Sibel Edmonds has an announcement on her blog concerning exposing the media

[mmonk]

http://123realchange.blogspot.com/

[JohnyCanuck]

1. Project Expose MSM

Snipped from Sibel's latest blog post:

Project Expose MSM

We all have been tirelessly screaming about issues related to Congressional leaders abdicating their main responsibility of 'oversight.' We have been outraged for way too long at seeing 'no' accountability whatsoever in many known cases of extreme wrongdoing. I, and many of you, believe that the biggest reason for this was, and still is, the lack of true journalism and media coverage -- which acts as the necessary pressure and catalyst for those spineless politicians on the Hill and in the Executive branch. Or, at least it's supposed to. So, in our book, the MSM has been the main culprit.

Well, here is a chance to turn the tables.

At my new blog, 123 Real Change, I'm happy to present an experimental project, Project Expose MSM, created to provide readers with specific mainstream media blackout and/or misinformation cases based on the documented and credible first-hand experiences of legitimate sources and whistleblowers.123 Real Change is inviting all members of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), other active (covert or overt) government whistleblowers, and even reporters themselves, to publish their experiences in regard to their own first-hand dealings with the media, where their legit disclosures were either intentionally censored, blacked out or tainted.

Yes, we will be naming names -- myself included.

We will even do so below, in one real-case example, intended to help illustrate how the project will work. In the absence of the real investigative journalism and unbiased independent media we need, this is one way to set the record straight...

http://123realchange.blogspot.com/2009/05/announcement.html

[get the red out]

3. Sounds like the so-called Journalists are working for the Gov

From the cases I read there it seems to be some kind of media policy to turn whistle-blowers over to the Gov to be "investigated" and their information covered up.

I guess we really don't know anything about what our Government has been up to and never will.

[blm]

4. They have been for DECADES.

.

[SpiralHawk]

5. The 'journalists' work for corporations and for money

and the corporations -- owned by fatcats -- hire the so-called 'journalists' who bloviate, spin and propagandize. They do not serve the truth or the public -- they quite obviously serve only their corporate paymasters, in service of profit and dedicated to making America's citizens quiet, compliant consumers.

[get the red out]

7. That part I knew, but I didn't know the rest

Reading some of the stories on that site, it appears that the Government/powers that be must have been literally tipped off about any whistle-blower that tried to go to a media source by the media. That goes even farther than burying a story because it wouldn't help the parent corporation's bottom line. That is even sicker than plain greed.

[blm]

11. In 2005 I spoke with a reporter at Boston Globe and straight up asked him why the Globe

after 9-11 and during the 2004 campaign would not talk about Kerry's expertise on terrorism issues and that his work on BCCI actually tracked the global terror networks and their funding, and it was Bushies who helped to block his investigations.

He said that he brought up BCCI in a meeting with the managing editor and he was shot down, that they would not go there. No explanation. Just silence.

[get the red out]

14. Ghosts of the past

I imagine somewhere the ghost of Joseph Goebbels is laughing.

[Canuckistanian]

28. Interesting

And isn't the Boston Globe one of the more not-so-right-leaning newspapers?

Notice I didn't say "left-leaning" because there is no such animal.

[blm]

43. Owned by NYT, too. Remember, NYT and LATimes led the smears against Gary Webb in 1996 after

his report on CIA drugrunning and the dumping of all that cheap IranContra cocaine into America's black communities.

Two years later CIA documents acquired for a court case proved his report to be correct, but most people are not even aware of that - a little thing called impeachment was going on, and I am CERTAIN that dog and pony show was staged specifically to keep revelations about these illegal operations from getting any traction.

[jbnow]

45. Of course Kerry didn't bring it up either, a real surprise to me.

I kept waiting for him to bring it up. there were some openings in the debate.

I was too puzzled about why he didn't bring it up to wonder about the media failing to do so.

[blm]

46. Yes, he did....Washington Post mocked him for it and NO Dems would further Kerry's remarks

when he referred to BCCI during that campaign.

[jbnow]

47. I missed that. Two things..."mocking" reminds me of old

NY Times article I found that mocked him for his Iran-Contra investigation...pretty much calling him a conspiracy nut and attention seeker.

