, Albom wrote a scathing column about Blair's book-deal ambition and lack of contrition after his downfall."What he doesn't get is that journalism is not Hollywood," Albom wrote. "It's not about closing the deal. It's not about face time. It's about--simply put--telling the truth." Newsday columnist Shaun Powell had a hard time excusing Albom. "All we have in this business is our credibility," he said. "That's it . . . When we violate that trust, when we turn it to fiction, it's inexcusable."If you make up something, the penalty should be harsh."Calling Albom a friend, Feinstein said, "I'd say the best thing he could do is say `mea culpa' over and over. Don't try to justify it any level."Albom appears to be taking that advice, up to a point. Calling in Friday afternoon to the Detroit radio talk show where he normally serves as host on WJR-AM 760, he apologized to his colleagues at the Free Press and said he realized "all I had to do was write the words, `were scheduled to. Jason and Mateen were scheduled to fly. Jason and Mateen were scheduled to be in the crowd,' and the whole rest of the column would have made sense."

Albom's renown has transcended journalism as the author of best-selling "Tuesdays With Morrie," "Five People You Meet in Heaven" and the play "Duck Hunter Shoots Angel." He said he had a "crazy day" on the Friday that he wrote the column, along with another column and a stint on the radio. As a result, he said, "I made a stupid shortcut that's, you know, a rookie journalism mistake."Coincidentally, his mistake was caught by a rookie copy editor. But Nikki Overfelt does not work at the Free Press. She is a sportswriter and copy editor at the Duluth News Tribune who graduated from the University of Kansas last year. The Minnesota newspaper ran Albom's column on Saturday and Overfelt noticed the problematic verb tenses saying that Cleaves and Richardson were at a game that hadn't yet been played."The story came across Friday night, and I felt that even if the tenses were changed, the column didn't lose its meaning," Overfelt said.So Overfelt's paper ran Albom's column saying the two players "will be" at the game and "will sit in the stands." Where Albom wrote that they "flew" to the game, the Duluth version said each "is flying" to the game."News Tribune executive editor Rob Karwath, a former associate managing editor at the Chicago Tribune, said, "What Nikki did was the logical thing to do. I'm pleased with what she did, given what I know about the situation." Just doing her job. But I still love all that Morrie told you. The pressure gets me in re-write every time.--K05.

----------mhirsley@tribune.com

OH. MY. GOSH! Jack Abramoff and pal lunching at Signatures ( -- and why should Jack take ALL the blame for Mr. Tom-De-Lay?)

Thank you, Michael Isikoff!

With Friends Like These...
A lunchtime chat with a lobbyist close to Tom DeLay suggests he may be headed for hotter water.

Read http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7446492/site/newsweek/

Reuters: PODCASTS Explore Universe of topics - more than just political -

[ hmmmmm....Time to alert my clients and future clients to this! see: www.highvizpr.com ]


Technology - Internet Report

Homespun 'Podcasts' Explore Universe of Topics
Sat Apr 9, 4:00 PM ET

Technology - Internet Report
By Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As millions of pilgrims streamed into Rome this past week, Internet listeners accompanied a Dutch priest on an intimate audio tour to pay one last visit to Pope John Paul II before he was laid to rest.

Father Roderick Vonhogen brought the Catholic Church's ancient rites to life through a cutting-edge format: the podcast, a radio-style show that is distributed over the Internet.
Podcasts have caught on like wildfire since they first emerged nine months ago. Listeners can pick from roughly 10,000 shows on topics ranging from religion to wine to technology, and media companies and advertisers are taking note.

But for now, it's a cottage industry dominated by the likes of Father Roderick, a parish priest from the Netherlands whose low-key charm and you-are-there narratives bring the Church's pomp and circumstance down to a human scale.

On "Catholic Insider," listeners hear Father Roderick bicycle through Rome's predawn streets, banter with students camped out in St. Peter's Square and describe the pope lying in state in the basilica.

