Category: Media

  • Social media companies have been operating with little oversight and virtually no regulations for far too long, and it is past time that we start holding them accountable for what they do both on their sites and behind the scenes. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. Transcript: *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so […]

    The post Billionaires Are Running Social Media Companies Like The ‘Wild West’ appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • Every year, millions of viewers tune in to watch the Super Bowl, making it one of the most-watched television events in the world. And this year, thanks to a certain romance (ahem, Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce), the viewing figures are likely to be bigger than ever. And because of all that reach from the sporting event, advertising is, of course, a big deal. Brands usually spare no expense with their Super Bowl commercials, and most of them feature major celebrities and unique, creative angles, all in the hope of generating buzz (and a heck of a lot of sales). This year is no different.

    Below, we’ve listed four advertisements from vegan-friendly brands that you can expect to see during the big game this weekend. There’s also one bonus entry that you definitely won’t see, but it’s still worth watching all the same.

    VegNews.JeremyRenner.JenniferRoseClasen.SilkSilk

    1 Silk

    Last year, actor Jeremy Renner was involved in a life-threatening snowplow accident, but this year, he’s showing the world via the Super Bowl commercial break that he’s back and better than ever. In a spot for popular almond milk brand Silk, which also stars his daughter, Ava, Renner is seen kicking, twisting, dancing, and singing to James Brown’s “I Feel Good.”

    The actor told CNN that he’s “so glad” to be alive and to be able to “spend time on wellness.” The Silk ad, he indicated, was a signal of a new beginning after a difficult year. “To look back on this, not look back on the accident, but look back on like how far that we’ve come. It meant a lot to us,” he said.
    Watch it here

    VegNews.krisjenneroreo.oreoOreo



    2 Oreo

    Major cookie brand Oreo (which, yes, you’ll be pleased to know has many vegan flavors) teamed up with Kardashian-Jenner matriarch Kris Jenner to give a new “twist” to its Super Bowl commercial. The ad travels throughout the past showing major history-defining moments decided by twisting an Oreo. One of them is, of course, Jenner (dressed in her 2007 blazer) deciding on whether to go ahead with Keeping Up With the Kardashians.

    “I come from a generation where it was all about the commercials for some of us,” Jenner told the Independent regarding her decision to do the ad. “I love football, but I’m not as into football as maybe some of my male friends or my kids. So it’s always so exciting to wait for the commercials to come on and see what the brands would come up with. That was always embedded in my brain.”

    “The concept was so playful, fun, and really captured my quirky sense of humor,” she added.
    Watch it here

    Screenshot 2024-02-08 at 3.28.12 PMPringles




    3 Pringles

    Pringles (yep, it’s another vegan-friendly snack brand!) teamed up with Chris Pratt to film its Super Bowl commercial, which sees the actor (sporting a curly mustache) go viral for his resemblance to Julius Pringles, aka Mr.P, aka the man on the Pringles can.

    According to Pratt, he started growing the mustache during the recent Hollywood strikes. “I grew it out and shaved down the sides, and it curled up,” Pratt told Variety. “[My wife said] ‘That’s actually a good look for a character. Have you ever played a character with that type of mustache?’” he continued. “I kept it.”
    Watch it here

    VegNews.elfcommercial.elfE.l.f


    4 E.l.f. Cosmetics

    Vegan and cruelty-free beauty brand E.l.f. Cosmetics teamed up with Judy Sheindlin (aka Judge Judy), Megan Trainor, and Suits stars Gina Torres, Rick Hoffman, and Sarah Rafferty for its second-ever Super Bowl commercial. In the ad, Torres is on trial for spending too much on makeup. Judge Judy, of course, sentences her to use E.l.f. Cosmetics’ Halo Glow Liquid Filter foundation for “$14 glowy skin.”

    “We knew early on that we’d need to show up with a veteran attitude and outdo ourselves,” Brian Vaughan, partner and executive creative director of E.l.f. Beauty’s creative marketing and communications agency Shadow, told Adweek. “We wanted the campy daytime TV courtroom vibe, with a super eclectic cast of characters to achieve that silly, unrestrained, over-the-top Super Bowl sensibility.”
    Watch it here

    Screenshot 2024-02-08 at 3.26.57 PMPETA


    5 PETA

    This year, PETA’s Super Bowl ad sees Edie Falco (who famously played mob wife Carmela Soprano on The Sopranos) break down and scream after a block of cheese is stolen from her. The clip then cuts to a mother cow chasing after its calf, who is being taken away on a truck. “Kidnapping and violence may be everyday things for fictional mob wife Carmela Soprano, but did you know that they’re horrifyingly real for mother cows?” PETA says of the new ad.

    As you may have guessed, this is one Super Bowl commercial you likely won’t see in the middle of the game. According to PETA, its ads are usually deemed to be too controversial or provocative to air by the National Football League.
    Watch it here

    This post was originally published on VegNews.com.

  • America’s Lawyer E85: If you want to know why politicians never do anything to help you, all you have to do is follow the money. A new report has found that lobbyists spent a record amount of money last year to stop progress on the issues that matter to you. Social media companies have gotten […]

    The post Lobbyists Break New Record Buying Lawmakers appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • The 2023-2024 Gaza Massacre has continued now for nearly 4 months while the World looks on. The  Zionist-subverted and US lackey  Australian Labor Government  has fervently assisted Apartheid Israel diplomatically, with  key arms supplies, intelligence, weapons targeting and now with cessation of support for UNRWA – racist Labor is complicit in the US-Israeli massacre of  Palestinian children. Zionist-subverted Australian Mainstream media are complicit by lying for Apartheid Israel.

    Set out below is a quantitative view of the Gaza Genocide from truthful reportage (notably from some prize-winning Western journalists) but which is overwhelmingly ignored by Zionist-subverted Mainstream Western and Australian media:

    (1) Apartheid Israel allowed the 7 October (10/7) event to happen (like the US re 9/11).

    (2) The 10/7 Breakout by lightly armed Palestinians from the Gaza Concentration Camp was to get hundreds of Israeli hostages to trade for 10,000 Palestinians in Israeli military prisons and indeed for 5.6 million highly abusively confined  Occupied Palestinians.

    (3) The IDF response with high explosive tank shelling and helicopter missiles was responsible for a substantial proportion of the 1,200 Israelis killed – if deaths were proportional to firepower then most of the Israeli deaths on 7-8 October were due to the IDF.

    (4) 97.5% (1,170) of the Israelis killed (1,200) were adults involved militarily in the 56 year Occupation because of Israeli compulsory military service. 2.5% (30) were children).

    (5) 84.2% (1,010) of the Israeli dead were present serving Israeli military responsible for violently maintaining the 56-year Occupation and hermetically sealing the bombed and blockaded Gaza Concentration Camp.

    (6) The Israeli-complicit 10/7 carnage (like the US-complicit 9/11 carnage from massive intelligence failure as adverted by both former US president Donald Trump and former US Vice President Al Gore) provided the “excuse” for disproportionate violence with genocidal intent.

    (7). As of mid-January 2024, after 100 days  of the Gaza Massacre 100,000 Palestinians were killed, missing or wounded, and 31,497 Palestinians had been killed  including  12,345 children, 6,471 women and 245 health workers. 1,500 Palestinian fighters were killed in Israel on 7-8 October for a total of 33,000 Palestinians killed.

    (8) In the present Gaza Massacre there is an Occupied/Occupier Reprisals Death Ratio of 33,000/1,200 = 27.5 (55 if the IDF killed 50% of the Israeli victims) versus the 10 ordered by Nazi leader Hitler in 1944 (and effected in the Ardeatine Massacre), and 30,000,000/3,000 = 10,000 in the post-9/11 US War on Terror (this including  avoidable deaths from war-imposed deprivation in 20 countries violated by the US Alliance).

    (9). International Law expert Professor Francesca Albanese states that under International Law subjugated Occupied people (the Occupied Palestinians) have the right to defend themselves but the war criminal Occupiers (the genocidally racist Israelis) in an occupied territory do not.

    (10).  US, UK and Australian Mainstream media reportage is overwhelmingly dominated by lying Israeli propaganda. Thus a Google Search for “Hamas massacre” yields 500,000 results whereas that for “IDF massacre” yields 1,400 results.  

    (11). Most of 2.3 million Gazans (nearly half of them children, nearly three quarters women and children) are living in tents, denied requisite water, food, sanitation, medicine and medical care, and facing an existential catastrophe due to deprivation and disease.

    (12). The forced displacement of Gazans to the south is a Third major mass population expulsion after the 1948 Nakba (800,000 expelled) and the 1967 Naksa (400,000 expelled), with a feared  Fourth mass population expulsion of 2.3 million Palestinians into the Egyptian Sinai desert. Genocidally racist, settler-colonialist Apartheid Israel wants all the land of Palestine (plus neighbouring lands) but not the Indigenous inhabitants.

    The civilized World is utterly horrified  but must translate that horror into urgent action as summarized below:

    (1). Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS).

    (2). Dump the US dollar.

    (3). UNSC, UNGA and other action over genocidal Israeli violation of the South Africa-requested ICJ ruling on the Gaza Genocide.

    (4). Young-impelled decent Third Parties (e.g. Greens) to urgently replace war criminal and climate criminal Western duopolies (e.g. the US Republican/ Democrat, UK Conservative/Labour and Australian Coalition/Labor political duopolies).

    (5). Decent voter backlash in the US, UK, and US Alliance e.g. Australians voting for either the unforgivable, Apartheid Israel-supporting  Australian Labor Government or the even worse Coalition are complicit in genocidal Apartheid Israeli crimes.

    (6). Unexceptional and immediate granting of  equal rights and all Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)-specified  human rights for 15 million sorely oppressed Palestinians.

    (7). In relation to the present horrifying, Israel-imposed Gaza circumstances the Indigenous Palestinians should at the very least be immediately given the rights accorded  in law to pets and livestock in the West.

    (8). If Palestinians are to continue to be denied life without foreign occupation the World should immediately insist on occupation by a decent non-Invader country (e.g. Switzerland, Ireland, Fiji).

    (9). Immediate ceasefire with war criminal Apartheid Israel out of Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories immediately to permit entry of life-saving security, humanitarian aid, health workers, reconstruction teams, and forensic teams to examine all the dead (Israel was a world leader in illegal organ trading).  

    (10). Action now – if the US Alliance-, UK- and Australia-backed  US and Apartheid Israel continue to get away with mass murder of children in Gaza then  we are all existentially threatened.

    The post Western Media and Politician Complicity in US-Israeli Massacre of Palestinian Children first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Albert Einstein argued,

    [P]rivate capital tends to become concentrated in few hands”, resulting in “an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organised political society.

    Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education).

    It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. [May 1949 edition of socialist magazine Monthly Review]

    Thomas Jefferson wrote of Newspapers Lies:

    Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day. I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens, who, reading newspapers, live & die in the belief, that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time;… General facts may indeed be collected from them, such as that Europe is now at war, that Bonaparte has been a successful warrior, that he has subjected a great portion of Europe to his will, but no details can be relied on. I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn of the great facts, and the details are all false.1

    Chronologically,

    – vested interests journalism made the killing, capturing, transporting and slavery of Africans acceptable in colonial times and during the early United States of America.

    –   corrupted journalists drummed up hate against Indigenous peoples and the later desire for war and the pillage of Mexico.

    • Hearst newspapers’ journalists convinced enough Americas to war on Spain, Cuba and the Filipinos
    • journalists working for President Wilson’s established Committee on Public Information created a public desire for entering the First World War.

    –  journalists made U.S. corporations arming of Hitler’s poor Nazi Germany acceptable as a ‘bulwark’ against Communist Soviet Russia.2

    –  Julius Streicher, Nazi newspaper publisher was convicted of crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg trials and was executed by hanging on October 16, 1946

    • cooperating journalists made a U.S. genocidal war in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia appear necessary as was war in Korea before, and neo-colonial U.S. wars in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East thereafter.
    • Journalists reported non-existent popular demonstrations fired upon in Libya, which the UN had cited for its higher standard of living than 9 European countries. Journalists hail US/NATO bombing and terrorist army, slander Gaddafi – did not cover a near million Libyans wildly demonstrating in support of their wealthy and democratic Green Book Arab Socialist government.3

    –  All mainstream journalists ridiculed Gaddafi’s wonderful address to the UN General Assembly in which he, as no one had done before, described how the UN has sanctified US-NATO invasions and bombings in falsification of its charter from its very beginning, and labeled the UN Security Council correctly, a ‘council of terror.’

    • The CIA currently maintains a network of journalists around the world, who influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda, and provide direct access to a large amount of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.”4

    WAR BY MEDIA

    At London’s Trafalgar Square, on October 8, 2011 during the U.S. U.K. genocide in Iraq, Australian editor, publisher, activist and founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange spoke encouragingly about how “peace can be started by truth”:

    “. . . and that is something I want to talk about. What can we do with our values, what can we do at all in relation to this (Iraq) war? Because the reality is Margaret Thatcher had it right; there is no society any more. What there is is a transnational security elite that is busy carving up the world using your tax money.

    To combat that elite we must not petition; we must take it over.

    We must form our own networks of strength and mutual value which can challenge those strengths and self-interested values of the warmongers in this country and in others that have formed hand in hand an alliance to take money from the United States, from every NATO country, from Australia and launder it through Afghanistan, launder it through Iraq, lander it through Somalia , launder it through Yemen, launder it through Pakistan and wash that money in peoples blood.

    I don’t need to tell you the depravity of war, you are all too familiar with its images, with the refugees of war, with information that we have revealed showing the everyday squalor and barbarity of war.

    Information such as the individual deaths of over 130,000 people in Iraq. Individual deaths that were kept secret by the US military who denied that they ever counted the deaths of civilians.

    “Wars Can Be Undone!”

    Instead I want to tell you what I think is the way that wars come to be and that wars can be undone.

        “Wars Are a Result of Lies.”

    In democracies, or the pseudo-democracies that we are evolving into, wars are a result of lies. The Vietnam War and the push for US involvement was the result of the Gulf of Tonkin incident . . . a lie. The Iraq War famously is the result of lies. Wars in Somalia are a result of lies. The Second World War and the German invasion of Poland was the result of carefully constructed lies.