I can't find it now but the general attitude they had is mentioned in this recent Salon article (cached page since you'd have to log in otherwise)
How John Kerry exposed the Contra-cocaine scandal

The mainstream press continued to publish stories that denigrated Kerry's investigation. On Feb. 24, 1987, a New York Times article by reporter Keith Schneider quoted "law enforcement officials" saying that the Contra allegations "have come from a small group of convicted drug traffickers in South Florida who never mentioned Contras or the White House until the Iran-Contra affair broke in November."

The drift of the article made Kerry out to be something of a dupe.

Everyone discouraged him on the BCCI thing too, putting it mildly of course. It's not surprising they wouldn't be eager to have it brought back up...it never really finished, so much did not come out.

Kerry won't be president at this point. He doesn't have to be "good" anymore for the powers that be. We could use a fierce investigator/truth teller now.

[blm]

48. NYT knew it wasn't conspiracy theory, but their job was to OBSCURE the truth.

It really pisses me off when Democrats and left 'activist' folks jump on the bandwagon and smear Kerry with lies created by the corporate media and their fascist masters.

[defendandprotect]

35. Remember, there are no perfect crimes . . . ergo the many coverups that have been required -- !!!

[defendandprotect]

41. Every journalist should be interested in and support an investigation/effort like this . .

for their own safety and as a way to break thru the fog of corporate press!!!

[blm]

2. I agree with her attack on media, but I have a message for her re earlier posts.....

Hey Sibel....you attack the media rightly then turn around and buy into THEIR interpretation of Kerry duck hunting in 2004. The media covering the campaign knew that Kerry was an expert huntsman and marksman who hunted regularly for over 50years. They deliberately crafted their reports to make it sound like he was a fumbling newbie attempting to hunt.

The corporate media didn't WANT a President Kerry - I'm surprised you didn't realize that. You jumped on the media's bandwagon and smeared the ONE man who uncovered and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. Why the hell do you THINK they attacked him so viciously? You think their masters WANTED an open government president in the oval office finally opening the books on IranContra, Iraqgate, BCCI and CIA drugrunning?

The media owners targeted Kerry for over three decades, and it just got worse in 2003....

June 2, 2003
Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"

Commission Decision May Violate Laws Protecting Small Businesses; Kerry to File Resolution of Disapproval

WASHINGTON - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules. Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete. As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace. In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said: "Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests. "Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."

[mmonk]

6. I agree the media was out to smear Kerry (and in many instances, succeeded).

However, let's keep this thread on focus.

[blm]

10. That's why message was specifically addressed to her....

I'm sure she'll read your thread.

[blm]

21. Part 2: And I see I was right about Sibel reading the thread. ;)

heh...

thanks for the thread, mmonk....I didn't know about the site and it was great to read....except for the mistaken view on JK.

[mmonk]

22. Well yes.

Thanks for participating in it. You're welcome, anytime. Be sure to watch the site.

[blm]

27. Don't mind kicking for my open government compatriots....

.

[defendandprotect]

36. Corporate media does more than target candidates, lie and misinform . . .

disinform -- take a hint from the role John Ellis played in the beginning

of the 2000 election steal at Fox for Bush.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/defendandprotect

[upi402]

8. God she's cool

Unreal!
:patriot:

[Echo In Light]

9. K&R

[jtrockville]

12. Dan Rather could probably tell a few tales.

[blm]

13. Rather HAD a microphone and couldn't use it effectively because of media owners.

He said in 2006 that media owners needed Bush to stay in office for the favorable rulings they expected in his second term, so they protected him....vigorously.

[mmonk]

18. Yes, boardroom interference with the newsroom.

[blm]

20. Boardroom has their embeds in the production offices of the newsrooms.

Especially in the editing rooms.

[cascadiance]

32. There have been many attempts for a long time now to do this. This isn't only a recent phenomenon.

I think its' been more recently though that the board rooms, advertising groups in the company, and other executive management have been able to micromanage the news operations that much more over what producers, etc. have wanted to damange the product that much more.

I say this since I recall even back in the early 80's when I worked for a local TV station news operation in the midwest editing news tapes for the night time news shows then and knowing some of what went on behind the scenes even then.

First, there was a well known directive that came from higher ups and the advertising department that the producers of the 10:00 PM newscast should be favoring stories in that show that reflected themes that were present in the entertainment show(s) immediately preceding that newscast (to preserve the audience interest presumably), rather than just the newsworthiness of the stories themselves.