"It's beautiful, it really looks like he's sleeping," he whispers as a choir sings in the background.

Catholic Insider and thousands of other podcasts can be found through directories like Podcast Alley (http://www.podcastalley.com ), while free software like iPodder(http://www.ipodder.org) automatically downloads new shows as they become available. Listeners can transfer their podcasts to an Apple iPod or other portable MP3 player, and listen to them when and where they wish.

A recent survey by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that one in three U.S. adults who own an MP3 player have listened to a podcast, though the survey's small sample size means that figure could be substantially lower.

Even so, the potential audience is huge, encompassing anyone with a computer and a broadband connection.

Podcasting could challenge the broadcast industry by giving consumers more listening options and more control over where and when they hear them, analysts say.

"To radio it's a big threat, because people are fed up with radio," said digital-media analyst Phil Leigh.

HOMESPUN CHARM

Like the World Wide Web ten years ago, many podcasts rely on homespun charm rather than slick presentation. Anybody with a computer and a microphone can set up their own show. "The Daily Download" (http://www.apeboymonkeygirl.com ) is little more than a man describing his bowel movements as they happen. One of the most popular podcasts, "The Dawn and Drew Show," (http://www.dawnanddrewshow.com ) features the ramblings of a married couple on a Wisconsin farm.

"Do we have anything to talk about? No? I guess that's the appeal, right?" Dawn said on a recent show.

Several radio stations have developed podcasts of their own, typically condensed versions of their morning shows. Businesses from Newsweek to General Motors have set up podcasts, as has Democratic politician John Edwards, who ran unsuccessfully for U.S. vice president last year.

Some amateur podcasters hope to quit their day jobs. Todd Cochrane hopes to attract more advertising dollars for his twice-weekly technology show "Geek News Central" (http://www.geeknewscentral.com ) by setting up a network of podcasts that meet professional standards for sound quality and family-friendly language.

"We're trying to build a brand out of many individual brands," Cochrane said of his fledgling Techpodcasts.com network (http://techpodcasts.com ). Music remains a hurdle for podcasters. Because no licensing rules exist, podcasters must secure permission from individual artists and songwriters before playing their songs. One popular show,"Coverville" (http://www.coverville.com ), finesses this issue by only playing cover versions of well-known songs by obscure artists, though the show does pay a royalty to songwriters' groups. Other podcasts stick to independent music.
The Recording Industry Association of America, which represents the largest record labels, declined to comment.

For now, the greatest opportunity lies in spoken-word podcasts which can develop faithful if narrow audiences interested in a particular subject, said analyst Leigh, who podcasts his interviews with industry figures at (http://www.insidedigitalmedia.com ).

As big companies have jumped into podcasting, some pioneers have worried that they could be crowded out. But that hasn't proven to be the case as blogs have entered the mainstream, said Ryan Ozawa, whose HawaiiUP podcast (http://www.hawaiiup.com ) explores daily life on the Hawaiian Islands.

"Successful, commercial blogs like Engagdet and Defamer haven't destroyed the New York Times, but neither have they stopped the millions of other voices out there," he wrote in an e-mail interview. "The easier it is to put yourself out there, and the more people that do it, the more likely we are to find the next Ed Murrow ... or the next Howard Stern."

What every single solitary WEB-LOGGER (if secretly) wants! Trust me on this one.

Media and reporters
Originally uploaded by highvizpr.

Chicago Trib: Royko's son Bank Robber -- WHAT????????

The author of BOSS (about Mayor Daley I) IS SPINING IN HIS GRAVE!

Royko son held in bank heist attempt
Police say suspect carried phony bomb
By Matt O'Connor and Todd Lighty
Tribune staff reporters
Published April 9, 2005

A son of the late Tribune columnist Mike Royko was arrested Friday after he allegedly attempted to rob a Northwest Side bank while claiming to be armed with a bomb that turned out to be phony, authorities said.