                “Average death count attributed to each journalist?”

    That is war by media. Let us ask ourselves of the complicit media, which is the majority of the mainstream press, what is the average death count attributed to each journalist?

    When we understand that wars come about as a result of lies peddled to the British public and the American public and the publics all over Europe and other countries then who are the war criminals? 

                            “Journalists Are War Criminals!”

    It is not just leaders, it is not just soldiers, it is journalists; journalists are war criminals. And while one might think that that should lead us to a state of despair, that the reality that is constructed around us is constructed by liars, is constructed by people who are close to those that they are meant to be policing, it should lead us also to an optimistic understanding because if wars can be started by lies, truth can be started, peace can be started by truth. So that is our task and it is your task, go and get the truth, get into the ballpark and get the ball and give it to us and we’ll spread it all over the world.” [War By Media: “Journalists Are War Criminals,” Julian Assange “The Reality That Is Constructed Around Us Is Constructed By Liars.” Celia Farber, The Truth Barrier, Oct. 10, 2023]

    Julian Assange spoke succinctly about those media journalists who read us selected, bent and twisted news to disinform, blind or trick the public to support, accept or ignore ongoing atrocity wars even when massive amount of lives are being taken.

    Gaza as a flagrant example:

    First, 

    a Description of  An Ongoing Unmitigated Glaringly Obvious Horrific Criminal Unbearably Cruel Genocide in Gaza and the October 7 Lethal Hamas Attack (Julian Assange said “truth can be started, peace can be started by truth.”)

    Is followed by

    The Reconstructed ‘Reality’ of Gaza Reconstructed by Western Media’ Wars Enabling Liars as ‘Acceptable,’ ‘Excusable,’ and/or a ‘Reasonable and ‘Proportionate’ ‘Necessary’ Defensive Reaction,’ and Not Seen as Genocide. Also a ‘Reconstructed October 7 ‘Reality’

    (“Wars Are a Result of Lies,”  and wars kept going by lies)

    First,

    A basic reality never mentioned in Western media is that Israel has been killing its own imprisoned Palestinians, imprisoned in its generations long, UN declared illegal, military occupation, while international law regarding military occupation has the occupying power responsible for the well being of its militarily occupied population. Also, Israel’s settling half a million Israelis in occupied Palestinian territory displacing the local population contravenes fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.

    Since October 7, In Israeli militarily occupied and blockaded Gaza, more than 27,000 Palestinians,5 mostly women and children, have already been killed by Israeli Air Force bombings with U.S. supplied warplanes and bombs. Over 66,000 have been wounded,[8] Thirty percent of the homes and buildings in the cities of Gaza have been destroyed completely or in part, and thousands are believed to be still buried in the ruble.  According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), of the thousands of maimed and crippled children, hundreds have suffered amputations of limbs, many without anaesthesia. Since October 7, Israeli attacks have killed 11,500 children in the Gaza Strip.6 Thousands more are missing under the rubble, most of them presumed dead.

    This grim toll means that one Palestinian child is killed every 15 minutes, or that about one child out of every 100 in Gaza has perished, leading the UN to say that the Gaza Strip is a “graveyard for children.”

    Half a million residents are starving with very little food and water and no electricity and most humanitarian aid blocked from being imported.[New York Times Jan. 31] Tens of thousands trying to escape the indiscriminate bombings have been forced into intensely crowded together refuge with little toilet facilities now rampant with disease. Report: Israel burns down hundreds of homes in Gaza:

    Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports it has obtained exclusive information saying that Israeli army commanders have been ordering their troops to destroy unoccupied Gaza homes. The commanders have been doing this without obtaining proper legal approval, the report says. “After the structure is set on fire along with everything inside it, it is allowed to burn out until it is rendered useless,” Haaretz wrote. The newspaper cited three Israeli army officials who have been “spearheading” Gaza operations, who confirmed that this is common practice.7 The UN Court of Justice is still hearing the great amount of evidence of Israeli committed genocide. US State Dept said “not seeing acts of genocide” in Gaza.8 Some Israeli leaders and rabbis have engaged in genocidal talk praised ethnic cleansing operations, one minister suggesting nuclear bombing of Gaza. Western media keeps quoting Isreal’s right to defend itself. All the above mentioned death, suffering and destruction is continually excused by Isreal to be necessary because Israel must kill Hamas to defend itself from future Hamas attack.9 Western media never questions why Israel could not just defend itself with it vast arsenal of U.S. supplied weapons instead of claiming It has had to kill 10,000 children among more than 27,000 Palestinians in order protect Israel from Hamas (an acronym of its official name), the Islamic Resistance Movement, an elected Palestinian Sunni Islamist political and military organisation governing the Gaza Strip of the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.

    The Oct. 7  Hamas Attack

    It has been widely reported that at the end of a Jewish holiday on October 7, hundreds of Hamas fighters, and other militants, broke through Gaza’s militarised border, crossed into Israel by land, air and sea and reportedly (with some amount of documentation), killed civilians in the streets, in their homes and at an outdoor rave party.

    Israel’s latest official estimated death toll of soldiers and civilians during the Oct. 7 Hamas invasion is 1,200.10

    UN Secretary General Guterres stated on October 25.

    It was important to acknowledge that the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum. The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation. They have seen their land steadily devoured by settlements and plagued by violence; their economy stifled; their people displaced and their homes demolished. Their hopes for a political solution to their plight have been vanishing,” The grievances of the Palestinian people cannot justify those appalling attacks, and those appalling attacks cannot justify the collective punishment of the Palestinian people.

    Hamas issued on Jan. 21, an 18-page document explaining its official explanation for why it launched its attack on Israel October 7, saying that it was aimed at stopping the expansion of West Bank settlements and bringing an end to the blockade of the Gaza Strip.

    In its report titled “Our Narrative” Hamas, which is also the elected government of Gaza, said it wanted to “clarify” the background and dynamics of its surprise attack. The group said that avoiding harming civilians “is a religious and moral commitment” by fighters of Hamas’s armed wing, the Qassam Brigades. “If there was any case of targeting civilians; it happened accidentally and in the course of the confrontation with the occupation forces.” Hamas said in the report. “Many Israelis were killed by the Israeli army and police due to their confusion.” [19] Hamas’ describes its October 7th goal was to launch a commando-style assault on four military bases surrounding Gaza to kill or take hostage as many Israeli soldiers as possible, and a similar assault on local Israeli communities to seize civilian hostages in order to trade the hostages for Palestinian prisoners, thousands of whom are in Israeli jails, including women and children, often held without a military trial or even charges. To the Palestinian public, these prisoners are no less hostages than the Israelis held in Gaza.

    Western media journalists keep citing the hostages Palestinian Hamas is holding as one of the reasons for war. But the thousands of Palestinians are currently in Israeli prisons are never mentioned. And how many of them are children? First the figure mentioned was 7,000, a month later 9,000. (Since 1967, when Israel occupied East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, it has arrested an estimated one million Palestinians, the United Nations reported last summer. One in every five Palestinians has been arrested and charged under the 1,600 military orders that control every aspect of the lives of Palestinians living under the Israeli military occupation. That incarceration rate doubles for Palestinian men — two in every five have been arrested.)

    Forces of five other militant groups, Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades, Al-Azsa Martyrs’ Brigades, Omar Al-Qasim Forces, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Mujahideen Brigades also invaded on Oct. 7, and three groups – PIJ, the Mujahideen Brigades and Al-Nasser Salah al-Deen Brigades – claim to have seized Israeli hostages, alongside Hamas, on that day.Hamas says its October 7 attacks in southern Israel were a “necessary step” against Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories. But the Islamist group admitted in its 16-page report justifying the attack that “some faults happened” due to the rapid collapse of the Israeli security and military system, and the chaos caused along the border areas with Gaza.” The Palestinian source said through the memorandum, Hamas was sending a message to the International Court of Justice in The Hague that Hamas should not be judged solely by the events of October 7 without examining Israel’s conduct in the West Bank and Gaza over the past decades.

    Hamas pointed to the historical origins of the conflict, saying “the battle of the Palestinian people against occupation and colonialism did not start on October 7, but started 105 years ago, including 30 years of British colonialism and 75 years of Zionist occupation.”

    The group said it wanted to “hold the Israeli occupation legally accountable” for the suffering it had inflicted on the Palestinian people. Hamas said the attack was “to confront all Israeli conspiracies against the Palestinian people.” The militant group urged “the immediate halt of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, the crimes and ethnic cleansing committed against the entire Gaza population.”

    The group blames Israeli helicopters for killing “many” of the 364 civilians massacred at the Nova music festival, saying that Hamas “had no prior knowledge of it.” The document alleges hypocrisy on the part of those who would accept civilian casualties as collateral damage in Gaza while condemning Hamas’s actions during its massacres on October 7.

    The document calls for an investigation by the International Criminal Court to look at “the broader context” of the October 7 attack as part of the “struggle against colonialism, as a “national liberation and resistance movement.” The document refers to several clauses in Hamas’s updated charter from 2017, alleging that the conflict is not with the Jews, but rather with Zionism. The section condemns “what the Jews were exposed to by Nazi Germany and praises Muslim nations for having provided Jews a “safe haven” for centuries.

    The document says that Hamas receives their legitimacy from the “Palestinian right to self-defence, liberation and self-determination,” claiming that according to “all norms, divine religions and international laws,” as well as the Geneva convention, parties are granted the right to resist when facing “the longest and brutalist colonial occupation,” as well as “massacres” and “oppression.”

    Calls on all countries around the world to back “Palestinian resistance” and support the Palestinians’ “struggle for liberation.” Calls on its allies to “support… the Palestinian resistance,” to charge Israel with crimes, to mobilise against “Israeli aggression” on Gaza, and to stop governments from providing further aid or arms to Israel.

    “Israel has destroyed our ability to create a Palestinian state by accelerating the settlement enterprise,” Hamas said, blaming the United Nations for failing to stop the process. “Were we supposed to continue waiting and relying on the helpless UN institutions?” the document asked. The organisation claimed that the Gaza had “been turned into the world’s largest open-air prison” and that the war “was necessary to end the blockade.

    And it said it rejected any international and Israeli efforts to decide Gaza’s post-war future. “We stress that the Palestinian people have the capacity to decide their future and to arrange their internal affairs,” the report said, adding that “no party in the world” had the right to decide on their behalf.

    Unknown to most western audiences, there has been a steady trickle of evidence from Israeli sources over the past two months implicating Israel’s own military in many of the killings attributed to Hamas. A police investigation shows Israeli Apache helicopters opened fire on attendees of the Nova music festival during the 7 October Hamas attack. [25] Israeli resent investigations have found that a large fraction of the bodies recovered had been charred beyond all recognition. Since the Hamas fighters had only been carrying rifles, Kalashnikov rifles and other small arms, all those victims must have been killed by explosive tank shells and Hellfire missiles. Indeed, newly released video footage revealed that hundreds of Israeli cars had been incinerated by such munitions, suggesting that many if not most of the Israelis killed fleeing the dance festival had probably died at the hands of trigger-happy Apache pilots.

    At Kampala, Uganda, on Jan 17, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres addressing a summit of the Group of 77 (G-77) and China, with more than 130 countries– the largest grouping of the global South, representing 80 per cent of the planet’s population, denounced Israel for the “heartbreaking” deaths of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and called it unacceptable to resist statehood for the Palestinian people.[Reuters]

    (Julian Assange said “truth can be started, peace can be started by truth.”)

    Now

    The Reconstructed ‘Reality’ of Gaza Reconstructed by Western Media’ Wars Enabling Liars to portray the annihilation in Gaza as ‘Acceptable,’ ‘Excusable,’ and/or a ‘Reasonable and ‘Proportionate’ ‘Necessary’ Defensive Reaction,’ and Not Seen as Genocide. 

    (“,wars can be started by lies,”then kept going by lies)

    Hamas “beheading 40 babies” – headlines and the front pages of countless western news outlets. U.S. President Biden claimed to have seen “confirmed photos of terrorists beheading babies,” and that “Israeli women were raped, assaulted, paraded as trophies.”

    This is journalism that projects thinking the wholesale destruction  of Gaza to eliminate Hamas is morally justified.

    Hamas is pictured as bloodthirsty savages. Hamas beheaded 40 babies, baked another in an oven, carried out mass, systematic rapes, and cut a foetus from its mother’s womb.

    An Israeli first responder to the October 7 terror attack has claimed that Hamas terrorists roasted a baby in an oven in shocking video testimony. Asher Moskowitz, of the United Hatzalah first responder group, published a video of himself speaking to a camera, delivering his witness account.

    US Secretary of State Antony Blinken even describing in graphic detail – and wholly falsely – a Hamas attack on an Israeli family: The father’s eye gouged out in front of his kids. The mother’s breast cut off, the girl’s foot amputated, the boy’s fingers cut off before they were executed.Then their executioners sat down and had a meal.” Hamas beheaded 40 babies, baked another in an oven, carried out mass, systematic rapes, and cut a foetus from its mother’s womb.

    Efforts by the United Nations to investigate these claims being obstructed by Israel go unreported.

    Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, set the tone as he spoke about October 7. “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. This rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved, it’s absolutely not true. They could’ve risen up, they could have fought against that evil regime.”

    In different ways, the sentiment that the Palestinians are collectively responsible for the actions of Hamas in killing of about 1,200 Israelis and abduction of over 200 – and therefore deserve what is coming to them – has been echoed far beyond Israel’s borders. In the US, Senator Lindsey Graham called for the wholesale destruction of Gaza.

    Worldwide reaching colonial media journalism will not report the truth that Israel admits Apache helicopters fired on their own civilians running from the Supernova music festival – even when Tel Aviv Ynet reports it to Israelis.11

    Western media readiness to re-examine 7 October long after those events took place.

    “Israel has the right to defend itself!” Israel has the right to defend itself!” Each and every time Western media conglomerates consider it necessary to report the number of thousands killed in Gaza, media journalists repeat words to the effect that this is “a response to October 7 attack by Hamas — considered a terrorist group by the United States and European Union.” Hamas is a terrorist group!

