Osama's Vanity

This NPR report on the capture of Osama bin Laden and the videos the Pentagon released on him, contained something really interesting. 


"In one of them [the videos..],  which runs more than a minute, bin Laden is under a rough-hewn blanket wearing a woolen cap. His beard is unkempt and streaked in gray...

In another of the clips, bin Laden appears with a very dark clipped beard. Officials said that video was part of a propaganda message bin Laden intended to send to the U.S. entitled "Message to the American People." 

They [officials] were quick to point out the vanity bin Laden must have had to dye his beard for the video. Officials had said earlier that hair dye was one of the things they found in the bin Laden compound."

While NPR might call it vanity, I think it's way more than that.  Bin Laden needed to look younger to appear strong and immortal.  It's just funny to think that our leaders do the same exact thing...  

University Politics

This post is about more local, smaller politics, which I will attempt to connect to the media, sorry if it seems like a bit of a stretch...

This week, CUNY's board of trustees decided to rescind the honorary award that they had been planning to give to Tony Kushner.

The reason? Well, apparently Jeffery Wiesenfeld, a trustee, convinced the rest of the board that Kushner was anti-Israel, and therefore his work deserved to not be honored.
I read somewhere yesterday (and now I can't find the article so maybe I'm making this up...) that Wiesenfeld was basing his decision on something that Kushner wrote online.

It will be interesting to see what happens now that the news is all over this- there are numerous facebook pages, editorials, articles crying out against this- and calling for Wiesenfeld's resignation.

YU's very own Professor Schrecker who was also honored with the same award a couple of years ago on her work on academic honesty, is mentioned in this article (she's returning her award in solidarity).


 

The White House + Social Media

The 1978 Presidential Records Act states that White House staffers must preserve all presidential records-- but does that include Twitter messages? Facebook posts? Emails?

Next Tuesday Brook Colangelo and David Ferriero will testify before the House over how far the 1978 Presidential Records Act extends.

As this WSJ blog post states, it makes sense that with the increase in communication outlets, these rules need to be clarified.

Thoughts on 2011 Pulitzer Prize Winners

This week the winners of the Pulitzer Prize were announced and a couple of things struck me as interesting.

1. The first award was given for non-print (ie online) reporting to ProPublica's "The Wall Street Money Machine"

and

2. For the first time there was no award given out for local reporting of breaking news (even though there were four finalists in the category).

These two things show that online news is considered credible enough that it is deserving of a Pulitzer, and that there is something lacking in local reporting.  I think that it is very significant that there was no prize given out in that category.  They could have given the prize to any of those finalists, but they chose not to.  Any other thoughts on this?

(see list of other winners here)

Female Reporters

I think someone posted about something similar last week, but I saw this article in the Washington Post and wanted to post on it as well. 

Emily Wax writes about being a female correspondent overseas in light of the sexual attacks on Lara Logan and Lynsey Addario. 

Wax makes the point that these women need to be trained in how to deal with the dangers that they are susceptible to in these war-torn countries.

While maybe one can make the argument that women should not place themselves in situations in which they could be in danger, women reporters, unlike men, are able to connect to the women in these countries and hear stories that male reporters may be unwilling to report on (women in the Congo who needed vagina reconstructions due to violent gang rape, for one example).

The answer to the safety of these women reporters is not for them to not be in these places, but for their editors to train them in how to stay safe in these situations.  

The WSJ Wrote It Best: "Here's an Unlike.ly Tale: Gadhafi Does Swimming.ly on the Internet"

Unbeknownst to many, the .ly internet domain name is actually owned by Gadahfi.  

Many people like to use web services like Ow.ly and bit.ly which enable them to shorten domain names and the .ly is especially popular because of the memorable domain names they can create ("For those without their own adverb indexes, the company helpfully posted a list of "8,742 words ending in ly." While cruel.ly, gris.ly and smel.ly are taken, inept.ly, violent.ly and psychotical.ly remain available, the company said."- read the entire Wall Street Journal article here).

In fact, most of the users of .ly are not actually Libyans, 43% of .ly users come from the UK, US and Canada. 

This, naturally, has created a small scandal for those who do not want to be supporting Gadahfi, not that the $75 is costs to create a .ly is his main income source, but it's the priniciple. 

(Side point- everyone needs to get together and decide on one way to spell Gadahfi (WSJ) Qaddafi (NYTimes) Gaddafi (Washington Post) etc. etc. What's up with that?)  

  

Facebook+Gibbs?

The New York Times published this article a couple days ago about how Facebook is looking to hire Robert Gibbs, the former White House Press Secretary, to help manage their communications.


Facebook is doing this because of their increase in popularity and want to be able to communicate better what their policies are and who they are.  Additionally, Gibbs would seem like a good choice because of his Washington experiences and his communication credentials.


Also, Washington is still trying to figure out internet privacy issues and security, and Facebook probably thinks that Gibbs would be a perfect go-between with all his government connections.