An off-duty Chicago police officer working security at Associated Bank, 6355 N. Central Ave., quickly arrested Robert Royko, the FBI said.Moments before his initial appearance in U.S. District Court, Royko, 41, could be overheard telling a court official: "I wish my name was Smith right about now."

Calling Royko a danger to the community, Assistant U.S. Atty. Patrick Pope asked that he be held without bond pending trial. Royko, who lives in Johnsburg in McHenry County, will be held in the Metropolitan Correctional Center at least until a detention hearing scheduled for Tuesday. According to court records, Royko and his wife, Cindy, filed for bankruptcy protection from creditors in 2001, listing their assets at $1,500 and liabilities at $175,000.Reached by phone at home, Cindy Royko said her husband was a wonderful father to their three children."I have no idea why he would do this. Right now, I am very hurt," she said before breaking down into tears and hanging up the phone. Royko's father was a legendary columnist for the Tribune, Sun-Times and Daily News over a 33-year career until his death in 1997.

A federal criminal complaint charged that Royko entered the Associated Bank at about 9:50 a.m. Friday with a device consisting of two pipes, a jar of nails, a circuit board and duct tape.Robert Arnolts, the off-duty Chicago police officer who arrested Royko, said in a telephone interview that Royko placed the device on a bank employee's desk and announced: "It's a bomb. I'm not joking around."Royko then slipped on a ski mask and turned to the tellers' windows, Arnolts said. Arnolts said Royko then allegedly placed a bag onto the counter and yelled at the teller: "Give me all the money."As he approached Royko, Arnolts pulled out his gun and saw a device in Royko's hand--a remote control for a toy, Arnolts said. "I could see this guy was full of bull ...," Arnolts said.Royko allegedly insisted his bomb was real and he would blow up the bank, Arnolts said. "It was over quickly," Arnolts said. "He was not a big resister."

Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune

More from "I'm not making this stuff up"

Mincing Words ~ Courtesy MetroWeekly
http://www.metroweekly.com/mwblog/?iblogid=172
04/05/200511:34 am EST
From: Sean Bugg That's just crazy talk! If you thought that the Jeff Gannon/James Guckert, reporter/escort White House press room scandal couldn't get any more surreal, go check out this roundup of the latest conspiracy theory of Gannon's origins. It's like La Femme Nikita, but with a penis. Paging Oliver Stone! (via Romenesko)

The "grassy knoll" theory, BIG TIME! Start here:
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050405/LIFE04/504050376/1039/LIFE

One Gannon NPC story makes it to one honest-to-God real NEWSPAPER - there is hope for everybody!

Jeff Gannon back -- at National Press Club?
By Scott Shepard
Cox News Service
Saturday, April 09, 2005

WASHINGTON — Ana Marie Cox (aka The Wonkette), online chronicler of Bush twins sightings and Capitol Hill sex scandals, was lecturing James Guckert (aka Jeff Gannon), the infamous White House correspondent with an alias, on the ethics of journalism Friday.

Seriously.

Or at least actually. At no less a forum than the prestigious National Press Club, where the likes of giants like David Brinkley, Eric Sevareid and Ben Bradlee once held forth on journalism.

In the words of another nationally known media figure, humor columnist Dave Barry, "I'm not making this up."

The irony was evident even before NPC President Rick Dunham convened the panel discussion on "Who Is A Journalist," focusing on the mostly non-credentialed world of bloggers and online journalism. NPC officials demanded to see the press credentials or club membership card of reporters attending the event.

Even more irony: less than an hour later, in the room next door, Bradlee, the still legendary retired editor of The Washington Post, dismissed the question as irrelevant when asked for his own views of who qualifies as a journalist.

"Well, I'm not sure that it's worth all that much effort to find out the answer to that," Bradlee said to the delight of a press club lunch audience. "A journalist is someone who earns a living writing for a journal, whether it's a television journal - but whether these bloggers are journalists or not, I don't think it makes a hell of a lot of difference."

Or does it?

