Media Bites – Coors
This week’s addition of Media Bites takes a look at a recent Coors Light commercial that is basically promoting male fantasy and male privilege. We also provide a brief history of the Coors family support of right-wing policies over the past several decades. There have been numerous organized boycotts of Coors beer as well with the most recent being organized because Coors has funded anti-affirmative action campaigns throughout the country.
Van Andel Research Institute Only Source Cited in GR Press Story on New Obama Nomination
On Thursday, the Grand Rapids Press reported that President Barack Obama has nominated Francis Collins as the new director of the National Institutes of Health. The Press article cites at length, Jeffrey Trent, the current president of the Van Andel Research Institute but no other sources even though Collins is somewhat of a controversial figure.
Collins is the former head of the Human Genome Project and is the founder and President of the BioLogos Foundation an organization that believes there is a harmony between science and faith, specifically Christianity. The Press story does not explore this aspect of the new Obama nominee, it only mentions that Collins spoke at Calvin College in 1999 and is the author of The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.
According the journalist Liliana Segura, Collins belief in Science and Christianity was revealed in 2000 when Collins was standing next to President Clinton when he announced that the Human Genome Project had unlocked the human DNA code. While some elements of the Religious Right do not agree with Collins’ wedding of Christianity and Science, it is clear that he is not a secular scientist. Here is a short excerpt from his 2006 book:
“As believers, you are right to hold fast to the concept of God as Creator; you are right to hold fast to the truths of the Bible; you are right to hold fast to the conclusion that science offers no answers to the most pressing questions of human existence; and you are right to hold fast to the certainty that the claims of atheistic materialism must be steadfastly resisted.”
Collins was also one of the subjects in Bill Maher’s recent documentary Religulous where he makes some interesting comments about the “historical evidence” to support the existence of Jesus.
It seems that since Collins has some pretty strong religious beliefs that he has made part of his scientific work that would be cause enough for the Grand Rapids Press to at least present readers with some sources that expressed some concerns about this new federal nomination. If the nominee was publicly an atheist or an agnostic would the Press not seek out a religious point of view in order the provide some balance in their news coverage?
The Press Obituary of McNamara
On Monday, July 6, former Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara died. The Grand Rapids Press ran an obituary from the New York Times with the heading, “Vietnam War architect.” It is interesting to note that the Times used the heading, “Architect of Futile War,” a sharp contrast to what the Press editors decided to use.
In addition to a different heading the Press version gutted most of the New York Times obituary, leaving out information about McNamara’s role in the US firebombing of Japanese cities during WWII.
The Press version mentions McNamara’s role in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, but exclusively about Vietnam. There is no mention of McNamara’s role in the US interventions in Laos, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Iraq and Indonesia, just to name a few.
The obituary article did mention McNamara’s regret over the loss of US soldiers during the Vietnam, but he never apologized for the more than a million Vietnamese deaths as a result of his role in the war, a fact the article never mentions.
The Press version of the obituary also excludes any mention of McNamara as head of the World Bank and what kind of development policies he presided over in that capacity. There are several good independent articles that are worth reading if you want to read a perspective different than that of the mainstream Press. Alexander Cockburn has an excellent piece on Counterpunch and a great discussion on Democracy Now with Marilyn Young, Jonathan Schell and radical historian Howard Zinn.
Local TV Stations to “Share” video footage
On Tuesday, July 7 the Grand Rapids Press ran a story on page 7 with the headline “Competing stations to share some resources.” The story announced that the local CBS, ABC and NBC affiliates will begin sharing resources, mostly in the form of video footage from local events.
The article cites all three of the TV station managers who spoke favorably about the decision. The WOOD-TV8 station manager was quoted as saying, “With the Web site, we’re doubling our content in a way. We’re all looking for ways to be more efficient.”
Fortunately, the story also cites someone from the Poynter Institute who was critical of the idea that stations would be sharing video footage. “What you see is what you get through the lens. That’s not great journalism, that’s stenography.”