    Blacking 0ut from Unfavourable News Indicting U.S. led West

    This section regarding criminal journalism’s reconstructed “reality” of Gaza and Hamas is perforce quite short, brief because simply not reporting reality is the most major crime in Western entertainment/news conglomerate journalism in hiding 90% of reality. Never mentioning for example, the reality of the immense and deadly suffering of the Palestinians, which is the motive for the very existence of the Hamas militant group. Recently, many news hours have been begun simply covering other world and local events to the exclusion of any mention of the extermination of Palestinians in Gaza

    In Conclusion

    White supremacy colonisers always getting away with mass

    murder both in real time and for generations thereafter has been for some time the accomplishment of the war investor controlled CIA overseen journalists of giant entertainment/news conglomerates, which have been allowed to usurp the use of public owned broadcasting frequencies. This is a government collaboration with war investors, which can and must be challenged, at the same time as taking down the credibility of the war enabling journalists of criminal mainstream media.

    Fortunately, there is declining trust in mainstream news outlets, pushing people toward alternative online sources and social media for information.

    Do journalists feel the shame when they pass on deceptive info? Yes, of course some do on occasion, and there is always a segment of the citizenry of varying size that feels responsible for the crimes of its government.

    The more info the public has makes it more difficult to pursue policies of war on innocent populations, so the public is a threat that needs to be countered. So whenever an invasion is planned, a  huge public relations campaign goes into gear.12

    An Advisory Based on Julian Assange’s Counsel

    So that is our task and it is your task, go and get the truth, get into the ballpark and get the ball and give it to us and we’ll spread it all over the world.”

    Countering the CIA-overseen giant entertainment/news/information conglomerates wars enabling deceptive journalism with truth can be more effective than attacking the wars ordering high government officials, both those elected and those appointed, who in reality must take orders form the ‘deep state’ Financial-Military-Industrial-Complex ‘deep pocket’ war investors.13

    Julian Assange has brought to our attention the pleasant-looking evening news anchor who captivates TV audiences with alternating joviality and gravitas, asking whether they should be seen as insidiously evil as they generate support for horrific suffering, death, maiming and destruction.

    Assange seems to have tasked us to awaken a critical number of decent but unwary citizens to the realisation that a trusted prime time personality of theirs is in fact a war criminal?

    ENDNOTES

    The post The “Reality” around Us is Constructed by Liars: “Journalists are War Criminals” first appeared on Dissident Voice.
    1    In a 14 June 1807 letter to John Norvell. The Founders’ Constitution, Volume 5, Amendment I (Speech and Press), Document 29, The University of Chicago Press.
    2    Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, Antony Cyril Sutton British-American writer, researcher, economist, and Stanford U. professor.
    3    There exists not one photo or video of a peaceful protest (CNN reported peaceful protests being fired upon by Libyan soldiers and police.) “There Was No Libyan Peaceful Protest, Just Murderous Gangs and Nic Robertson,” Information Clearing House, June 20, 2011 .  Long time Italian Prime Minister says Libyans love Gaddafi as Italians P. Nearly one million Libyans, out of a total population of six million, wildly demonstrated in favor of their nation’s government with a mile long green flag while listening to Gaddafi’s voice even as NATO warplanes were bombing nearby in Tripoli.
    4    “Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the C.I.A,” December 26, 1977, New York Times.
    5    Reports Gaza Ministry of Health and UN
    6    Aljazeera, Feb. 2.
    7    Report: “Israel burns down hundreds of homes in Gaza” Aljazeera, Feb. 1.
    8    US ‘not seeing acts of genocide’ in Gaza, State Dept says, Reuters, Jan. 3, 2024
    10    Israel-Hamas War Israel Lowers Oct. 7 Death Toll Estimate to 1,200, New York Times, Nov 10, 2023.
    11    Israeli Apache helicopters killed own soldiers, civilians on …New footage corroborates previous reports that say the Israeli military is responsible for many of the Israeli casualties.
    12    See “The War You Don’t See,” John Pilger Documentary, YouTube.
    13    The awful crimes against humanity ordered by President Eisenhower in Laos, Guatemala, Congo and other places indicate that the president was under the thumb of the Military Industrial Complex he warned of on the day he left office.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Vince McMahon has resigned from his position as the head of the entertainment group that oversees most of professional wresting after a former staffer accused him of sexual assault and sex trafficking. Also, lawmakers in Florida are advancing legislation that would ban children under the age of 16 from using social media. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. […]

    The post Texts Reveal Vince McMahon’s Disturbing Behavior & FL Lawmakers Want To Ban Addictive Social Media appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • The National in Port Moresby

    The Papua New Guinea government plans to introduce laws to curb free speech and freedom of the press, former prime minister Peter O’Neill says.

    In a statement, O’Neill said the same law would jail any journalist or person who published anything the government deemed to be “misreporting”.

    O’Neill described the government’s proposal as “deeply concerning and needs to be vehemently opposed every way possible”.

    He said: “Today we learn government is preparing to crack down on journalists with new media laws being urgently prepared and to be presented to Parliament very soon.

    “They plan to curb free speech and freedom of the press to report by being able to jail any journalist or person who publishes anything they deem is misreporting.”

    Information and Communication Technology Minister (ICT) Timothy Masiu said yesterday that the Department of Information and Communication Technology (DICT) was currently working on the media policy to include holding persons accountable for misreporting.

    Masiu said the policy to be presented to Cabinet would still hold its original content but would emphasise that media quality, accessibility and responsibility in information dissemination would be based on facts.

    ‘We don’t want to tighten up’
    “We don’t want to tighten up on media so much but we want to make sure that reporters are responsible for what they report and it’s about time this should be implemented,” Masiu said.

    Prime Minister James Marape said he supported the move.

    “This is our country where you all have the power in your pen but take some responsibility and write correctly and based on facts,” he said.

    “You have a responsibility to our county.

    “Do not write your own opinion, or if you have an opinion, then find facts to support that opinion.

    “Those who are not writing based on fact, I will be holding you accountable,” he said.

    O’Neill questioned whether journalists and their editors will be subject to arrest and punishment.

    “I am both saddened and alarmed at the proposed way the Marape government is dismantling democracy.

    “I am utterly convinced that if we uphold all the principles of a healthy democracy, we as a people will overcome any challenge whether it be economic, social or environmental,” he said.

    “We are a strong people with the courage of our convictions and centuries old traditions and customs.”

    Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The release of the Vault 7 files in the spring of 2017 in a series of 26 disclosures, detailing the hacking tools of the US Central Intelligence Agency, was one of the more impressive achievements of the WikiLeaks publishing organisation.  As WikiLeaks stated at the time, the hacking component of the agency’s operations had become so sizeable it began to dwarf the operations of the National Security Agency.  “The CIA had created, in effect, its ‘own NSA’ with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capabilities of a rival agency could be justified.”

    The publication ruffled feathers, enraged officials, and stirred the blood of those working in the intelligence community bothered by this “digital Pearl Harbor”.  The exercise involved the pilfering of 180 gigabytes of information and constituted, according to the agency, “the largest data loss in CIA history”.

    The CIA’s WikiLeaks Task Force was charged with investigating the incident and submitted its findings to the director in October 2017.  Pompeo should have been grudgingly grateful – WikiLeaks had given the organisation a good excuse for cleaning the cobwebs and removing the creases.  The report, for instance, found that the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI) had placed greater emphasis on the building of “cyber weapons at the expense of securing their own systems.  Day-to-day security practices had become woefully lax.”  The cyber weapons were also “not compartmented”, passwords at various administrator levels were shared “and historical data was available to users indefinitely.”  In what reads like a vote for the dull and the tedious, the report took issue with “a culture that evolved over years that too often prioritized creativity and collaboration at the expense of security.”

    The individual responsible for taking the loot to WikiLeaks was the fractious Joshua Schulte, who worked at the CCI as a software developer and had himself created a number of hacking tools.  On February 1, he was sentenced in the New York federal court to 40 years in prison.  His list of previous convictions was encyclopaedically colourful: espionage, computer hacking, contempt of court, making false statements to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and child pornography.

    At the sentencing hearing, Judge Jesse M. Furman, in that time honoured tradition of judicial vagueness, remarked that, “We will likely never know the full extent of the damage, but I have no doubt it was massive.”  This was a silly claim, given that the leaks were, as Axios reported, “largely inconsequential, with most being instruction manuals for old hacking tools”.

    The prosecution was similarly imprecise (and disingenuous), as they tend to be when measuring the extent national security is supposedly impaired by information disclosures.  “He caused untold damage to our national security in his quest for revenge against the CIA for its response to Schulte’s security breaches while employed there,” stated the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Damian Williams.  Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen further added that Schulte had “directly risked the lives of CIA personnel, persisting in his efforts even after his arrest.”

    In comments made to the court prior to the sentencing, Schulte touched on the wonderful penal conditions that mark the US penitentiary system.  He had, for instance, been denied hot water.  He had been extensively exposed to artificial light and constant noise.

    He also had – and here, British judges should take note regarding Assange’s own arguments against extradition to the US – been deceived by the prosecutors in a plea deal offer that would have seen him sentenced to 10 years in prison.  Instead, he got an additional three decades.  “This is not justice the government seeks,” Schulte accurately observed, “but vengeance.”

    Schulte proved an important figure in the roistering annals of WikiLeaks.  It was his disclosures that signalled the cold and vicious turn in US policy in targeting Assange.  The release of the Vault 7 files sent the then director, Mike Pompeo, into a rage.  The 2021 Yahoo! report, which famously noted various opinions within the intelligence community on what could be done about the Australian publisher, reports that change of approach.  According to one former Trump national security official, the director and CIA officials “were completely detached from reality because they were so detached about Vault 7.”

    Soon, Pompeo was publicly tarring WikiLeaks while privately pondering options to kidnap or assassinate Assange.  In April 2017, in a speech given to the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington, the director hoisted the black flag.  “WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service and has encouraged its followers to find jobs at the CIA in order to obtain intelligence.”  Nonsensically, Pompeo imbues the publishing organisation with dictatorial and mesmeric qualities.  “It directed Chelsea Manning in her theft of specific secret information.”  (No, it did not.)  “And it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States while seeking support from anti-democratic countries and organizations.”  Given the concentration of unstable power at the heart of Washington, and its imperial pretences, Pompeo can hardly be surprised.

    The speech is worthy of close analysis.  It declares, inevitably, that the CIA is a noble organisation incapable of abuse, a saintly enterprise of patriots who should be treated as such.  It takes issue with those who give the game away.  And, more fundamentally, it refuses to have any truck with a publisher who aids that cause.

    Pompeo, for instance, dismissed Assange’s own justifications for publishing national security material as “sophistry”.  He could hardly be compared to Thomas Jefferson or “the Pulitzer Prize-winning work of legitimate news organizations such as The New York Times and The Washington Post.”

    Dangerously, the strategy behind the bluster becomes clear, and would find itself gorily displayed in the indictment against Assange.  It picks and chooses between publishers as sacred and profane, the ennobled and the condemned.  It ignores the pointed fact that national security information is almost always pilfered and leaked, sometimes patriotically, sometimes selfishly.  Punish Assange, and you are opening the door to punishing any news outlet of any stripe operating anywhere.  And that, fundamentally, is the point.

    The post Unaccountable Hackers: The CIA, Vengeance, and Joshua Schulte first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Lawmakers in Florida are advancing legislation that would ban children under the age of 16 from using social media. Studies have found that social media use causes chemical reactions in the brain that are similar to drug use, and addiction to social media has become a serious problem for the younger generation. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. […]

    The post FL Moves Forward With Legislation To Ban Social Media For Children appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • New national security legislation will make it harder for detained suspects to meet with their lawyers and could target journalists and media organizations for interviewing them, Hong Kong officials have revealed in recent comments aired by a pro-China broadcaster.

    Suspects in national security cases, who are typically people who have opposed the government via their public speech or peaceful actions, could be seeking to stay in touch with “accomplices,” by requesting to see their lawyer, who might also be a member of their “group,” Secretary for Justice Paul Lam told TVB’s “Speak Clearly” talk show at the weekend.

    “As a result, they could continue with activities that endanger national security under the guise of seeing a lawyer,” said Lam, whose government launched a public consultation on the new law, which the city is obliged to enact under Article 23 of its Basic Law, its mini-constitution since the 1997 handover to Chinese rule.

    The Article 23 legislation was recently rebooted following a 20-year hiatus in the wake of mass popular protests, and is being billed by the government as a way to close “loopholes” in the already stringent 2020 National Security Law, which was imposed on the city by Beijing in response to the 2019 protest movement.

    The Safeguarding National Security Ordinance – which will criminalize “treason,” “insurrection,” the theft of “state secrets,” “sabotage” and “external interference,” among other national security offenses – is highly likely to be passed by the Legislative Council now that electoral rules have been changed to allow only “patriots” to run for election.

    Lam also warned of tougher penalties for media organizations that interview people wanted by the Hong Kong government.

    “They could be seen as providing a platform and aiding and abetting them,” he warned, calling on the media to be “careful.”

    ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_02052024.2.jpg
    Hong Kong democracy activist Agnes Chow, who is now on the city’s wanted list, speaks from Toronto during an online interview with AFP on Dec. 5, 2023. Secretary for Justice Lam has warned of tougher penalties for media organizations that interview people wanted by the government. (Su Xinqi/AFPTV/AFP)

    Hong Kong has already plummeted in press freedom and overall freedom indexes since launching a post-2019 crackdown on dissent, and has placed a number of high-profile journalists including Next Digital mogul Jimmy Lai on trial for “national security” offenses linked to newspaper articles.

    The new legislation could also target people deemed to be using too confrontational a “tone” to criticize the government in public life, Secretary for Security Chris Tang told the show.

    “You can criticize the government, but if you keep repeating yourself and spicing it up, using your tone of voice for example to deliberately stir up people’s emotions, that could be regarded as inciting hatred [of the authorities],” Tang warned, but said that would only happen in cases where there was “criminal intent.”

    ‘Intimidation on a huge scale’

    Current affairs commentator Sang Pu, who is also a lawyer, said that such assurances can’t be trusted, however. 

    “The Hong Kong government, the national security police and the Department of Justice have very loose criteria for determining criminal intent,” Sang said. “Basically, there is criminal intent if they say there is.”