The panel came together because we wanted to discuss some issues that came about from the Gannon case," said Mike Madden, a Gannett News Service reporter and a member of the Club's Professional Affairs Committee.

Since resigning as White House correspondent for Talon News, a now-suspended online news service owned by Texas Republican activist Bobby Eberle, Gannon has largely avoided the media spotlight, despite having a blog of his own.

But he was the main attraction at the NPC event Friday, his Talon News activities at the White House and reports of previous links to the online gay escort business having raised the issue of who is a legitimate journalist and who is entitled to hard-to-get credentials to attend daily White House press briefings.

Gannon renewed his claims that he was a target of liberal bloggers, outraged by the often provocative pro-administration nature of his questions at the White House briefings, arguing that his downfall would have a "chilling" effect on other political conservatives in the media.

"I was about the only news source providing ... information without a filter," he said, defending his practice of including lengthy verbatim portions of White House press releases in his Talon News reports. "There is nothing wrong with reporting what the administration says about a particular issue ... Why does everything have to be looked at through a lens that represents every point of view?"

When Gannon suggested that the Bush administration had to pay conservative commentator Armstrong Williams to get "a fair hearing" on its school reforms because the mainstream media is overwhelming liberal, Cox leaped into action, arguing that the White House was seeking "a favorable hearing, not a fair hearing.

She also grilled Gannon when he initially said he could not remember how long it took him to get the first of the daily White House press passes after his initial request, an important issue because it is often a lengthy process, sometimes lasting months:

"Oh, come on, you must remember. Come on, how long? How long? How long? Days, months weeks?" the Wonkette asked.

"Weeks," Gannon eventually conceded.

Gannon questioned the objectivity of the mainstream media as he defended his own conservative approach to the news and his pro-administration style of questioning at the White House.

Alluding to CBS's use of phony documents to challenge whether President Bush had fulfilled his stateside military service during the Vietnam War, for example, he said, "I'm not the one who was waving documents at the president saying, 'Hey, you were not serving your time in the Texas National Guard'."

To emphasize his point, Gannon waved some papers in his hand. The papers turned out to be an electoral map of the United States in the 2004 presidential election using colors to highlight areas that voted for Bush and Kerry. Only, instead of red for the Republican areas, he used green, explaining that his home computer printer ran out of red ink. He used the map to underscore his contention that the voters in the Republican areas depended on him to ask his kind of questions at the White House.

Gannon met sustained laughter from the audience when, at one point, he asserted, "You can hardly call Fox News conservative."

The panel discussion included Julie Davis of the Baltimore Sun, the chairman of the Standing Committee of Correspondents, which oversees congressional press credentials and denied Gannon a pass last year; John Stanton of Congress Daily, who has written extensively about bloggers and online journalism; Garrett Gaff, former Dean for America staffer who recently became the first blogger to be granted a daily White House press pass; and Matthew Yglesias, a writer and blogger for American Prospect magazine.

The 90-minute talk ended with a blogger, Mike Rogers of blogACTIVE.com, screaming questions at Gannon about his sexual activities, questions Gannon ignored as he retreated from the hearing room.

Probably not the kind of National Press Club moment that Sevareid, the famed CBS commentator, had in mind when in a memorable retirement appearance, he said of the club:

"It's the Westminster Hall, it's Delphi, it's Mecca, the wailing wall (for) everybody in this country having anything to do with the news business; the only hallowed place I know of that's absolutely bursting with irreverence."

Scott Shepard's e-mail address is sshepard@coxnews.com.

HighVizPR once again advises Jeff Gannon -- and what he [still] didn't say

Jeff Gannon's comments are in blue

-----Original Message----
From: Jeff Gannon [mailto:jeff.gannon@jeffgannon.com]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 11:07 AM
To: highviz, a project company
Subject: RE: mini-critique

Thanks for the feedback.