This observation from the Poynter Institute is similar to what we have documented over the past 10 years with local TV news coverage, where not only does the coverage fail to report on issues with any substance, but already tend to cover the same kinds of stories. Sharing video footage amongst the three stations will no doubt result in increasingly homogenous newscasts for the West Michigan community.
Media Bites – AXE
In this week’s Media Bites we look at an AXE commercial that is part of a series called the “Hair Crisis Relief Team.” This commercial uses a bachelor party setting to promote their product and since it is a typical bachelor party there is sexual exploitation. The women don’t end up doing what the men expect, but the commercial still normalizes the use of women’s bodies to sell the product. Some good resources of sexual exploitation in media are Media Watch and About Face.
Independent Media Now More Than Ever
Ok, so we are almost half way through the first year of the Obama administration and I think enough time has passed to be able to make some observations about what has happened so far just by looking at how the mainstream news media has reported on “Change We Can Believe.”
For the first 100 days of the new administration I was tracking the coverage in the Grand Rapids Press and I could see no fundamental differences in how the reporting was done from both the local and national reporters. Politics was still viewed through a bi-partisan lens with limited perspectives and almost no verification of the claims made by those in office.
One example is how the news reported on the recent health care proposal from the Obama administration. The coverage has presented the new Obama plan as a radical reform of the existing health care policy, when in fact it is only a mild adjustment of a system that is still dictated by HMOs, insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry. For great information and analysis on this issue go to the website of the Physicians for a National Health Program.
In mid-June Democratic lawmakers overwhelming voted for the $106 billion war-funding bill that passed in the House. In fact, on just about every major issue that people care about the new administration has demonstrated that it differs little from the Bush administration. For some excellent non-partisan analysis of the policy positions that the new administration has taken read Paul Street’s columns on ZNet and while you are at it, check out his excellent book that was published just months before the election entitled, “Barack Obama and the Future of American Politics.”
It is true that there are mild policy reforms with the new administration, but the only major difference is the style and rhetoric of the Obama administration. Of course, it is more pleasant to the ears to hear the President give speeches, but if we are serious about real change we cannot be content with having a president who just speaks in complete sentences.
One tool that we so desperately need if we are to avoid being seduced by the promises of “Change,” is a vibrant, investigative and independent news media. We need a news media that serves the public interest and holds power accountable and you will rarely find that in mainstream news. We have to stop believing that CNN and MSNBC are independent news entities just because they don’t sound as ridiculous as FOX News. The reality is that when it comes to investigating power and government policies the there is little difference. We need to seek out sources that are outside of the framework of “official news.”
So, here are some recommendations for news sources that I think would be useful to look at along side of the mainstream sources. Democracy Now! offers some of the best weekday news analysis within the US. There is also GRITtv with Laura Flanders if you are looking for a daily news show that is in a TV format. Other daily sources of online news and analysis are CounterPunch, ZNet, Dissident Voice, PR Watch, Open Secrets, Rebel Reports, Common Dreams, Black Commentator, Black Agenda Report and the Center for Public Integrity.
I also try to provide regular news analysis on this site but also look at commercial media in our weekly Media Bite segments. In addition, we need more people to make their own media, not only to provide more perspectives, but to provide a counter-narrative to the dominant messages that are so pervasive in the corporate media.
If you want to make media or participate in media analysis contact Jeff Smith at jsmith@griid.org.
Media Bites – Transformers 2 & GM
In this week’s Media Bites we take a look at a commercial for and clips from the new movie Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen. In many ways the film is a 2-hour commercial for GM with numerous scenes that feature GM vehicles. This is quite ironic considering the current US Government/taxpayer bailout of the auto giant. We direct people looking for independent information on the GM bailout and resources on the use of Product Placement in films.
Media Bites – IBM
In this week’s addition of Media Bites we look at a recent commercial from IBM that promotes their “smart planet” image. IBM is trying to position themselves as the makers of life enhancing products. The reality is that IBM has a history of collaborating with the Nazis, polluting communities where they have factories and a major layoff of workers in recent months.