Also, since the station I worked for also owned the main newspaper in that city, as well as one of the few news radio stations, and there was only one other network TV affiliate in that town, there was rumored to be a "gentleman's agreement" between the two stations that they didn't cover each other's labor issues and therefore as a result you'd never hear about any "labor problems" in a local media outlet there. You'd only hear about what was happening at a local meat packer's strike, and you'd have a reporter friend of mine paid far less than one of those strikers on the weekend news show interviewing a striker in a suit and admirably trying to ask him how he was being treated unfairly being paid quite a bit more than the reporter was getting paid for his story. I knew the guy (actually had season tickets at the University's basketball arena when it first opened up) and he deserved more than he got paid, just as many of us did there.

And though I was warned that attempts in the past of organizing labor there (besides the engineering staff) had lead to some mass firings, I wasn't able to appreciate that until I saw that happen at our station too when there were some significant "layoffs" that happened all at once, and of course the other station didn't cover it at all.

And this was over 25 years ago! You can imagine some of the pressure that people in the media work under today, and with their "gentleman's agreements" amongst smaller and smaller numbers of ownership entities their difficulties don't get covered. I'm sure if you know some people who work in the media and they know they can trust you not to spill out what they know because they know they might be a "victim" later, they will echo the things I'm saying here in their own personal experiences.

There were good people working in these areas, even though I got paid more than my old boss did as soon as I left the station to work at a University data services job. The old producer for the news show there until very recently worked as a scholar writing for the online Poynter Institute.

[defendandprotect]

31. And, we know that at least one boardroom/FOX interferred with the 2000 election . . .

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/defendandprotect

[blm]

44. more than one......Jack Welch, too....and he still influences the greater part of NBC's

political coverage.

[defendandprotect]

30. OK . . . STOP right there and hold that thought . . .

"that media owners needed Bush to stay in office" . . .

because you've touched a hot wire that I've wanted to try to expose.

Think back to John Ellis at Fox and their influence over the beginning
of the steal for Bush in 2000 in overturning the call of Florida for Gore -
and then re-calling it for Bush.

The power of the corporate press to call elections was very important there.

That power arrived when the large computers used by MSM began coming in
during the mid-1960's which they originally used to REPORT election results.
The arrival of the computers was followed by frequent "breakdowns," often
following large jumps in votes for favorites. When the reporting resumed,
often the "jump" had been corrected and the least favored candidate was
winning.

Coincidentally, all of this was taking place just as America passed
The Voting Rights Act.

We certainly don't think it's unusual to say that the corporate press is lying
and deceiving and misinforming and disinforming -- not in the least!

However, I think we also need now to look at the overall role in election steals.

This isn't my investigation . . . it was done by two journalists in the late-60's
and early-70's. And their book which was scheduled to be published was called
"Votescam" - "The Stealing of America."
http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

If you're interested, you can read most of it at the website --
Orm, your library will get a copy of it for you -
Or it can be purchased used for a few dollars.
Make sure all the pages are intact.

We all also know that our CIA was keeping right wing governments in place all over
the world post WW-II, but there is now reason to look at what they might have been
doing here in America to keep our elections in right-wing hands.

The death of Bill Buckley evidently caused a few documents to bounce out which reveal
that our CIA was funding the campaigns of right-wing Senators/Reps ...
two of those named were Sen. Strom Thurmond and Rep. Gerald Ford--!!

Others have mentioned Sen. Jesse Helms and Pat Buchanan as other beneficiaries.


http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

[StateSecrets]

15. K & R

Here is a relevant story: On Times reporters on White House involvement in the Watergate scandal before Mark Felt passed the story to the Washington Post. The explanation offered: the story just "fell through the cracks," And, then the Associated Press alleged that they failed to follow up a lead, too.

Link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h6D7GLEfO4SOoPTDMIobe7rmDIcAD98DHEH00

The sources are long-dead and the culprits in blacking it out are long-gone.

Hope this project gets things out with 'living sources' and 'current culprits';-)

[mmonk]

17. Looks like a lot of people misplace things of value to someone else.

Yes, I want to see the living current culprits squirm with the project.:)

[Ghost in the Machine]

29. Keep on telling the truth, Dear Patriot, don't let them keep you silenced...

Here's a big K&R for you...