    “A lot of people will come under that definition, which will be extended [under this legislation],” he said.

    He said the new law could spell the end of independent political commentary about the city, even beyond its borders, as overseas commentators still have friends and family back home who could be put under greater pressure as a result of their comments.

    “This is intimidation on a huge scale, and is totally designed to eliminate any voice that tries to provide oversight of the government.”

    ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_02052024.3.JPG
    Secretary for Justice Paul Lam attends a ceremony to mark the beginning of the new legal year in Hong Kong on Jan. 16, 2023. (Tyrone Siu/Reuters)

    To Yiu-ming, a former assistant journalism professor at Hong Kong’s Baptist University, agreed, saying that officials are clearly targeting political commentators, exiled and wanted Hong Kong activists, media organizations and journalists.

    “This is clearly about political law enforcement,” To said. “The Hong Kong government doesn’t want the voices of exiles and wanted activists to be heard back in Hong Kong.”

    “It’s being done so as to allow law enforcement agencies to have the option, if needed, to cause trouble for certain reporters they don’t like and prevent them from doing their jobs,” he said.

    Eric Lai, research fellow at the Asian Law Center at Georgetown University, said that while the consultation document isn’t a final draft, the details revealed so far suggest that the media is a major target of the law.

    “The Article 23 legislation incorporates some elements of the [planned] fake news law into its text,” Lai said. 

    “According to the consultation document, if you interview people wanted [by the authorities], or publish some remarks that are considered to endanger national security, you could be prosecuted,” he said.

    “The devil is in the details,” he said. “If all of these provisions are included [in the final draft], it will certainly have a huge impact on press freedom.”

    ‘More stringent’ than the mainland

    Patrick Poon, human rights researcher currently at the University of Tokyo, said that even mainland Chinese law hasn’t banned overseas news organizations from interviewing its dissidents overseas.

    “People inside China face the biggest pressures and the highest risks if they give interviews to foreign journalists,” Poon said. “[Now], it could be risky for foreign journalists to interview people in exile, which is even more stringent than some of the practices in mainland China.”

    He said the potential restrictions on allowing meetings with a national security detainee’s lawyer is a violation of international law and human rights standards.

    He said the Hong Kong authorities wouldn’t be able to guarantee a fair trial to suspects under such an arrangement.

    State news agency Xinhua hit out at the criticism of the Article 23 legislation in a Feb. 3 commentary, describing critics of the law as “ants on a hotpot.”

    “They’re falling over each other to attack and smear [this] legislation,” the article said. “People who love China and Hong Kong won’t feel the slightest bit worried … [but] will support its completion as soon as possible.”

    It accused “anti-China and disruptive elements in Hong Kong” of “seriously undermining Hong Kong’s stability and endangering national security,” warning that they will face prosecution and prison as a result.

    “These anti-China disruptors in Hong Kong do not want to be upright Chinese people, but want to be slave-dogs driven by the enemy,” the article said, warning that the new law will make them into “homeless dogs” without “foreign masters” to rely on.

    Translated by Luisetta Mudie.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Chen Zifei for RFA Mandarin, Tim Lee for RFA Cantonese.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    The mother of Al Jazeera’s award-winning Gaza bureau chief Wael Dahdouh has died at a hospital in Gaza due to illness, reports Al Jazeera.

    Dahdouh, who has become a symbol for the perseverance of Palestinian journalists in Gaza, had lost his wife Amna, son Mahmoud, daughter Sham and grandson Adam to an Israeli air raid in October.

    Dahdouh was later wounded in an Israeli drone attack that killed his colleague, Al Jazeera cameraman Samer Abudaqa. He is currently being treated for his injuries in a hospital Doha, Qatar.

    Last month, his eldest son, Hamza — a journalist who worked with Al Jazeera — was also killed in an Israeli attack alongside fellow journalist Mustafa Thuraya, a freelancer.

    Last Friday, India’s Kerala Media Academy announced that its Media Person of the Year award has been given to Wael Al-Dahdouh in recognition of his exceptional journalistic courage.

    ‘Global face of courage’
    The academy said in a statement that Al-Dahdouh was “a global face of journalistic courage, who continues to work despite the heavy losses borne by his family”.

    Anil Bhaskar, secretary of the academy, told Arab News that Al-Dahdouh was recognised for his fearless reporting that allowed the world see the “true picture of the catastrophe” in Gaza.

    “His commitment and bravery are exemplary and set an example for other journalists not only in India but all over the world,” Bhaskar said.

    According to UN reports, more than 122 journalists and media workers have been among more than 27,000 people killed in Israel’s nearly four-month offensive in Gaza.

    Press freedom watchdog the Committee to Protect Journalists said last month that journalists were being killed in Gaza at a rate with no parallel in modern history and that there was “an apparent pattern of targeting of journalists and their families by the Israeli military.”

    ‘Struggling to keep alive’
    Meanwhile, Ayman Nobani, reporting from Nablus in the occupied West Bank, says Palestinian journalists are “struggling to keep alive”.

    He reported that Shorouk al-Assad, a member of the general secretariat of the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate, as saying that journalists in the besieged coastal enclave were living through unprecedented times as they were being targeted by Israeli forces.

    “The most important challenge today is the survival of journalists in light of their targeting and bombardment by Israel, in addition to the killing of their families, the destruction of their neighbourhoods, and the death of their colleagues,” she told Al Jazeera.

    She also said:

    • At least 73 media offices have been bombed since October 7;
    • All of Gaza’s radio stations are no longer operating due to bombardment, power outages, or the killing or displacement of staff;
    • Only 40 journalists remain in northern Gaza and they are besieged and isolated, with no means to send food or relief items to them; and
    • Some 70 journalists have lost close family members

    Earlier reports have indicated 78 Palestinian journalists have been killed in the Israeli war on Gaza, many of them targeted.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • This week’s bonus episode for our supporters at the Truth-teller level and higher on Patreon is Part I of the Gaslit Nation Social Media Workshop, designed for those who hate social media and miss the old Twitter. Organizer Rachel Brody, who works with various campaigns to help get out the vote and leading brands, joins us to share the landscape of social media today and how to leverage the power of your voice in a world that needs you. 

    Got questions about the  investigations and prosecutions of the Traitor-in-Chief? Join Gaslit Nation for a special live taping on Monday, February 12, at 12 pm ET, featuring Tristan Snell—the prosecutor who led New York State’s case against Trump and Trump University, and the author of the new book Taking Down Trump: 12 Rules for Prosecuting Donald Trump by Someone Who Did It Successfully. An event link will be sent to our Patreon community at the Truth-teller level or higher on the day of the event. To join us, sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit!

    Our regular Q&As will return in February, so be sure to send in your questions! Thank you to everyone who supports the show – we could not make Gaslit Nation without you!

    Show Notes:

    Replace Jay Jacobs: https://replacejayjacobs.com/


    This content originally appeared on Gaslit Nation and was authored by Andrea Chalupa.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • By Nacanieli Tuilevuka in Suva

    Those spooked by the presence of a senior Central Intelligence Agency official in Fiji this week have nothing to fear.

    At least, this was the view of Acting Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica as he hinted at the possibility of using the CIA’s “global knowledge and expertise” in the fight against drugs.

    He said he met the CIA’s Deputy Director David Cohen on Tuesday in Suva to discuss areas of mutual interest.

    Fiji's Acting prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica
    Fiji’s Acting Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica . . . “Expertise will keep the border safe.” Image: Jonacani Lalakobau/The Fiji Times

    They exchanged ideas on how both countries could benefit from each other.

    “I’ve met him as the Acting Prime Minister, so it was a broad conversation around the international environment and the fact that we are becoming more and more of a transit point for drugs,” Kamikamica said.

    There is a possibility of Fiji working with the CIA in its fight against drugs, said Kamikamica.

    The CIA is the US government’s foreign intelligence service that gathers national security information from around the world.

    ‘Think about their expertise’
    In response to questions from The Fiji Times, Kamikamica did not specify the nature of his discussions with Cohen.

    “However, think about the security apparatus the Central Intelligence Agency has,” he said.

    “The global knowledge and expertise they have.”

    Asked why he discussed these areas of mutual interest when they fell under the ambit of the US State Department, Kamikamica said he also met other officials of the US government

    “I also met the deputy Secretary of State and Ambassador at Large for cybersecurity separately in my office,” he said.

    The developments of the past few days also gave Kamikamica an opportunity to allay potential public fear and disquiet over Cohen’s visit.

    In response to concerns raised on social media over the presence of the CIA’s second in command, Kamikamica urged Fijians against what he described as “idle speculation”.

    ‘We have stable government’
    “There is no need to be concerned,” he said. “We have a very stable government, we have a Prime Minister who is in total control of the Coalition.

    “We are tracking well as a government,” said Kamikamica, adding that the important thing for the country was focusing on “how we work together to rebuild Fiji rather than getting preoccupied with idle speculation”.

    “Expertise will keep the border safe, [so we ate] just looking at ways to collaborate.”

    On the essence of their discussions on national issues, Kamikamica said “we didn’t really touch on that, more around just having an opportunity to collaborate”.

    “When we have expertise like them at our doorstep, it is a very positive development and just to allow, not only Fiji, but the region to benefit.”

    Nacanieli Tuilevuka is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Stockholm, February 2, 2024 – Kazakh authorities should fully investigate a recent wave of cyberattacks on independent media outlets and hold those responsible to account, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Friday.

    Cyberattacks by unidentified perpetrators have targeted at least nine independent media outlets and multiple journalists in Kazakhstan since November 2023, according to data shared with CPJ by local press freedom group Adil Soz, which issued a statement on the attacks January 19, 2024, and several of the journalists, who spoke to CPJ.

    The attacks, which have targeted well-known independent media including news agency KazTAG, and popular social media-based outlets like AIRAN and Obozhayu, included distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and blocking of outlets’ social media accounts through orchestrated mass complaints, causing media to lose access to their audiences and incurring heavy financial costs, those journalists told CPJ.

    The latest wave follows a previous series of cyberattacks and physical attacks on independent journalists in Kazakhstan in late 2022 and early 2023. In March, authorities arrested and later convicted five people in connection with those incidents, including one who admitted to ordering the attacks. Despite those convictions, Karla Jamankulova, head of Adil Soz, told CPJ that cyberattacks against the independent press have continued throughout 2023 and intensified since November.

    “Kazakhstan’s continuing epidemic of cyberattacks on the press poses a threat not just to the individual outlets targeted but has become a systemic threat to the country’s media and demands a concomitant response,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, in New York. “Authorities in Kazakhstan must conduct a swift and thorough investigation into these attacks and hold all those responsible to account.”

    According to data from Adil Soz, the organization recorded 56 incidents of cyberattacks on media outlets and journalists in 2023, up from 37 in 2022. Of those cyberattacks, 36 were against the websites and social media pages of media outlets, and 20 of them targeted the social media accounts of individual journalists.

    Since November, DDoS attacks have targeted the websites of at least four independent media – KazTAG, independent news outlet Nege.kz, and business news outlets Kursiv.Media and inbusiness.kz, causing them to be inaccessible for short periods or load slowly, according to reports and Adil Soz. 

    A January 5 statement by KazTAG said that the outlet closed access to its website from outside of Kazakhstan to fight the DDoS attacks, but the attacks later resumed from IP addresses located in the building of majority state-owned telecommunications company Kazakhtelecom. Kazakhtelecom denied involvement.

    Over the same period, social media accounts or websites of at least four independent media – Kursiv.Media, and social media-based outlets AIRAN, ProTenge, Shishkin_like, and Obozhayu – were blocked by orchestrated mass complaints or by fake accounts posting banned content that triggered social media companies’ automated blocking systems, according to Adil Soz and several of the outlets, who told CPJ that it can take a long time, or prove impossible, to restore the blocked accounts. Kursiv.Media chief editor Mira Khalina told CPJ the outlet ’s Instagram accounts were blocked for over six weeks and that replacement accounts set up by the outlet remain blocked. Dmitry Shishkin, founder of Shishkin_like, told CPJ the outlet was unable to restore an Instagram account wrongly blocked in April 2023.

    Askhat Niyazov, founder of Obozhayu, which covers the work of local authorities, told CPJ that in addition to blocking the outlet’s Telegram channel by flooding it with banned violent and pornographic content, perpetrators hacked or blocked the Instagram and WhatsApp accounts of Niyazov, two of the outlet’s journalists, and Niyazov’s parents and wife. Around 4,000 fake accounts left the comment “R.I.P.” under one of the outlet’s YouTube videos.

    Mikhail Kozachkov, author of the popular Telegram channel Kozachkov offside, told CPJ that the channel has removed around 750,000 fake accounts posting banned or offensive content since October 2023. In November, dozens of fake Telegram accounts under Kozachkov’s name spread calls for interethnic violence, which is subject to heavy penalties under Kazakh law.

    Jamankulova of Adil Soz told CPJ the ongoing attacks are having a “huge impact” on the functioning of independent Kazakh media, which often struggle financially and are forced to divert significant resources to deal with the cyberattacks. Khalina told CPJ that the attacks have cost Kursiv.Media over 19 million tenge (US$42,300) in redirected resources, lost advertising revenue, and other costs.

    In January, six of the outlets filed a police complaint over the attacks but are still waiting for police to respond, Khalina said. She described the attacks as an attempt to “disable” independent journalism.

    Maricheva of ProTenge told CPJ that while it remains unclear who might be behind the attacks, which usually cost tens of thousands of dollars, they require resources typically available only to wealthy business interests and those with access to state resources.

    In November, a closed-doors court in the southern city of Almaty convicted Arkady Klebanov, the son of a former member of the Kazakh elite, of ordering attacks on journalists in late 2022 and early 2023, but declared him insane and ordered him to undergo psychiatric treatment. Several of the journalists targeted by those attacks have expressed skepticism that Klebanov was the real instigator of those attacks.

    CPJ emailed the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Kazakhstan for comment but did not receive any reply.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Arlene Getz/CPJ Editorial Director.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet blamed bad foreign press for the abrupt end to a development boom in the coastal resort of Sihanoukville that has left hundreds of derelict buildings in its wake.

