Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts

Sunday, April 5, 2009

5 Worst Proven Conspiracies

Conspiracy TheoryWhen you hear the word "conspiracy" what do you think of? Traitors? Crazy nuts? Mel Gibson?

In most cases, the first assumption is correct.

A conspiracy is defined as:

An agreement between two or more persons to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act, as if by sinister design.

But conspiracies aren't always bad; an example of a "good" conspiracy would be the the Underground Railroad. On the other hand, because conspiracies are based on lies and deceit, they're usually so disgusting, terrible, and just plain wrong that they need to be kept secret to prevent public outrage - and to keep the lie going.

Here are 5 of the worst.

(Not to sound like a stereotypical conspiracy nut with tin foil on my head, but isn't it strange that most of these involve a government of some sort?)


Smallpox-Infected Blankets given to Aboriginals

smallpox conspiracyJeffrey Amherst was the Commander-in-Chief of the British Army mid-18th century, and is also believed to be responsible for purposely giving smallpox-infected blankets to American Indians, an early form of germ warfare.

Some people are skeptical about these stories, while others assert that the infected blankets were not intentionally distributed to the Indians, or that Lord Jeff himself is not to blame.

Two hard-to-read letters , however, suggest not only that it happened, but that it was intentional, and that Amherst was responsible – assuming, of course, the letters are authentic:

Colonel Henry Bouquet to General Amherst (13 July 1763) suggests in a postscript the distribution of blankets to "inocculate the Indians"

Amherst to Bouquet (16 July 1763) approves this plan in a postscript and suggests "to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race."

(Image: Nativeweb.org)


“The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”

The Protocols of the Elders of ZionThe Protocols of the Elders of Zion is an anti-Semitic forgery claiming an elaborate plot of Jewish world domination. It was first privately printed in 1897 and was first made public in Russia in 1905, when Nicholas II and his secret police distributed the work and presented it as true.

It was later published in 1920 in a Michigan newspaper started by Henry Ford mainly to attack Jews and Communists. Ford even wrote a book that was heavily influenced by the text —The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem.

Adolf Hitler later used the Protocols to help justify his attempt to exterminate Jews during World War II.

The Protocols have been deemed a hoax for decades, and yet many parts of the world are still taking it as fact and using it to foster anti-Semitism. (Similar to claims that Jews made up the Holcaust.)

(Image: NYTimes.com)


Tuskegee Experiments

Tuskegee ExperimentsBeginning in 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service conducted an experiment on 399 black men who were unknowingly suffering from syphilis. The men were never treated for the disease, but their symptoms and the progression of the disease was studied.

(Experimenters wanted to see how blacks and whites reacted differently to syphilis, but whites were not part of the study.)

By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 died of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis.

Even when penicillin was discovered in the 1940s—the first real cure for syphilis— the study participants were deliberately denied the medication

The experiments ended 40 years later when the story finally broke in the Washington Star on July 25, 1972.

(Image: Brown.edu)


Project MKULTRA

mind controlMKULTRA was the code name for a covert CIA mind-control and chemical interrogation research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. The program began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s - although some argue it’s still being done - and used United States citizens as its test subjects.

These are just some of the other disturbing aims of the CIA’s mind-altering substance studies, aside from creating manchurian candidates:

  • Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public.
  • Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called "brain-washing".
  • A material which…in very small amounts will make it impossible for a man to perform any physical activity whatsoever.

Another study of MKULTRA was Operation Midnight Climax - and yes, it was just as perverted as it sounds. Women (prostitutes on the CIA payroll) lured men to apartment hideaways in New York City and San Francisco. They then fed them LSD or marijuana while experimenters watched through two-way mirrors and recorded the sounds.

(Image: Anomalyarchives.org)


Abu Ghraib Torture and Media Manipulation

Abu Ghraib tortureIn 2004 images began to surface of the abuse, torture, sodomy, and murder of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq in a news report on CBS’s Sixty Minutes II, acts that were committed by personnel of the United States Army.

Then in 2007, long-time CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather filed a $70 million lawsuit against CBS and Viacom for wrongfully terminating his employment.