-----Original Message-----
From: highviz, a project company
[mailto:abbe@highviz.net]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 12:21 PM
To: 'Jeff Gannon
'Subject: mini-critique

Jeff---

Okay, here goes:

--> Bad statement about Armstrong Williams: It was PR all the way down the line. He was paid by Ketchum WW.

[Comments]
Of course it was PR and I said that, but I think the point I made about the NCLB Act was important.

--> Good stuff about Stephanopoulos. Russert was an operative but you still are an operative, so this is why you are taking the heat – at least this is the perception. This is why you should go away for a while and have someone be the mouthpiece ----- (even if you have to pay them a couple of bucks).

[Comments]
- I have to make some money. I see keeping myself out there reinforces my reputation.

--> Yes, YOU NEED to come clean about how you got your day pass before you starting writing anything. In depth.

[Comments]
- I have come clean about the day pass. I persistently called and persevered. They let me in and I kept asking to come back. I didn't intentionally circumvent anything.

--> "I'd hardly call Fox conservative" FAUX PAS! This is a bad perception, not reality. Roger Ailes is the new grandfather of the neo-conservative movement.

[Comments]
- It was an incomplete statement. "I'd hardly call Fox conservative, if we're not going to call CBS and CNN liberal. Agreed it was not my best moment.

Otherwise, I though it went well. How much of the melee after the Q & A was broadcast? Security had to take me out a side entrance because a guy came after me. And he's a member!

Lee Atwater, DeLay's Spiritual Advisor - really, I am NOT kidding!

(---from CBS, those left-wingers that we so adore!)
Dotty Lynch is the Senior Political Editor for CBS News. E-mail your questions and comments to Political Points

From time to time, Political Points gets memos from the late Lee Atwater, who is continuing his work inside the pearly gates. He last checked in during the presidential race when he told the GOP to pump up Howard Dean and get those anti-war photos of Kerry and Jane Fonda out there. Now he is starting to get concerned about Tom DeLay. Note to bloggers: This memo came from an extra-terrestrial source and was NOT circulated on the floor of the Senate.

To: Tom Delay

From: Lee Atwater

Re: Where We Go From Here

Hey guy. Looks like that seedy liberal media is at it again. (Good word, Tommy, seedy; throw that slime stuff right back at them.) When The New York Times and Washington Post decide to go after you on the front page on the same day you know its show-time. Nothin' better for our direct mail and grassroots than having those guys to kick around. But when the Wall Street Journal pops off like they did last week, using words like "unsavory whiff" and "odor" it may be time to think a little about where to go from here.

1. Stay close to home. Travel is fun and broadening but $70,000 for a trip to the UK? The green fees and St Andrews are high but that's a real stretch. And $100,000 to South Korea? I mean how much kimchi can you eat? And now another $57,000 trip to Moscow? I didn't even know there were golf courses in Moscow. Stick to day trips around Houston for a while. Maybe do a few Habitats for Humanity. The pope's funeral is a good gig but don't have too much fun in Rome. They are gunning for you and there are paparazzi everywhere over there.

2. Get some new friends. It's nice to keep up with generous old pals and staffers like Jack Abramoff, Michael Scanlon and Ed Buckham, but those goo-goos think they mix a bit too much business with politics.

3. Watch out for your old enemies. Yes, you know you have them. Remember old John Boehner, who you got toppled after the '98 election? I keep reading that he is now "quietly positioning himself" to take over if you "decide" to step aside. And leaking all that nasty stuff about Roy Blunt and his friend the tobacco lobbyist could come back to bite you. And then there's Newt Gingrich's boy Bob Walker, who you beat for whip in '94. He's out there looking for some lobbying business. You might want to throw some crumbs to him. I mean Scanlon and Buckham seem to have more than enough for leftovers. And don't ignore Coach Hastert. Some think he may be getting a little tired of being referred to as your puppet.

[more] http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/08/opinion/lynch/main686840.shtml

SLATE: Jack Abramoff, the pal Tom DeLay just cannot shake

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116389/