    “It takes a long time to build a good reputation so that people will want to come to visit Angkor Wat but [this reputation] was destroyed within only six months after a few articles from Al Jazeera,” he said, without elaborating on specifically what the Qatar-based news outlet had reported.

    In 2019, Al-Jazeera published a scathing piece about crime-ridden casinos in Sihanoukville, and in 2022 it produced a documentary about cyber slaves–people duped into working as scammers, usually in casinos–after they were promised high-paying jobs. 

    Hun Manet’s remarks came at a forum to promote investment in Sihanoukville, where according to data by the Ministry of Finance there are 362 so-called “ghost buildings” – hotels, restaurants or casinos funded by Chinese investors who pulled out before construction was completed.

    ENG_KHM_GhostBuildings_01312024.2.JPG
    Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet blames bad foreign press for the abrupt end to a development boom in the coastal resort of Sihanoukville. (RFA)

    Hun Manet unveiled a plan to deal with the problem, which would allow special visas and tax incentives for investors to purchase the buildings worth more than US$1 million on the condition that they fix and maintain them.

    “We will consider tax exemptions [for those who buy the ghost buildings and fix them] but we need to set conditions so that they are actually fixing them instead of sitting on them for resale,” Hun Manet said.

    He said the government will also make Sihanoukville more attractive by introducing duty free zones, investing in infrastructure and fostering the creation of resorts and other services for tourists. And to prevent further bad press, Sihanoukville province should do more to prevent crime.

    ENG_KHM_GhostBuildings_01312024.3.JPG
    The Cambodian government seeks to promote investment in Sihanoukville, where according to data, there are 362 so-called “ghost buildings” – hotels, restaurants or casinos funded by Chinese investors who pulled out before construction was completed. (RFA)

    Minister of Finance Aun Pornmoniroth told the forum that Cambodia needed US$1.1 billion to take care of the ghost building problem. 

    “Back in 2016 investment in Sihanoukville was booming, especially in construction of restaurants, hotels and shops, but since 2019, due to the financial crisis and COVID-19 everything stopped,” he explained. 

    In addition to the 362 ghost buildings there are an additional 176 buildings that are complete, but are not being used, he said.

    Concerning incentives

    The new incentives might bring more casinos to Sihanoukville concerns Cheap Sotheary, the provincial coordinator for theCambodian Human Rights and Development Association. 

    He told RFA Khmer that the province would have to deal with more crime, drugs and human trafficking unless it seeks out other kinds of investment.

    “[Casinos] bring in gamblers through and sell drugs, alcohol and sex,” she said. “People don’t want to see this kind of investment.”

    Social and political commentator Por Makara said corruption has scared away Western investors. 

    ENG_KHM_GhostBuildings_01312024.4.JPG
    New economic incentives might bring more casinos to Sihanoukville, which brings concerns about crime that may come along with gambling. (RFA)

    “The ghost building situation will worsen because only Chinese investors … will be willing to deal with all the corruption,” he said. “European and American investors don’t want to be involved with human rights abuses.” 

    Political commentator Kim Sok told RFA that the government’s incentives would not attract good businesspeople to invest in the restoration of ghost buildings in Sihanoukville. He said that the main reason why Cambodia lacks good businessmen now is because the legal system is trampled by powerful people, corruption and crime.

    “Hun Manet’s incentives won’t help the national or local economy but are only good for money laundering. Good investors won’t invest in those buildings,” he said.

    The International Monetary Fund on Wednesday said in a report that Cambodia is on a “recovery trajectory post-pandemic.” The country’s GDP grew 5.2% in 2022 and is projected to grow 5.3% in 2023, “fueled by a resurgence in tourism,” which saw gains due to the 2023 South-East Asia Games.

    Translated by Samean Yun. Edited by Eugene Whong.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Khmer.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet blamed bad foreign press for the abrupt end to a development boom in the coastal resort of Sihanoukville that has left hundreds of derelict buildings in its wake.

    “It takes a long time to build a good reputation so that people will want to come to visit Angkor Wat but [this reputation] was destroyed within only six months after a few articles from Al Jazeera,” he said, without elaborating on specifically what the Qatar-based news outlet had reported.

    In 2019, Al-Jazeera published a scathing piece about crime-ridden casinos in Sihanoukville, and in 2022 it produced a documentary about cyber slaves–people duped into working as scammers, usually in casinos–after they were promised high-paying jobs. 

    Hun Manet’s remarks came at a forum to promote investment in Sihanoukville, where according to data by the Ministry of Finance there are 362 so-called “ghost buildings” – hotels, restaurants or casinos funded by Chinese investors who pulled out before construction was completed.

    ENG_KHM_GhostBuildings_01312024.2.JPG
    Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet blames bad foreign press for the abrupt end to a development boom in the coastal resort of Sihanoukville. (RFA)

    Hun Manet unveiled a plan to deal with the problem, which would allow special visas and tax incentives for investors to purchase the buildings worth more than US$1 million on the condition that they fix and maintain them.

    “We will consider tax exemptions [for those who buy the ghost buildings and fix them] but we need to set conditions so that they are actually fixing them instead of sitting on them for resale,” Hun Manet said.

    He said the government will also make Sihanoukville more attractive by introducing duty free zones, investing in infrastructure and fostering the creation of resorts and other services for tourists. And to prevent further bad press, Sihanoukville province should do more to prevent crime.

    ENG_KHM_GhostBuildings_01312024.3.JPG
    The Cambodian government seeks to promote investment in Sihanoukville, where according to data, there are 362 so-called “ghost buildings” – hotels, restaurants or casinos funded by Chinese investors who pulled out before construction was completed. (RFA)

    Minister of Finance Aun Pornmoniroth told the forum that Cambodia needed US$1.1 billion to take care of the ghost building problem. 

    “Back in 2016 investment in Sihanoukville was booming, especially in construction of restaurants, hotels and shops, but since 2019, due to the financial crisis and COVID-19 everything stopped,” he explained. 

    In addition to the 362 ghost buildings there are an additional 176 buildings that are complete, but are not being used, he said.

    Concerning incentives

    The new incentives might bring more casinos to Sihanoukville concerns Cheap Sotheary, the provincial coordinator for theCambodian Human Rights and Development Association. 

    He told RFA Khmer that the province would have to deal with more crime, drugs and human trafficking unless it seeks out other kinds of investment.

    “[Casinos] bring in gamblers through and sell drugs, alcohol and sex,” she said. “People don’t want to see this kind of investment.”

    Social and political commentator Por Makara said corruption has scared away Western investors. 

    ENG_KHM_GhostBuildings_01312024.4.JPG
    New economic incentives might bring more casinos to Sihanoukville, which brings concerns about crime that may come along with gambling. (RFA)

    “The ghost building situation will worsen because only Chinese investors … will be willing to deal with all the corruption,” he said. “European and American investors don’t want to be involved with human rights abuses.” 

    Political commentator Kim Sok told RFA that the government’s incentives would not attract good businesspeople to invest in the restoration of ghost buildings in Sihanoukville. He said that the main reason why Cambodia lacks good businessmen now is because the legal system is trampled by powerful people, corruption and crime.

    “Hun Manet’s incentives won’t help the national or local economy but are only good for money laundering. Good investors won’t invest in those buildings,” he said.

    The International Monetary Fund on Wednesday said in a report that Cambodia is on a “recovery trajectory post-pandemic.” The country’s GDP grew 5.2% in 2022 and is projected to grow 5.3% in 2023, “fueled by a resurgence in tourism,” which saw gains due to the 2023 South-East Asia Games.

    Translated by Samean Yun. Edited by Eugene Whong.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Khmer.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • In separate incidents in November and December 2023, two politicians in Botswana posted to social media the personal phone numbers of journalists Kabo Ramasia and Kealoboga Dihutso after the reporters sought to interview them.

    The unwanted publication of personal information online—known as doxxing—is an increasingly common form of digital harassment of the press.

    On November 23, 2023, Botswana’s Assistant Minister of Investment, Trade and Industry, Beauty Morukana Manake, published screenshots of a WhatsApp conversation with Ramasia, in which the journalist’s phone number was visible, on her Facebook page, which has over 63,000 followers, according to Ramasia, who spoke to CPJ, a statement by the Botswana chapter of the press freedom group Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA), and CPJ’s review.

    Ramasia is a freelance reporter who covers politics, health, and other news for a variety of local outlets.

    On February 1, 2024, the post was still live and contained screenshots of Manake’s conversation with Ramasia, who asked Manake for comment on allegations that she was “abusing” her office, including by arriving late at events.

    In the screenshots, Manake said the allegations were baseless and part of a “witch-hunt.” Manake also said that she had been “abused and weaponized by people using the media for their selfish ‘political gains.’”

    Ramasia told CPJ that he had called Manake, asking her to conceal his identity or delete the post, and that she had requested an apology, which the journalist declined to give.

    Manake told CPJ that she felt unfairly treated by the journalist and accused Ramasia of deliberately attempting to tarnish her image. 

    On December 19, 2023, Madibelatlhopo, a group that campaigns against election rigging and is affiliated with the opposition party Umbrella for Democratic Change, published Dihutso’s phone number on its Facebook page, which has over 10,000 followers, according to MISA, CPJ’s review, and Dihutso, who spoke to CPJ. 

    Dihutso’s phone number was included in a series of screenshots showing a WhatsApp exchange in which Dihutso, a reporter with the privately owned Duma FM, sought comment from Madibelatlhopo’s spokesperson, Michael Keakopa, about the group’s registration as a private company and its shareholding.

    As of February 1, 2024, the Facebook post was still live, along with commentary suggesting that Dihutso was an intelligence agent and a member of the ruling Botswana Democratic Party. Facebook commentators also accused him of being “naive and malicious” and claimed that Duma FM was founded on the “proceeds of crime.”

    MISA said “indiscriminate sharing of [the journalists’] personal data” contravened their right to privacy under Botswana’s constitution and its Data Protection Act, and created “a hostile environment” for reporting.

    Under the country’s data protection law, a person who processes sensitive personal data without permission is guilty of an offense and is liable to a fine not exceeding 500,000 pula (USD$36,500) and/or up to nine years imprisonment.

    In a statement, the Botswana Editors Forum said Madibelathlopo’s comments were an “attempt to discredit or attack journalists for simply practicing their trade.”

    Dihutso told CPJ he had reported the post containing his phone number to Facebook.

    In response to CPJ’s request for comment via messaging app in early January, Keakopa accused a CPJ staff member of being connected to Botswana intelligence, said “I’m going to publish this conversation for Batswana to know what I discuss with so called journalists just as I did with that other pseudo,” and told the staff member to “never send me stupid messages again.” Keakopa did not respond to subsequent queries from CPJ.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Sevinc Vaqifgizi is one of 13 independent journalists detained since snap presidential vote announced

    In late November last year, the investigative journalist Sevinc Vaqifgizi was arrested upon arrival at Heydar Aliyev international airport in Azerbaijan and accused of smuggling foreign currency.

    Shortly before takeoff the 34-year-old editor had learned that her close colleague, Ulvi Hasanli, had been detained hours earlier. The two journalists ran Abzas Media, a small, independent Azerbaijani news outlet known for its investigations. They deny the charges.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Feeding Tomorrow is the people who grow food and the people who eat food working together to transform the entire ecology of the planet,” says farmer Mark Shepard in the new documentary Feeding Tomorrow, released on January 23.

    The film, which has already won multiple awards, including Best Feature Documentary at the Ceres Food Film Festival, guides viewers through the current reality of the food system, which prioritizes fast and cheap production, and as a result, is destroying ecosystems, fuelling climate change, and threatening our health. But, as the name suggests, the key focus of Feeding Tomorrow is also the many solutions that are already available to us when it comes to fixing this broken food system.

    Right now, the livestock industry is responsible for 14.5 percent of global emissions, and it’s also a leading driver of deforestation and habitat destruction. But even in crop farming, agriculture is replacing natural vegetation, leading to soil erosion and vast land degradation. In the last century and a half, 50 percent of the planet’s topsoil—where most of the soil’s nutrients are held, and where seeds germinate and plants grow—has been lost.

    Feeding Tomorrow proves it doesn’t have to be this way. Shepard, one of the central figures of the film, is renowned for taking a worn-out Wisconsin farm and turning it into one of the most ambitious and advanced permaculture sites in the whole of North America. Instead of depleting the land, Shepard’s approach helps to regenerate it. Under permaculture practices, ecosystems flourish, and they become adaptive and resilient, too, and all of this helps to create a healthier, more sustainable base for food production.

    VegNews.markshepardfarmer.feedingtomorrowFeeding Tomorrow/Instagram

    The film also follows nutritionist Lisa McDowell, who built the first working hospital farm to emphasize the potential medicinal benefits of plant-based foods, as well as Thabiti Brown, an educator with a holistic approach that prioritizes the health and well-being of children. Because, as well as being good for the earth, localized, plant-forward approaches to food are good for our health, too. 

    Multiple studies have suggested that following a whole-food, plant-based diet is one of the healthiest ways to live. Plus, locally grown food is also fresher and more nutritious.

    Our current food system, however, is likely making us more prone to disease. This is demonstrated in areas where fresh, healthy food is harder to access (commonly called food deserts), where rates of heart disease and diabetes are significantly higher.

    “Without a ton of resources or connections, [Shepard, McDowell, and Brown] all set out to create a new model and show us that we have many of the solutions to the biggest environmental, health, and social problems at hand, today,” filmmaker Oliver English told VegNews.

    “We are at a fundamental turning point in the history of our food system. We are either going to start to turn the ship around in a big way, growing a more just and regenerative food system, or we are going to continue to suffer increasingly devastating consequences around the world,” English said.

    His fellow filmmakers include cinematographers Simon English and Mark Miller, entrepreneur Rebecca Walter, influencer Ethan Hethcote, and plant biologist James Bellis.

    Finding support for the solutions

    With Feeding Tomorrow, the team hopes to bring “large-scale, systemic awareness” to the issues in our food system, as well as “galvanize public opinion and support” for the solutions we have. For many of us, showing that support can be as simple as changing the way we shop and the foods we buy.

    “For everyday consumers, it means making consumption choices when and where we can,” English said. This includes actions like going to farmers’ markets, eating more plants, and supporting local, organic, and regenerative agriculture when possible. 