With nothing to lose, Rather accused CBS management of sitting on the Abu Ghraib story, the evidence for which was discovered in early 2004 by Mary Mapes, a producer for 60 Minutes II with over 20 years experience.

To top it all off, Rather claimed CBS refrained from publicizing the story to appease the Bush administration, which was, according to Rather, a regular occurrence at CBS.

(Image: Crooksandliars.com)

Thursday, March 26, 2009

CBC Cuts: "Hardly a Meltdown"

Canada US flags This is a repost of a Toronto Sun article:


Despite the sorry news that the CBC is cutting 799 jobs...it's still getting $1.1 billion a year. Hardly a melt-down...

Mr. Lacroix defends running U.S. game shows on grounds that they attract viewers and advertising. Now he says the Corp has to sell $125 million in assets to alleviate the shortfall...

Executive salaries have already been frozen, so maybe the 50% cut in bonuses now will be trimmed to 100%. Why are bonuses necessary when execs are already well-paid?

...Acknowledging that she had no inside knowledge about CBC layoffs or cutbacks, Ms. [Carole] Taylor [former chairman of the CBC (2001-05), and a former B.C. finance minister (2005-08)] said she opposed importing U.S. game shows and felt the CBC should 'not be going for ratings but providing a service that cannot be found anywhere else.'

...Lord knows, private broadcasting won't do it."



CBC logoI just want to point out that there are Canadian-made shows on the CBC that I and other people actually do like to watch (besides Hockey Night in Canada, obviously):

As for what to do with the other 20 or so hours of the day, here are my thoughts:

If the CBC doesn’t have the money or advertising to draw in a huge audience, that pretty much affirms its position as a public broadcaster. And what’s wrong with that?

The CBC doesn’t have the constraints of the privately-owned networks (pleasing advertisers mostly), so it can really be a place for fun and experimentation.

There are a ton of things the CBC could do, and perhaps, should have done, as a public broadcaster. Here's one: How about giving time slots to the public?

Got a garage band you want to showcase? Written a screenplay you would like to see come to life? Want to practice reporting skills by doing your own story on a Canadian person/event/issue?

It could be like YouTube for TV; public broadcasting for...public broadcasting.

This might actually get people to tune in more, if they, as the Canadian public, can make contributions to what’s considered “Canadian content.”

And Wheel of Fortune sucks anyway. What were they thinking?


Share your thoughts!

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Jon Stewart Gets Serious

Last night, I saw an episode of The Daily Show that really wasn’t that funny. (I think it originally aired on the 12th, but since this is Canada, maybe it was delayed?)

Jon Stewart let 'er tip on Jim Cramer, host of CNBC’s Mad Money, calling out the host, the show, and the entire company for not doing what they’re supposed to be doing as, 1) a news network,and 2) a news network that markets itself as having trustworthy answers to people's financial worries.

The best part was that Cramer couldn’t do or say anything about it other than shrug his shoulders and act like a suck-up. So I guess it was funny in an I-don’t-believe-this-is-actually-happening kind of way.





I can see the headlines now:

“Money Matters Fails: Jon Stewart Takes Down Another Mainstream News Program”


Go here to watch the full episode: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Warning: No Journalists Allowed

Beverly GiesbrechtA Canadian journalist who was kidnapped in Pakistan last November, and is still being held hostage for US $375,000 (although some reports say $2 million), said this is a new video made by her captors:

"I am going to be beheaded just like the Polish engineer [Peter Stanczak], probably by the end of the month. The deadline is by the end of March, and that's basically, I don't know, 18 days or 16 days.”

"I'm not quite sure how long that is but the time is very short and my life is going to end."


Beverly Giesbrecht converted to Islam after the 9/11 attacks and now runs Jihad Unspun, a website which claims to provide "a clear view of the U.S. war on 'terrorism'" and information that is "devoid of the constraints of mainstream media." She now prefers to be called Khadija Abdul Qahaar (although many of the articles on her kidnapping use her former name).