Peace,

Ghost

[Gregorian]

42. Journalism is more than a job.

Sometimes you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone.

Darn it. I get so angry when I see the talking hair doos. As if it's just a fashion show.

Thank you for your bravery. You've got to have a lot of courage, or concern for your country, to be doing what you're doing.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

16. Nicely done!

We need more exposure of the increasing illegitimacy for what we call the MSM.

[merh]

19. There isn't enough band width in the world

the abuses, tainting, distortions, blackouts, outright lies have been going on for years.

Simple yet obvious example. The coverage of Al Gore vs. the coverage of Cheney.

Good luck to all who participate - unfortunately, the media will ignore this and the opponents will label it as insane rants of the liberal fringe

[defendandprotect]

40. If you watch MSM and thereby give credence to it, that may be true . . .

but from what I can see the shoe is on the other foot now --

we ignore them and their idiotic rants/coverage --

They are the criminal fringe --

If you want to explore that idea further . . .

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/defendandprotect

[Raksha]

23. K & R - this is a very worthwhile effort, but it needs to break out of the blogosphere

Most people still don't realize the MSM lies to them routinely and buries important stories about crime in high places. Is there any possibility of publishing a magazine to go along with the blog, a print journal dedicated to excavating the memory hole? It would get the information out to a wider audience...and also scare the crap out of the PTB.

Once enough people realize they've been lied to for decades, revolution becomes inevitable. Look at what happened to the former Soviet Union once it was generally understood that Pravda's main function was deception on a grand scale.

[mmonk]

24. This may be a way to provide a little heat in the kitchen.

[blm]

26. Just look at how corpmedia ELEVATED Judy Miller and completely muted Landay and Strobel on Iraq.

Landay and Strobel write a report based on interviews with over a dozen CIA analysts saying Bush's WH was 'cooking the intel books on Iraq' in Oct2002, and Miller was selling the Cheney-Curveball lie about WMDs.

Not ONE broadcast news network would have Landay and Strobel on their shows to discuss their story and only a few KnightRidder papers repeated their report.


Miller was turned into an 'expert' on Iraq.

[mmonk]

33. Right you are blm. Because the esteemed Ms Judy had her little scare book on Germs.

[hootinholler]

25. I have some evening reading to do.n/t

[defendandprotect]

34. I don't imagine that the "but it's only been 120 days" people will find this

much fun, but hope that it adds to the pressure for them to wake up.

Even worse, Sibel Edmonds is pointing to how little difference, if any,
between Democrats and Republicans -- especially now, I'd point out, with
Obama having taken the corporate/right-wing-DLC into the White House with him!

And, beware, Sibel Edmonds is also talking about "conspiracy" -- another reality
readily denied too often at DU -- well, at least by pushing it off to never-never
lands at "9/11 dungeon."

Sibel Edmonds is to be greatly admired -- she is more than we deserve.

Let me suggest again that liberals/progressives need a PAC -- and lobbyists.
How about Sibel Edmonds hold the funds for us? Maybe we can get some legal
advice from Erin Brockovich - maybe take on a few lobbyists?

I'd give to a pac for small "d" democracy headed up by Sibel Edmonds!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

37. she shouldn't fly in a smal plane in the future

especially one that has ice on the wings.....

[defendandprotect]

38. Yes . . . and also makes the point that corporate media

is lacking in acknowledging the political violence we've suffered in the past

decades -- to the point of aiding and abetting those assassinations --

and certainly have only embraced and protected the coverups of those crimes.

:)

[Rosa Luxemburg]

39. hopefully one day we can drain the swamp and refill it with clean water

[symbolman]

49. Many of these goddamned blow hair asshats

need to be sitting in a cell in the Hague on Suicide Watch alongside Bush, Cheney, Rove, Miller, etc, etc..

The problem with our Takebackthemedia.com site is that we didn't advertise or accept funding from any single entity so we could stay "clean", but in the end there were so many sites springing up, like Media Matters, that it ends up being a pissing match for money between sites and blogs and in the end it's impossible to maintain..

If only I'd win the lotto or something, I'd give these Media assholes SO MUCH GRIEF :)

Good idea, if we can help there we will.. we DID bring about SOME changes and highlighted some abuse, but as one person here put it, "there ain't enough bandwidth in the world.." to cover it all, or Staff..