    VegNews.oliverenglishfarmersmarket.feedingtomorrowOliver English

    But public support alone isn’t enough. When it comes to transforming the food system, policy changes are imperative. “From the top down, we need to influence policymakers from the local to the national level to magnify our efforts by encouraging and paying farmers to transition to holistic, regenerative systems of food production,” he added.

    The film is partnered with the American Farmland Trust, the National Resource Defense Council, and Regenerate America, all of which have initiatives to influence the Farm Bill—the package of legislation that impacts food production in the US—to support more regenerative farming models across the country.

    “As we take a step back and look at all of the interconnected challenges we face, from agriculture to healthcare and education, I think it’s important that we approach the solutions with a holistic lens,” English said. “Rather than the segmented, isolated ‘apply a short-term bandaid’ kind of lens we have been using to address many of the challenges we face.”

    After making Feeding Tomorrow, English remains hopeful and inspired that change can happen. The next step is to get all of the viewers on board with him.

    “Visiting and learning from all of these farmers has shown me firsthand how truly powerful our food choices are,” he said. “And it begins with where we are getting our food, the farms and farmers we are supporting, and what we decide to eat.”

    “It includes putting plants at the center of your plate, and eating lots of colors,” he continued. “We all have the power to switch the paradigm with how we vote with our forks every day.”

    To find out more about Feeding Tomorrow, which is available to stream on Prime and Apple TV, click here.

    This post was originally published on VegNews.com.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    The incoming chair of the ABC, Kim Williams, must immediately move to restore the reputation of Australia’s national broadcaster by addressing concerns about the impact of external pressures on editorial decision making, says the media union.

    The Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance, the union representing journalists at the ABC, today called on Williams to work with unions to support staff who were under attack, reaffirm the commitment to cultural diversity in the workplace, and uphold the standards of reporting without fear or favour that the public expected of the ABC.

    MEAA welcomed the appointment of Williams, a former chief executive of News Corp Australia, noting that he had decades of media experience including senior management positions at the ABC, commercial broadcast media and arts administration in the past, and that he had been recommended by an independent nomination panel.

    The acting chief executive of MEAA, Adam Portelli, said the new chair would take office at a critical time for the ABC’s future following a staff vote of no confidence in managing director David Anderson earlier this week over the handling of a crisis over pressure from pro-Israeli lobbyists in the war on Gaza.

    “On Monday, union members overwhelmingly said they had lost confidence in David Anderson because of his failure to address very real concerns about the way the ABC deals with external pressure and supports journalists from First Nations and culturally diverse backgrounds when they are under attack,” he said.

    “Public trust in the ABC as an organisation that will always pursue frank and fearless journalism has been damaged, and management under Mr Anderson has not demonstrated it is taking these concerns seriously.

    Buttrose ‘completely out of touch’
    “Following yesterday’s board meeting, the current chair, Ita Buttrose, revealed she is completely out of touch with the concerns felt in newsrooms across Australia,” Portelli said.

    “Dozens of staff have told us their first hand experiences of feeling unsupported by management when under external attack and the negative impact this is having on their ability to do their jobs and on the reputation and integrity of the ABC. But Ms Buttrose failed to acknowledge these concerns.

    “ABC journalists have put forward five very reasonable suggestions to restore the confidence of staff in the managing director but at this stage, Mr Anderson has not committed to an urgent meeting as they requested.”

    Portelli said MEAA was optimistic that Williams would bring a more collaborative approach to dealing with issues of cultural safety and editorial integrity than had been witnessed under Buttrose.

    “He must understand that nothing less than the reputation of the ABC is at stake here,” Portelli said.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    Palestinian photojournalist Motaz Azaiza, who has been documenting the impact of the war in the Gaza Strip, has left the enclave for Qatar and gave his first interview there with the Doha-based Al Jazeera global news channel.

    Azaiza announced on Instagram yesterday that he was leaving the besieged enclave before boarding a Qatari military airplane at Egypt’s El Arish International Airport.

    However, it was unclear how he was able to leave Gaza or why he had evacuated, reports Al Jazeera.

    “This is the last time you will see me with this heavy, stinky [press] vest. I decided to evacuate today. … Hopefully soon I’ll jump back and help to build Gaza again,” Azaiza said in a video.

    The 24-year-old Palestinian captured the attention of millions globally — including in the South Pacific — as he filmed himself in a press vest and helmet to document conditions during Israel’s war, which has killed more than 25,000 people in Gaza.

    “Motaz Azaiza – A 24-year-old man from Gaza, in 108 days, did what CNN, Fox, the BBC, and all their ‘journalism’ predecessors refused to do for 75 years.

    “Humanise a people!”

    – Khaled Beydoun

    Israel launched its offensive after Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, killing 1,139 people and taking more than 200 people captive. It has killed more than 25,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, in a relentless attack on Gaza since then.

    Azaiza’s coverage often took the form of raw, unfiltered videos about injured children or families crushed under rubble in the aftermath of Israeli air strikes.

    He said he has had to “evacuate for a lot of reasons you all know some of it but not all of it”.

    In his post, he was seen on a video about to board a grey plane emblazoned with the words “Qatar Emiri Air Force”.

    “First video outside Gaza,” he said in one clip, revealing that it was his first time on a aircraft. “Heading to Qatar.”

    He also shared a video of the inside of the plane as it landed in Doha.


    Palestinian photojournalist Motaz Azaiza leaves Gaza after his “heroic” humanitarian reporting . . . “we are all Palestinian.” Video: Al Jazeera

    Since the start of the war, the photojournalist has amassed millions of followers across multiple platforms.

    His Instagram following has grown from about 27,500 to 18.25 million in the more than 108 days since October 7, according to an assessment of social media analytics by Al Jazeera.

    His Facebook account grew from a similar starting point to nearly 500,000 followers. He now has one million followers on X, formerly known as Twitter.

    As well as his social media posts, Azaiza has produced content for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNWRA).

    Social media users thanked Azaiza for his coverage of the war, many saluting him as a hero.

    “Thank you for everything you have done, you have moved mountains, what you have done in the last 100 days people can’t do in their whole lifetime. You were a pivotal voice in showing the world the Israeli atrocities in Gaza. Wishing you well and safety,” one user said on X.

    Another, Khaled Beydoun, wrote on Instagram, “Motaz Azaiza – A 24-year-old man from Gaza, in 108 days, did what CNN, Fox, the BBC, and all their ‘journalism’ predecessors refused to do for 75 years.

    “Humanise a people!”

    “I’m so glad you had the opportunity to get out, God willing, YOU WILL RETURN TO A FREE PALESTINE,” wrote another.

    “We love you so deeply,” American musician Kehlani wrote, adding, “Thank you for your humanity.”

    “Frame that vest. It’s the armor of one of history’s greatest heroes,” comedian Sammy Obeid said.

    Pacific Media Watch sourced from Al Jazeera.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The US corporate media has maintained a near unanimous support for the Israeli destruction of Gaza – the home of 2.2 million Palestinians. While pundits engage in parlor games over what degree of violence is “justified” by the Hamas attack upon Israel, while public intellectuals fall in line with the gutless unconditional support of Israeli punitive actions, tens of thousands of Palestinian people – largely men, women, and children going about their day-to-day lives– have been killed, maimed, wounded, or terrorized.

    Corruption, racism, and cowardice come together to produce a rare near-total US ruling-class consensus behind the brutal action of the ultra-right, ultra-nationalist, and racist Israeli government.

    The enforcement of this consensus is unprecedented and a truly appalling sight to behold.

    The highly publicized clash over even an embarrassingly tepid pushback by elite administrators at elite universities over free speech– a normally sacrosanct intellectual fallback– underscores the complete, unconditional freedom-of-action that Israel enjoys with the rich and powerful in the US.

    While the machinations of donors and administrators at Harvard, Penn, and MIT should be of little more than entertainment value for most of us, the raw, public exercise of the power of wealth in shaping academic institutions should cause many to recoil. Those who naively believed in the independence and integrity of academia should be chastened accordingly.

    Black Harvard President Gay would learn that neither her own elite background nor the thin armor of the faddish liberal DEI mutation of anti-racism would protect her from the vulgar bullying of wild-eyed Zionist billionaires and rightwing witch hunters.

    Christopher Rufo, puffed up with his own role in bringing down Harvard’s Gay, concedes that he couldn’t have done it without the collaboration of the center-left that accepted any excuse to enforce support for Israel.

    Despite the crude editorial endorsement of and overwhelming official enthusiasm for the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians, a different message has gotten through to the US populace. Whether it is the heart-rending pictures of death and destruction, the cracks in the carefully hedged and vetted news stories, or the alternative media, a bold, determined movement against Israel’s vicious assault on Gaza has emerged to challenge the ruling-class monolith. Risking economic reprisals, future status, and public shaming, hundreds of thousands– overwhelmingly youth– have stood and marched for life and a future for Gaza and Palestine.

    It is truly a remarkable moment of crass opportunism, slavish conformity, and viciousness confronted by high principle, self-sacrifice, and courage. It is this kind of moment that forces people to examine how their words and self-styled image cohere with reality.

    The facts are effective in awakening people to the brutal fate of Palestinians as a people. Because the Israeli government is so blatantly indifferent to international outrage, The Wall Street Journal is embarrassed to report the truth-on-the-ground in Gaza. Whether reluctantly or not, a recent front-page news story– Gaza’s Destruction Stands Out In Modern History (softened in the online edition to: The Ruined Landscape of Gaza After Nearly Three Months of Bombing) — describes an almost unimaginable living hell. Its lead is worth quoting in full:

    The war in the Gaza Strip is generating destruction comparable in scale to the most devastating urban warfare in the modern record.

    By mid-December, Israel had dropped 29,000 bombs, munitions and shells on the strip. Nearly 70% of Gaza’s 439,000 homes and about half of its buildings have been damaged or destroyed. The bombing has damaged Byzantine churches and ancient mosques, factories and apartment buildings, shopping malls and luxury hotels, theaters and schools. Much of the water, electrical, communications and healthcare infrastructure that made Gaza function is beyond repair.

    Most of the strip’s 36 hospitals are shut down, and only eight are accepting patients. Citrus trees, olive groves and greenhouses have been obliterated. More than two-thirds of its schools are damaged.

    While most media mention the 22,000 or more deaths or the over 80,000 total Palestinian casualties, they dutifully treat the facts as allegations and with vastly more than warranted skepticism. Nonetheless, the numbers have shocked millions around the world.

    But the WSJ article goes further, offering comfortable, secure readers a taste of what life is like for those not physically harmed by Israeli bombs:

    In the south, where more than a million displaced residents have fled, Gazans sleep in the street and burn garbage to cook. Some 85% of the strip’s 2.2 million people have fled their homes and are confined by Israeli evacuation orders to less than one-third of the strip, according to the United Nations…

    According to analysis of satellite data by remote-sensing experts at the City University of New York and Oregon State University, as many as 80% of the buildings in northern Gaza, where the bombing has been most severe, are damaged or destroyed, a higher percentage than in Dresden [the site of murderous firebombing in WWII].

    The WSJ presents a set of facts and expert observations that are nothing if not damning of the Israeli tactics:

    • Robert Pape, political scientist at the University of Chicago: “What you are seeing in Gaza is in the top 25% of the most intense punishment campaigns in history.”

    • “Some 85% of the strip’s 2.2 million people have fled their homes and are confined by Israeli evacuation orders to less than one-third of the strip, according to the United Nations.”

    • “He Yin, an assistant professor of geography at Kent State University in Ohio, estimated that 20% of Gaza’s agricultural land has been damaged or destroyed. Winter wheat that should be sprouting around now isn’t visible, he said, suggesting it wasn’t planted.”

    • “A World Bank analysis concluded that by Dec. 12, the war had damaged or destroyed 77% of health facilities, 72% of municipal services such as parks, courts and libraries, 68% of telecommunications infrastructure, and 76% of commercial sites, including the almost complete destruction of the industrial zone in the north. More than half of all roads, the World Bank found, have been damaged or destroyed. Some 342 schools have been damaged, according to the U.N., including 70 of its own schools.”

    • Where the US dropped 3,678 munitions on the entire nation of Iraq in seven years, Israel has dropped 29,000 on tiny Gaza in a little over two months.

    • On Gaza city: “‘It’s not a livable city anymore,’ said Eyal Weizman, an Israeli-British architect who studies Israel’s approach to the built environment in the Palestinian territories. Any reconstruction, he said, will require ‘a whole system of underground infrastructure, because when you attack the subsoil, everything that runs through the ground—the water, the gas, the sewage—is torn.’”

    • “The level of damage in Gaza is almost double what it was during a 2014 conflict, which lasted 50 days, with five times as many completely destroyed buildings, according to the Shelter Cluster. In the current conflict, as of mid-December, more than 800,000 people had no home left to return to, the World Bank found.”

    To those seduced by a gutless media and a bought-and-sold political establishment, this picture constructed by one of the US’s most conservative papers should bring Israel’s crimes against Gaza into sharper relief; it should be painful to even imagine living under such conditions; it should remove the Gaza question from the realm of political debate to the basic issue of human dignity and survival.

    Is there any humane answer beyond: Cease Fire Now!?

    The post The Willful Destruction of a People first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    Union members at the Australian public broadcaster ABC have today passed a vote of no confidence in managing director David Anderson for failing to defend the integrity of the ABC and its staff from outside attacks, reports the national media union.

    The vote was passed overwhelmingly at a national online meeting attended by more than 200 members of the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance (MEAA), the union said in a statement.

    Union members have called on Anderson to take immediate action to win back the confidence of staff following a series of incidents which have damaged the reputation of the ABC as a trusted and independent source of news.

    The vote of ABC union staff rebuked Anderson, with one of the broadcaster’s most senior journalists, global affairs editor John Lyons, reported in The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age as saying he was “embarrassed” by his employer, which he said had “shown pro-Israel bias” and was failing to protect staff against complaints.

    This followed revelations of a series of emails by the so-called Lawyers for Israel lobby group alleged to be influential in the sacking of Lebanese Australian journalist Antoinette Lattouf for her criticism on social media of the Israeli genocidal war on Gaza that has killed 25,000 people so far, mostly women and children.