These are some of the harsh comments from a CTV article and a Globe and Mail article on the video’s release. There weren’t many on each (only 10 comments all together), but there seemed to be a trend towards blaming Qahaar for her own kidnapping:


George
As a journalist she put herself in harms way in order to obtain a story that would be considered a scoop. She knew the risks that she was taking what the consequences would be should she be captured, hoping that she could beat the odds, and collect a sizeable payment for doing so. Now that she has been kidnapped the expectation is for our federal government to come to the rescue at great expense to the taxpayers and to negotiate with her captors for her release. She took her chances and lost,end of story. it was her own doing.

GDR

As a journalist, she has put herself in harms way and has become an author of her own misfortune. I would not pay any ransom as that encourages other pseudo journalists to act so irresponsibly.

Alysha
…this woman put herself in harms way for the sake of writing a story and being a journalist! Actions like this sometimes have consequences and now the people are expected to bail her by paying a ransom. Another load unto the taxpayers!

Eat Your Weedies
I am sad for her. It's tough to watch someone plead for their life. However, it's also sad to watch a fool make foolhardy decisions. She had no business going there in the first place. Whatever her name, she's a blond Canadian dealing with illiterate, ignorant, hot heads.

Bill Williams
Bye Bye Babe. You made the decision to go there, now suffer the consequences. Bad choice on your part, but, hey, that's the type of decisions idealist bleeding hearts make. Why should the rest of us be responsible for her well being.


Peter StanczakOf course the woman had a choice not to go to such a dangerous area, but blaming her for getting herself kidnapped just for a story isn’t only an insult to her, but to journalists who actually are willing to report from such dangerous areas, Stanczak, the engineer who was kidnapped for ransom in September 2008 and murdered by Pakistani Taliban last month (the key word here is engineer, not journalist), and the area's citizens, who are also victims of these kidnappings and executions.

Blaming Qahaar for going somewhere she knew was dangerous also ignores the idea that because it is so dangerous it almost necessitates journalists going there to expose exactly what’s happening.

Isn’t that was journalists do?

When a firefighter is killed on the job, no one says, “Oh well, he knew what he was getting into.” Definitely not. I realize there might be more of an immediate need to put out fires, but why is it different for journalists when they're harmed or killed for doing their job? Isn't the truth important too?

As some of the commentators already mentioned, Qahaar knew the stakes and is now asking for help from them, which I guess seems contradictory.

But to just say the hell with her doesn’t make us (“the innocent taxpayers”) any less “ignorant” or criminal than those who are literally holding her life in their hands. It also gives me a sick feeling in my stomach.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Another Documentary: America's Most Hated Family

Shirley PhelpsWARNING: The following contains foul language and very bizarre thinking. May also cause outrage.


I really don't want to give these people any more exposure than they’ve already had, but since this blog is all about lunacy and things that I find just plain nuts, I can’t resist.

About 2 years ago the BBC did a really, um, interesting documentary on a religious cult that's become America's most hated family - at least that's the title of it.

They're known for protesting the funerals of AIDS victims, murdered Amish children, and soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan to name a few, by holding signs and screaming, “Soldiers are fags,” “God hates fags/soldiers/Muslims/Jews,” and “Thank God for dead soldiers." And they're still at it today.

They also call themselves Christian. No, sorry, the only true Christians.

The mother, Shirley Phelps-Roper (crazy lady extraordinaire), even has the smallest of her 11 children saying those things and waving signs...and they don’t even know what they mean! Obviously Crazy Lady doesn’t even know what she’s talking about. (She’s crazy after all). There's definitely some serious brainwashing going on there.

Their entire belief system, or whatever you want to call it, is just another case of I’m right and you’re wrong, with absolutely no intelligent (or even slightly human)things being said – aside from Louis Theroux piping in with Reason and all the passersby flipping them off.


This is just part 1/8, but I promise there isn’t a dull moment.




(Image: NowPublic.com)

Watch This: Canadian in Afghanistan

In my last post, “Make Jobs, Not War,” I mentioned that I know some people who have fought in Iraq. One of them is a guy I went to middle school with named Glen Villa. (And he was actually in Afghanistan. Sorry for the mix-up.)