On Thursday, June 18 GRIID had the opportunity to interview Kathy Kelly, co-coordinator of Voices for Creative Non-Violence. Kathy recently returned from Pakistan where she spoke with refugees who have been displaced by the US bombing campaigns that are being conducted by US Predator Drones. We talked about what she learned for the refugees and what the implications of US policy are for this escalating war of the Obama administration. Click here to watch the interview.
Kathy also spoke to about 40 people at Trinity United Methodist Church that evening. The event was hosted by the Brunch & Revolution, which is organizing around the US wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If you want to become involved you can contact them at brunchandrevolution@gmail.com.<
War Funding Coverage Full of Omissions
(Editor’s Note: This is the first is a series of news analysis pieces that will look at the Grand Rapids Press coverage of the US occupation/war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This new GRIID study began on May 26 and will continue through the end of August. This article begins with analysis of the GR Press story and then includes the article at the bottom. Note that the text that is bold is the portion of the original story that was omitted in the GR Press version.)
This Associated Press story ran on page 2 of the GR Press on Wednesday, June 17. The headline points readers to the Senate vote, even though the story is about the House vote on a $106 billion piece of legislation that is primarily for the funding of the US occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
At one point the article reads, “Democratic leaders pushing the bill on behalf of the Obama administration had to overcome an unusual alliance.” This is an inaccurate statement, since there was no alliance between anti-war Democrats and the Republicans who voted against it. The Democrats who voted against the bill did so because they were opposed to the continual funding of the US occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but most Republicans voted against it for very different reasons, as was noted by independent journalist Jeremy Scahill is a recent article.
The article also states, “President Obama has argued that it is crucial to winding down operations in Iraq while boosting personnel and fighting power in Afghanistan.” While it is true that the US has increased troop strength in Afghanistan, the idea that the US is “winding down operations in Iraq” is still very debatable.
In a recent interview, author and writer Anthony Arnove said, “although Barack Obama promised he would have all troops out by 2012, the ground is being laid for troops to stay in Iraq for years and years to come. The army chief of staff, Gen. George Casey, said that the Pentagon was making preparations to keep troops in Iraq until the year 2019.”
Also, it should noted that the only Congress person cited in the original story was omitted from the Press version as well as the comment about the Obama administration’s removal of a provision in an earlier draft of the bill which would have allowed for the release of torture photos.
Lastly, it should be mentioned that there are no independent voices in this story, none from anti-war sectors, military families, Iraqis, nor Afghanis, all of which will be directly impacted by the increase of war funding for US operations in both countries.
GR Press article – Senators to tackle war funding bill
War-funding legislation survived a fierce partisan battle in the House on Tuesday, a major step in providing commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan the money they would need for military operations in the coming months.
The $106 billion measure, in addition to about $80 billion for military operations, provides for an array of other spending priorities, including $7.7 billion to respond to the flu pandemic and more than $10 billion in development and security aid for Pakistan and Iraq, as well as countries such as Mexico and the nation of Georgia.
Democratic leaders pushing the bill on behalf of the Obama administration had to overcome an unusual alliance. Anti-war Democrats opposed continued war spending and Republicans condemned $5 billion in the measure to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund for loans to poor countries.
Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, contended that Democrats were endangering troops by shifting money to create room for a “global bailout loan program.”
The vote was 226-202, with five Republicans voting for the bill and 32 Democrats against it.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., unsuccessfully appealed to Republicans for support, saying 80 percent of the package still went to the troops. “Stand up for them,” he said.
The Senate could move as early as this week on the legislation, which includes $1 billion to fund government rebates for consumers who trade in their old vehicles for more fuel-efficient models.
The Pentagon has said that without the bill, the Army could start running out of war funds as early as July. President Obama has argued that it is crucial to winding down operations in Iraq while boosting personnel and fighting power in Afghanistan.
Republicans also objected to a decision by House-Senate negotiators to remove a provision prohibiting the release of photos depicting U.S. troops abusing detainees. It was taken out, “at the demands of the fringe left,” said House Republican leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Obama, in negotiating the removal of the provision, guaranteed that he would stop the release of such photos.