    Staff have put management on notice that if it does not begin to address the current crisis by next Monday, January 29, staff will consider further action.

    The acting chief executive of MEAA, Adam Portelli, said staff had felt unsupported by the ABC’s senior management when they have been criticised or attacked from outside.

    Message ‘clear and simple’
    “The message from staff today is clear and simple: David Anderson must demonstrate that he will take the necessary steps to win back the confidence of staff and the trust of the Australian public,” he said.

    “This is the result of a consistent pattern of behaviour by management when the ABC is under attack of buckling to outside pressure and leaving staff high and dry.

    “Public trust in the ABC is being undermined. The organisation’s reputation for frank and fearless journalism is being damaged by management’s repeated lack of support for its staff when they are under attack from outside.

    “Journalists at the ABC — particularly First Nations people, and people from culturally diverse backgrounds — increasingly don’t feel safe at work; and the progress that has been made in diversifying the ABC has gone backwards.

    “Management needs to act quickly to win that confidence back by putting the integrity of the ABC’s journalism above the impact of pressure from politicians, unaccountable lobby groups and big business.”

    The full motion passed by MEAA members at today’s meeting reads as follows:

    MEAA members at the ABC have lost confidence in our managing director David Anderson. Our leaders have consistently failed to protect our ABC’s independence or protect staff when they are attacked. They have consistently refused to work collaboratively with staff to uphold the standards that the Australian public need and expect of their ABC.

    Winning staff and public confidence back will require senior management:

    • Backing journalism without fear or favour;
    • Working collaboratively with unions to build a culturally informed process for supporting staff who face criticism and attack;
    • Take urgent action on the lack of security and inequality that journalists of colour face;
    • Working with unions to develop a clearer and fairer social media policy; and
    • Upholding a transparent complaints process, in which journalists who are subject to complaints are informed and supported.

    A further resolution passed unanimously by the meeting read:

    MEAA members at the ABC will not continue to accept the failure of management to protect our colleagues and the public. If management does not work with us to urgently fix the ongoing crisis, ABC staff will take further action to take a stand for a safe, independent ABC.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Ronald Toito’ona and Charley Piringi in Honiara

    China’s interference and moves to control the media in the Solomon Islands have been exposed in leaked emails In-depth Solomons has obtained.

    On Monday last week [15 January 2024], Huangbi Lin, a diplomat working at the Chinese Embassy in Honiara, called the owner of Island Sun newspaper, Lloyd Loji, and expressed the embassy’s “concern” in a viewpoint article that the paper published on page 6 of the day’s issue.

    The article, which appeared earlier in an ABC publication, was about Taiwan’s newly-elected president William Lai Ching-te, and what his victory means to China and the West.

    Lin’s phone call and his embassy’s concern was revealed in an email Loji wrote to the editorial staff of Island Sun, which In-depth Solomons has cited. Loji wrote:

    “I had received a call this morning from Lin (Chinese Embassy) raising their concern on the ABC publication on today’s issue, page 6.

    “Yesterday, he had sent us a few articles regarding China’s stance on the elections taking place in Taiwan which he wanted us to publish.

    “Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Solomon Islands) made a press release (as attached) reaffirming Solomon Island’s position with regards to the Taiwan elections (recognition of one China principle).

    “Let us align ourselves according to the position in which our country stands.

    “Be mindful of our publication since China is also a supporter of Island Sun.

    “Please collaborate on this matter and (be) cautious of the news that we publish especially with regards to Taiwan’s election.”

    No response
    Loji has not responded to questions In-depth Solomons sent to him for comments.

    The day before on Sunday, Lin sent an email to owners and editors of Solomons Islands’ major news outlets, asking for their cooperation in their reporting of the Taiwanese election outcome. His email said:

    “Dear media friends.

    “As the result of the election in the Taiwan region of the People’s Republic of China being revealed, a few media reports are trying to cover it from incorrect perspectives.

    “The Embassy of the People’s Republic of China would like to remind that both inappropriate titles on newly-elected Taiwan leaders and incorrect name on the Taiwan region are against the one-China policy and the spirit of UN resolution 2758.”

    In the same email, he also sent two articles from the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China on the results of the Taiwan elections.

    He requested that the articles be published in the next day’s papers.

    Articles published
    None of the two articles appeared in the Island Sun the next day, but the paper eventually published them on Tuesday.

    The Solomon Star featured both articles, along with a government statement issued at the behest of the Chinese Embassy, on its front page.

    Lin failed to respond to questions In-depth Solomons sent to him for comments.

    Taiwan has been Solomons Islands’ diplomatic ally until 2019 when Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare ditched Taiwan for China.

    In the last two years, China has provided both financial support and thousands of dollars’ worth of office and media equipment to the Island Sun and Solomon Star.

    China’s reported manipulation of news outlets around the Pacific has been a topic of discussion in recent years. The communist nation is one of the worst countries in the world for media freedom. It ranks 177 on the Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index.

    Responding to the incident, the Media Association of Solomon Islands (MASI) has urged China to respect the independence of the media.

    MASI criticism
    “This incident is regrettable,” MASI President Georgina Kekea told In-depth Solomons.

    “Any attempts to control or manipulate the media compromise the public’s right to information,” Kekea added.

    “Despite the one-China Policy, China must respect the rights of Solomon Islanders in their own country.

    “The situation shows the big difference between the values of the Solomon Islands and China. Respect goes both ways.

    “Chinese representatives working in Solomon Islands must remember that Solomon Islands is a democratic country with values different to that of their own country and no foreign policy should ever dictate what people can and cannot do in their own country.”

    Kekea further added that it was disheartening to hear interference by diplomatic partners in the day-to-day operations of an independent newsroom.

    She said in a democratic country like Solomon Islands, it was crucial that the autonomy of newsrooms remained intact, and free from any external government influence on editorial decisions.

    Kekea also urged Solomon Islands newsroom leaders to be vigilant and not allow outsiders to dictate their news content.

    “There are significant long-term consequences if we allow outsiders to dictate our decisions.

    “Solomon Islands is a democratic country, with the media serving as the fourth pillar of democracy.

    “It is crucial not to permit external influences in directing our course of action.”

    Kekea also highlighted the financial struggles news organisations in Solomon Islands face and the financial assistance they’ve received from external donors.

    She pointed out that this sort of challenge arose when news organisations lacked the financial capacity to look after themselves.

    “The concern is not exclusive to China but extends to all external support.

    “It is essential to acknowledge and appreciate the funding support received but there should be limits.

    “We must enable the media to fulfil its role independently. Gratitude for funding support should not translate into allowing external entities to exploit us for their own agenda or geopolitical struggles.

    “Media is susceptible to the influence of major powers. Thus, we must try as much as possible to not get ourselves into a position that we cannot get out of.

    “It is important to keep our independence. We must try as much as possible to be self-reliant. To work hard and not rely solely on external partners for funding support.

    “If we are not careful, we might lose our freedom.”

    Republished by arrangement with In-Depth Solomons.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Binoy Kampmark

    The Age has revealed the dismissal of ABC broadcaster Antoinette Lattouf last December 20 was the nasty fruit of a campaign waged against chair Ita Buttrose and managing director David Anderson.

    The official reason for Lattouf’s dismissal was ordinary: she shared a post by Human Rights Watch about Israel “using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war in Gaza”, calling it “a war crime”.

    It also noted the express intention of Israeli officials to pursue this strategy. Actions were also documented: the deliberate blocking of food, water and fuel “while wilfully obstructing the entry of aid”.

    Sacked ABC presenter Antoinette Lattouf
    Sacked ABC presenter Antoinette Lattouf . . . bringing wrongful dismissal case. Image: GL

    Lattouf shared it after management directed staff not to post on “matters of controversy”.

    Prior to The Age revelations, much had been made of Lattouf’s fill-in role as a radio presenter — which was intended for five shows.

    The Australian, owned by News Corp, had issues with Lattouf’s statements on various online platforms. It found it strange in December that she was appointed “despite her very public anti-Israel stance”.

    She was accused of denying that some protesters had called for Jews to be gassed outside the Sydney Opera House on October 7. She also dared to accuse the Israeli Defence Forces of committing rape.

    ‘Lot of people really upset’
    It was considered odd that she discussed food and water shortages in Gaza and “an advertising campaign showing corpses reminiscent of being wrapped in Muslim burial cloths”. That “left a lot of people really upset’,” The Australian said.

    ABC managing director David Anderson
    ABC managing director David Anderson . . . denied “any external pressure, whether it be an advocacy group or lobby group, a political party, or commercial entity’. Image: Green Left

    If war is hell, Lattouf was evidently not allowed to go into quite so much detail about it — at least concerning the fate of Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli war machine.

    What has also come to light is that the ABC’s managers were not targeting Lattouf on their own. Pressure had been exercised from outside the media organisation.

    According to The Age, WhatsApp messages by a group called “Lawyers for Israel” had been sent to the ABC as part of a coordinated campaign.

    Sydney property lawyer Nicky Stein told members of that group to contact the federal Minister for Communications asking “how Antoinette is hosting the morning ABC Sydney show” the day Lattouf was sacked.

    They said employing Lattouff breached Clause 4 of the ABC code of practice on “impartiality”.

    Stein went on to insist that: “It’s important ABC hears from not just individuals in the community but specifically from lawyers so they feel there is an actual legal threat.”

    No ‘generic’ response
    She goes on to say that a “proper” rather than “generic” response was expected “by COB [close of business] today or I would look to engage senior counsel”.

    Did such threats have any basis? Even Stein admits: “There is probably no actionable offence against the ABC but I didn’t say I would be taking one — just investigating one. I have said that they should be terminating her employment immediately.”

    It was designed to attract attention from ABC chairperson Ita Buttrose, and it did.

    ABC political reporter Nour Haydar
    ABC political reporter Nour Haydar . . . resigned last week citing concern about the ABC coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza. Image: Green Left

    Robert Goot, deputy president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and part of the same group, boasted of information he had received that Lattouf would be “gone from morning radio from Friday” because of her “anti-Israeli” stance.

    There has been something of a journalistic exodus from the ABC of late.

    Nour Haydar, a political reporter in the ABC’s Parliament House bureau and another journalist of Lebanese descent, resigned on January 12 citing concern about the ABC’s coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza.

    There had been, for instance, the creation of a “Gaza advisory panel” at the behest of ABC news director Justin Stevens, ostensibly to improve coverage.

    Journalists need to ‘take a stand’ over the Gaza carnage after latest killings

    Must not ‘take sides’
    “Accuracy and impartiality are core to the service we offer audiences,” Stevens told staff. “We must stay independent and not ‘take sides’.”

    This pointless assertion can only ever be a threat because it acts as an injunction on staff and a judgment against sources that do not favour the line, however credible they might be.

    What proves acceptable, a condition that seems to have paralysed the ABC, is to never say that Israel massacres, commits war crimes and brings about conditions approximating genocide.

    Little wonder then that coverage of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice does not get top billing on the ABC.

    Palestinians and Palestinian militias, however, can always be described as savages, rapists and baby slayers. Throw in fanaticism and Islam and you have the complete package ready for transmission.

    Coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the mainstream media of most Western countries, as the late Robert Fisk pointed out, repeatedly asserts these divisions.

    After her resignation, Haydar told the Sydney Morning Herald: “Commitment to diversity in the media cannot be skin deep.  Culturally diverse staff should be respected and supported even when they challenge the status quo.”

    Sharing divisive topics
    Haydar’s argument about cultural diversity should not obscure the broader problem facing the ABC: policing the way opinions and material on war, and any other divisive topic, is shared with the public.

    The issue goes less to cultural diversity than permitted intellectual breadth.

    Lattouf, for her part, is pursuing remedies through the Fair Work Commission and seeking funding through a GoFundMe page, steered by Lauren Dubois.

    “We stand with Antoinette and support the rights of workers to be able to share news that expresses an opinion or reinforces a fact, without fear of retribution.”

    Kenneth Roth, former head of Human Rights Watch, expressed his displeasure at Lattouf’s treatment, suggesting the ABC had erred.

    ABC’s senior management, via a statement from Anderson, preferred the route of craven denial. He rejected “any claim that it has been influenced by any external pressure, whether it be an advocacy group or lobby group, a political party, or commercial entity”.

    Dr Binoy Kampmark is a senior lecturer in global studies at RMIT University, Melbourne. This article was first published by Green Left Magazine and is republished here with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Binoy Kampmark

    The Age has revealed the dismissal of ABC broadcaster Antoinette Lattouf last December 20 was the nasty fruit of a campaign waged against chair Ita Buttrose and managing director David Anderson.

    The official reason for Lattouf’s dismissal was ordinary: she shared a post by Human Rights Watch about Israel “using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war in Gaza”, calling it “a war crime”.

    It also noted the express intention of Israeli officials to pursue this strategy. Actions were also documented: the deliberate blocking of food, water and fuel “while wilfully obstructing the entry of aid”.

    Sacked ABC presenter Antoinette Lattouf
    Sacked ABC presenter Antoinette Lattouf . . . bringing wrongful dismissal case. Image: GL

    Lattouf shared it after management directed staff not to post on “matters of controversy”.

    Prior to The Age revelations, much had been made of Lattouf’s fill-in role as a radio presenter — which was intended for five shows.

    The Australian, owned by News Corp, had issues with Lattouf’s statements on various online platforms. It found it strange in December that she was appointed “despite her very public anti-Israel stance”.

    She was accused of denying that some protesters had called for Jews to be gassed outside the Sydney Opera House on October 7. She also dared to accuse the Israeli Defence Forces of committing rape.

    ‘Lot of people really upset’
    It was considered odd that she discussed food and water shortages in Gaza and “an advertising campaign showing corpses reminiscent of being wrapped in Muslim burial cloths”. That “left a lot of people really upset’,” The Australian said.

    ABC managing director David Anderson
    ABC managing director David Anderson . . . denied “any external pressure, whether it be an advocacy group or lobby group, a political party, or commercial entity’. Image: Green Left

    If war is hell, Lattouf was evidently not allowed to go into quite so much detail about it — at least concerning the fate of Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli war machine.

    What has also come to light is that the ABC’s managers were not targeting Lattouf on their own. Pressure had been exercised from outside the media organisation.