While flipping through channels one day back in January, I saw Glen in a CBC documentary, "Fighting Ghosts,” which showed clips of his video journal from Afghanistan.

But what I remember most about that broadcast when it actually aired – I mean, besides the scary horrible realness of the footage – was that at the end, Peter Mansbridge said the military wasn’t exactly upset with Glen for sharing his experiences, but asked him not to speak to the news media anymore.

Pshh! If anything, this is what the news media should be showing. But since it’s “not allowed” or whatever (*cough bull@#$% cough*) there’s no reason I can’t post it here.

It’s really good and I want to encourage everyone to watch it!

Part 1


Part 2

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Ad-Less, Get More

Do you ever tire of opening the newest issue of your favourite magazine only to have to flip through 30 pages of ads just to get to the index?

Do you ever start reading a captivating article, turn the page and – UGH – it’s gone, replaced by some perfectly perfected supermodel you hope is simply the result of extensive airbrushing?

I know I do.

magazines
In my feeble quest to find alternative ad-free magazines, I made a rather shocking discovery: there are a lot of them. (So, on second thought, I guess it wasn’t really that feeble of an attempt.)

The slightly higher cost aside, there's an ad-less magazine for almost every audience out there, audiences that are currently being targeted and captured by the mainstream – and even ones that aren’t.

There are magazines for Christians, and divers, and poetry writers...And butchers, and bakers, and candlestick-makers. Okay, that last one was a joke (as far as I know); it just seemed to fit so well.


If you want to break free from the pressure to BUY! BUY! BUY! here are some alternatives:
Bitch
- for Christians – Geez

- for Scuba Divers – In-Depth

- for Feminists – Bitch

- for Gardeners – Garden Gate

- for Science-Fans – Greater Good

- for Literary-Lovers – The SunU&I

- for Design and Photography Buffs – U&I

- for Political Junkies/ Environmentalists/ Culture Critics – Briarpatch; Adbusters; could also include Bitch

- for those who Like to Laugh – The Funny Times

- for a Little Bit of Everything – YES!
Ad-Free Blog

…and one last thing for Bloggers – Ad-Free Blog

If none of these sound like you, check out NewPages.com.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Blogging, and Linking, and Tags, Oh My!

dog on computer

Have you ever heard the expression, “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks”?

Yeah, I guess that saying has a ring of truth to it, and as most of those wise old sayings go, they can be applied to just about everything. For example, just replace “old dog” with “journalism,” and “can’t” with “can,” and what do you get? BLOGS!

I’ve been aware of these things called “blogs” for a while, read them occasionally, and wrote for them never. Now my first one is just one among millions – 70 million according to The State of the Live Web – so it’s hard to imagine that anyone would find mine in the vast sea of civic journalism and actually read it. Then again, Perez Hilton did pretty well for himself, as did Arianna Huffington.

But with a massive jump of 40 million new blogs in less than a year, I have to wonder why so many people are hopping on the blog-wagon. Being one of those people, here are some of my own reasons:

  • Need for personal expression
  • Desire to know, understand, and connect with others
  • Distrust of the mainstream media
  • Love of writing
  • Had to find out what all the fuss is about

Another motive for the blog craze could be out of a need to understand and deal with real-life issues. Techorati suggests this through its graph of Daily Posting Volume, which shows spikes in the amount of postings during such events as the 2004 US election, Hurricane Katrina, the Israel/Hezbollah conflict, and the time now-V.P. Biden called Obama “clean.” (Isn’t it strange that most of those are US-based?)

Technorati chart 2007

But if you think about it, the growing popularity of blogs can also help explain the increase in tagging and the trend towards folksonomy.

Folk (common people) and taxonomy (categorization system) collide in this modern and fun-to-say word. And just as categorizing everything and everyone – from gender, to religion, to political leanings, to food groups, to movie genres – helps us organize and better understand our world, so do blogs. Blogging and tagging allow us to search, link, share, debate, connect, and learn.