This Washington Post quote brings up a different side, “Facebook has grown too big too fast and needs to be closely watched,” said Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy. “All Gibbs would be doing if it is true he is going to Facebook is selling his connections to the White House while it is in the crosshairs of privacy concerns around the world.”  

More on NPR

The House voted 228-192 today to stop federal funding for NPR.  Only Republicans voted for the bill, many of whom are opposed to the liberal leanings of the radio station and feel that it should pay for itself.  

One of the reasons many oppose the bill is because federal funds let public radio operate in really remote places.

Chances are, this Bill will not pass in the Democratic controlled Senate.

Doesn't it make sense that at this point NPR should be funding itself, not using government funds? They would still be able to use federal funding for operating expenses, so it's not as if they would be cut off entirely.

More here.

Reactions to the Schiller Situation

In this New York Times article/blog, Brian Stelter discusses how Ronald Schiller, one of NPR's fund-raising executives was secretly recorded by James O'Keefe which included him saying things like "The Republican party has been 'hijacked' by the Tea Party" and that Tea Party supporters are "seriously racist, racist people."

Stelter continues to write that Schiller was unaware he was being recorded, and that Schiller qualified most statements by saying that they were his opinion, not NPR's.

While this is essentially a non-issue, because Schiller is leaving NPR for the Aspen Institute, this got me wondering.

First of all, is it even legal to set someone up in the way that O'Keefe did, hoping to get controversial statements out of Schiller? O'Keefe was secretly recording him, and then published the recordings.  This can't be legal.

Additionally, while NPR would probably have fired Schiller if he wasn't already leaving, Schiller made it clear that these were his opinions, not the network's. Does this make any difference? Most reporters have a bias in their writings, so why is it wrong that Schiller made this statement?
I know he represents the network, but what's wrong with him expressing his opinion especially once he makes it clear that they are his own?

Any thoughts?

The Wisconsin Protests

In This New York Times article, Paul Krugman tries to compare the demonstrators in Wisconsin to those in Cairo, Benghazi, and other Middle East cities. The liberal media is trying very hard to paint public unions in a positive light, and there is no better way to achieve this than to make the demonstrations out to be a heroic attempt to preserve democracy.

This comparison is not very feasible. States that have had overly friendly relations with public unions (Illinois, New Jersey) are faced with growing debt and yawning budget gaps. Demanding that unions accept scaled back benefits is a logical political move. In this light, the demonstrators in Madison cease to be freedom fighters akin to protesters in the Middle East, and merely workers intent on keeping benefits that states cannot afford.

Reactions to "The Television War"

I was just going over the reading ("The Television War") for tomorrow's class and was struck by something interesting.

On the one hand, many are upset by the media using live footage from war, but on the other hand a lot of the footage is actually sanitized. 

I don't understand why we need this footage broadcasted at all.  There are so many negatives: family members wondering if they're watching the death of their loved one, the way you can watch the war and then switch the channel to see what's on MTV? The whole thing is kinda sickening. 

I know that people like to know what's going on, but I feel like putting toned down or graphic war footage on TV trivializes events and is not really necessary 

Making a Stand on Facebook

Facebook's been pretty busy lately, what with organizing rebellions and stuff. 


I don't know how many of you have seen the "Stand With Planned Parenthood" (in reaction to a Feb 18th  vote in the House to pass the Pence Amendment, which if made into law, will strip Planned Parenthood of all its federal funding) Facebook event page, but it has over 153,000 people attending. 


I don't know if this page will actually do anything, but it's interesting how people feel as if it will make a difference (especially post Egypt, etc.).

Viva la Información!

This is an interesting Wall Street Journal article about the commodification of Julian Assange/ WikiLeaks.  Assange has been turned into an icon for the preservation of free speech, and now you can wear him on your t-shirt, and can even have "Dinner with Julian"! 

We keep talking about the media being newspapers and television etc, but I think that the media, or form of communication in this case, also includes the websites, t-shirts, umbrellas and bags that are creating an entire WikiLeaks culture. 

Assange, through the help of these media outlets, has become a celebrity.

News in 140 Characters or Less

This New York Times article discusses the way Andy Carvin of NPR used his Twitter to transmit real-time updates on the situation in Egypt.

Forget online newspapers-forget actual articles- the future of news lies in 400, one sentence Tweets.

Overcoming Through the Media

This picture, from a protester's sign in Egypt, proclaims "We Shall Overcome," a slogan that was frequently used by Civil Rights activists in the 1960s.  

In the American Culture and Politics of the 1960s class that I took last semester, we discussed the role the media played in changing the views American citizens held on civil rights.  

Specifically during the Freedom Rides, participants felt that despite the dangers involved, it was important for them to be involved because of how the public would react.  The more violent a protest became, the more likely the media would be there broadcasting events on television.  Americans who would normally turn a blind eye to the injustices would be forced to react to what they were seeing.  The involvement of the media put pressure on the government to enforce the segregation laws that were already in existence, and essentially enabled things to move a lot more quickly.  

Though America in the 1960s does not have so much to do with Egypt in 2011, the way the media is being utilized is pretty comparable.  And though the road will be bumpy, perhaps they too shall overcome.