Their popularity has also given the mainstream news media some unexpected competition, even making it feel threatened enough that they had to incorporate our medium into theirs.

If you ask me – although, I guess if you’re reading this you want to know what I think – this brand of news, ie., blogging, is the most reliable news we have (for the moment anyway).

Bloggers don’t hide under journalism’s guise of “objectivity;” they tell it like it is and as it ought to be. But right or wrong, left or right, bloggers’/our ideas are flowing, leaving marks on a world we live, learn, and write about.

New tricks indeed!



One last relevant, timeless (yet slightly updated) saying:

“The blog is mightier than the Military-Industrial-Media Complex.”

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Just to be Fair: Rathergate

Abu Ghraib liberty cartoon
Since I’ve been giving FOX so much flak for its right-wing biases, racial stereotyping, fear-mongering, cluelessness about the definition of “fair” and “balanced,” and its unwavering support for the Bush Administration (to name a few), it’s only fair to mention that FOX isn’t the only network guilty of spinning the news – and in some cases, ignoring it completely.

While researching editorial cartoons for a school project – My topic was conspiracies. Go figure – I came upon something especially disturbing regarding CBS.

In 2007 CBS made headlines of its own after the network released long-time Evening News anchor Dan Rather, which prompted him to fire back with a $70 million lawsuit.

But he didn’t stop there.

For one, Rather accused CBS of purposely sitting on the Abu Ghraib story, the evidence for which had been discovered months before the images were released in April 2004.

As an even larger blow, Rather claims this - as well as many other skewed reporting - was done simply to placate the Bush Administration.

And it was only when a journalist at the New Yorker was about to scoop the story that CBS reacted and reluctantly unveiled the horrible truth about the US Military’s actions at Abu Ghraib.

Above is a cartoon (GoalsForAmericans.org) based off an actual photograph of the kind of torture being administered at Abu Ghraib. A prisoner was connected to a series of wires and told to stand on a box; he was told that if he fell off he would be electrocuted. As you can see from this image, the victim is Liberty.


Read Bill Van Auken's article if you want to know more details of Rather’s accusations.


(Trial still pending.)

Monday, January 19, 2009

That’s FOXed Up


As the famous X-Files tagline states: “The truth is out there.” There’s just one question: How do we go about finding it? The obvious answer should be through research and investigation. But when the sources of information – who have the tools, means, and responsibility to research and investigate – fail to disclose the truth, what then?

(Note: Don’t be surprised when X-Files references occasionally pop up. It’s bound to happen from time to time.)

Before I take a crack at answering that, maybe I should clarify. We’re not (usually) outright lied to by the mainstream news media, but given a selected version of the truth. But as the documentary OUTFOXED shows, sometimes lying is part of the gig.

The stories we’re told are not only fictitious at times, but suggest that “objectivity” – in other words, what journalism is supposed to be – is also a lie. When journalists can’t do their job, what does that mean for democracy?

I don’t care if FOX is a conservative, Republican, Bush-idolizing news source, but if they’re going to be that obvious, they should just admit it. Maybe journalism had it right when partisan presses were the norm. At least then you knew when you were getting the facts and when you were getting commentary.

When Bill O’Reilly – shudder – tells his left-wing, anti-war, anti-Bush guests to “shut up,” how can FOX news morally, legally, logically, consider itself “fair and balanced”? What’s even more amazing is that anyone watching the show can think it is.

However, to be fair and balanced, the same can be said about the more recent coverage of Barack Obama and John McCain. I can’t think of one news channel – besides FOX, of course – that regularly cast Obama in a negative light. On the other hand, McCain tended to be the subject of ridicule, if not for his relationship with Bush, then for his incessant references to Joe the Plumber, and major attitude shift throughout the campaign - oh, I almost forgot, Sarah Palin too.

I’m not saying those criticisms weren’t founded – especially regarding Joe – but it was clear that neither candidate received equal coverage.


To get the opposing view, and to see a neat bar graph comparing Obama and McCain coverage, visit
Donald Douglas’s blog. (Notice that he subscribes to the FOX newswire.)