    According to The Age, WhatsApp messages by a group called “Lawyers for Israel” had been sent to the ABC as part of a coordinated campaign.

    Sydney property lawyer Nicky Stein told members of that group to contact the federal Minister for Communications asking “how Antoinette is hosting the morning ABC Sydney show” the day Lattouf was sacked.

    They said employing Lattouff breached Clause 4 of the ABC code of practice on “impartiality”.

    Stein went on to insist that: “It’s important ABC hears from not just individuals in the community but specifically from lawyers so they feel there is an actual legal threat.”

    No ‘generic’ response
    She goes on to say that a “proper” rather than “generic” response was expected “by COB [close of business] today or I would look to engage senior counsel”.

    Did such threats have any basis? Even Stein admits: “There is probably no actionable offence against the ABC but I didn’t say I would be taking one — just investigating one. I have said that they should be terminating her employment immediately.”

    It was designed to attract attention from ABC chairperson Ita Buttrose, and it did.

    ABC political reporter Nour Haydar
    ABC political reporter Nour Haydar . . . resigned last week citing concern about the ABC coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza. Image: Green Left

    Robert Goot, deputy president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and part of the same group, boasted of information he had received that Lattouf would be “gone from morning radio from Friday” because of her “anti-Israeli” stance.

    There has been something of a journalistic exodus from the ABC of late.

    Nour Haydar, a political reporter in the ABC’s Parliament House bureau and another journalist of Lebanese descent, resigned on January 12 citing concern about the ABC’s coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza.

    There had been, for instance, the creation of a “Gaza advisory panel” at the behest of ABC news director Justin Stevens, ostensibly to improve coverage.

    Journalists need to ‘take a stand’ over the Gaza carnage after latest killings

    Must not ‘take sides’
    “Accuracy and impartiality are core to the service we offer audiences,” Stevens told staff. “We must stay independent and not ‘take sides’.”

    This pointless assertion can only ever be a threat because it acts as an injunction on staff and a judgment against sources that do not favour the line, however credible they might be.

    What proves acceptable, a condition that seems to have paralysed the ABC, is to never say that Israel massacres, commits war crimes and brings about conditions approximating genocide.

    Little wonder then that coverage of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice does not get top billing on the ABC.

    Palestinians and Palestinian militias, however, can always be described as savages, rapists and baby slayers. Throw in fanaticism and Islam and you have the complete package ready for transmission.

    Coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the mainstream media of most Western countries, as the late Robert Fisk pointed out, repeatedly asserts these divisions.

    After her resignation, Haydar told the Sydney Morning Herald: “Commitment to diversity in the media cannot be skin deep.  Culturally diverse staff should be respected and supported even when they challenge the status quo.”

    Sharing divisive topics
    Haydar’s argument about cultural diversity should not obscure the broader problem facing the ABC: policing the way opinions and material on war, and any other divisive topic, is shared with the public.

    The issue goes less to cultural diversity than permitted intellectual breadth.

    Lattouf, for her part, is pursuing remedies through the Fair Work Commission and seeking funding through a GoFundMe page, steered by Lauren Dubois.

    “We stand with Antoinette and support the rights of workers to be able to share news that expresses an opinion or reinforces a fact, without fear of retribution.”

    Kenneth Roth, former head of Human Rights Watch, expressed his displeasure at Lattouf’s treatment, suggesting the ABC had erred.

    ABC’s senior management, via a statement from Anderson, preferred the route of craven denial. He rejected “any claim that it has been influenced by any external pressure, whether it be an advocacy group or lobby group, a political party, or commercial entity”.

    Dr Binoy Kampmark is a senior lecturer in global studies at RMIT University, Melbourne. This article was first published by Green Left Magazine and is republished here with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • You have to hand it to the U.S. and its henchmen for brazenness.  In order to protect their client state Israel and its genocide in Gaza, the U.S., together with the UK, have in one week launched air and sea attacks on the Houthis in Yemen five times, referring to it as “self-defense” in their Orwellian lingo.  The ostensible reason being Yemen’s refusal to allow ships bound for Israel, which is committing genocide in Gaza, to enter the Red Sea, while permitting other ships to pass freely.

    To any impartial observer, the Houthis should be lauded.  Yet, while the International Court of Justice considers the South African charge of genocide against Israel that is supported by overwhelming evidence, the U.S. and its allies have instigated a wider war throughout the Middle East while claiming they do not want such a war.  These settler colonial states want genocide and a much wider war because they have been set back on their heels by those they have mocked, provoked, and attacked – notably the Palestinians, Syrians, and Russians, among others.

    While the criminalization of international law does not bode well for the ICJ’s upcoming ruling or its ability to stop Israeli’s genocide in Gaza, Michel Chossudovsky, of Global Research, as is his wont, has offered a superb analysis and suggestion for those who oppose such crimes: that Principle IV of the Nuremberg Charter – “The fact that a person [e.g. Israeli, U.S. soldiers, pilots] acted pursuant to order of his [her] Government or of a superior does not relieve him [her] from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.” – should be used to supplement the South African charges and appeal directly to the moral consciences of those asked to carry out acts of genocide. He writes:

    Let us call upon Israeli and American soldiers and pilots “to abandon the battlefield”, as an act of refusal to participate in a criminal undertaking against the People of Gaza.  

    South Africa’s legal procedure at the ICJ should be endorsed Worldwide. While it cannot be relied upon to put a rapid end to the genocide, it provides support and legitimacy to the “Disobey Unlawful Orders, Abandon the Battlefield”  campaign under Nuremberg Charter Principle IV.

    While such an approach will not stop the continuing slaughter, it would remind the world that each person who participates in and supports it bears a heavy burden of guilt for their actions; that they are morally and legally culpable.  This appeal to the human heart and conscience, no matter what its practical effect, will at least add to the condemnation of a genocide happening in real time and full view of the world, even though no one will ever be prosecuted for such crimes since any real just use of international law has long disappeared.  Yet there is a edifying history of such conscientious objection to immoral war making, and though each person makes the decision in solitary witness, individual choices can inspire others and the solitary become solidary, as Albert Camus reminded us at the end of his short story, “The Artist at Work.”

    With each passing day, it becomes more and more evident that Israel/U.S.A. and their allies do want a wider war.  Iran is their special focus, with Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen targets on the way.  Anyone who supports the genocide in Gaza, explicitly or through silence, bears responsibility for the conflagration to come.  There are no excuses.

    And the facts show that it is axiomatic that waging war has been the modus operandi of the U.S./Israeli alliance for a long time.  Just as in early 2003 when the Bush administration said they were looking for a peaceful solution to their fake charges against Sadam Hussein with his alleged “weapons of mass destruction,” the Biden administration is lying, as the Bush administration lied about September 11, 2001 to launch its ongoing war on terror, starting in Afghanistan.  Without an expanded war, President Biden – aka the Democrats, since he will most probably not be the candidate – and his psychopathic partner Benjamin Netanyahu, will not survive.  It is bi-partisan war-mongering, of course, internationally and intramurally, since both U.S. political parties are controlled by the Israel Lobby and billionaire class that owns Congress and the “defense” industry that thrives on never-ending war to such an extent that even the notable independent candidate for the presidency, Robert Kennedy, Jr., who is running as an anti-war candidate, fully supports Israel which is tantamount to supporting Biden’s expanding war policy.

    Biden and Netanyahu, who are always claiming after the fact that they were surprised by events or were fed bad advice by their underlings, are dumb scorpions. They are stupid but deadly.  And many people in the West, while perhaps decent people in their personal lives, are living in a fantasy world of “sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity,” in MLK, Jr.’s words, as the growing threat of a world war increases and insouciance reigns.

    Neither the Israeli nor American government can allow themselves to be humiliated, U.S./NATO by the Russians in Ukraine and the Israelis by the Palestinians.  Like cornered criminals with lethal weapons, they will kill as many as they can on their way down, taking their revenge on the weakest first.

    Their “mistakes” are always well intentioned.  They stumble into wars through faulty intelligence.  They drop the ball because of bureaucratic mix-ups. They miscalculate the perfidy of the moneyed elites whom allegedly they oppose while pocketing their cash and ushering them into the national coffers out of necessity since they are too big to fail.  They never see the storm coming, even as they create it.  Their incompetence or the perfidy of their enemies is the retort to all those “nut cases” who conjure up conspiracy theories or plain facts to explain their actions or lack thereof.  They are innocent.  Always innocent.  And they can’t understand why those they have long abused reach a point when they will no longer impetrate for mercy but will fight fiercely for their freedom.

    All signs point to a major war on the horizon.  Both the U.S.A. and Israel have been shown to be rogue states with no desire to negotiate a peaceful world.  Believing in high-tech weapons and massive firepower, neither has learned the hard lesson that anti-colonial wars have historically been won by those with far less weapons but with a passionate desire to throw off the chains of their oppressors.  Vietnam is the text-book case, and there are many others.  Failure to learn is the name of their game.

    The Zionist project for a Greater Israel is doomed to fail, but as it does, desperate men like Biden and Netanyahu are intent on launching desperate acts of war.  Exactly when and how this expanded war will blaze across the headlines is the question.  It has started, but I think it prudent to expect a black swan event sometime this year when all hell will break loose.  The genocide in Gaza is the first step, and the U.S./Israel, “not wanting” a wider war, have already started one.

    (For an excellent history lesson on the Zionist oppression of Palestinians and the current genocide, listen to Max Blumenthal’s and Miko Peled’s impassioned talk – “Where is the War in Gaza Going? – delivered from the heart of darkness, Washington D.C.  Two Jewish men who know the difference between Zionism and Judaism and whose consciences are aflame with justice for the oppressed Palestinians.)

    The post “Not Wanting” A Wider Middle East War, the U.S. Has Started One first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Orientation

    Questions about fame and celebrity

    What does it mean to be famous? Does being famous go all the way back to hunter-gatherers or does it have an origin later in history? What does it mean to be a celebrity? Is it common in all societies or do celebrities emerge at a certain point in history? What is the relationship between being famous and being a celebrity? Are these terms interchangeable or are they distinct phenomenon? What fame and celebrity have in common is that they involve relations that are not:

    • Everyday
    • Kin-based
    • Occupy local places

    According to Leo Braudy in his great book The Frenzy of Renown: Fame and Its History there are four parts to being famous: a) a person; b) an accomplishment; c) there is  immediate publicity; and d) how posterity has held them ever since. I shall define celebrity later.

    My claim in this article is that fame and celebrity, while having the common characteristics above, are fundamentally different and emerge at different points in history.

    My sources

    In order to make these comparisons I have relied on three books. For the history of fame, Leo Braudy’s great book, The Frenzy of Renown is about the best book I know. While there are many books on celebrity, Chris Rojek’s book Celebrity has the advantage of comparing six other theories of celebrity besides his own. Most theories of celebrity focus in on the fields of entertainment. The first focus is on movies, then secondarily on sports and music. But like it or not, politicians have become celebrities and politics is not supposed to be about entertainment. How do we understand the relationship between fame and celebrity when it’s in politics? A book that does a great job on this question does not set out to contrast fame to celebrity. Kathleen Hall Jamieson’s book Eloquence in the Electronic Age simply compares politics in 19th century Yankeedom before the rise of radio and television to politics in the 20th century. As it turns out, this historical contrast in politics corresponds to the evolution from fame to celebrity. Fame is linked with 19th century politicians while celebrity corresponds with 20th century electronic age politicians. The image that this article leads with is a sculpture of fame in mythology.

    My direction in this article

    In the first part of this article, I compare fame to celebrity in terms of when each starts historically; how each evaluates authority; how its status was acquired; who is the targeted audience and what media are used to bridge the relationship between these notorious individuals and their public and mass audiences. I also ask questions about what the power bases involved are; how long fame or celebrity lasts and I also ask what the notorious person gives and receives from his audience. As it turns out, unlike fame, the celebrity-mass audience relationship produces psychological pathologies on both sides. In first half of the article, I only talk about celebrity as resulting from entertainment.

    In the second half of the article, I contrast the difference between fame and celebrity only in relationship to politics. We will find that famous politicians have a great deal in common with famous military men or artists. However, we discover that political celebrities are very different from celebrities in the fields of entertainment such as movies, sports and music.

    What is “Primary Fame” Prior to the 18th Century?

    Fame in social evolution

    To be famous is to be regarded with special attention by people with whom the average person has no contact – that is, strangers. There was no fame in either hunter-gatherers or simple horticulture societies because everyone knows everyone else by direct or extended kin groups. I suspect the first forms of fame came in complex horticulture societies, in chiefdoms. It is not the chief within one’s own society people consider famous, but a chief from another society with whom a commoner has no personal relationship but the chief has a reputation of being a great fighter, arbitrator or healer. The first time an individual could be famous within a society is in an agricultural civilization with tens of thousands of people and most having no kinship relations with others. The famous person may be of high standing as a religious authority, a divine king or a military hero. In the Italian Renaissance artists and musicians were famous.

    Fame is rare, connected to deeds done that are notorious

    How easy is it to be famous? Being famous for most of human history was rare. There wasn’t an infinite opportunity for people to be famous. This isn’t because there was some kind of quotient. It’s just because in the caste societies of agricultural states most people lived and died in their social caste and had no ambition to be famous. As you can probably imagine, being famous has little to do with being virtuous or not. It is more a case of people taking notice. You do have to do something to be famous. That is, having achieved status is more than you can inherit by being famous such as being the son of a great military hero. For the most part, being famous is connected to notorious deeds that have been performed. These deeds can be witnessed by the same generation or they can be remembered as having a reputation and then saved for posterity.

    Means of cultural transmission

    How do people find out about famous people in agricultural civilizations? Because there was no printing press, people found out through theatre, mystery plays and storytelling. The population also found out through mimes and minstrels. In the case of famous people who died their fame was carried on through folk tales. After the invention of the printing press stories of famous people reached middle class readers. The scope of fame reached to the end of empires but was limited mostly to the upper classes. Merchants in agricultural civilizations were unique in learning about famous people since they regularly traded with other societies.

    Power bases

    The leading power base for fame is competency. Competency means a famous person can get people to follow them because of demonstrated skill. Famous people can also move people because they occupy a social office that people respect, but this legitimacy by itself cannot generate fame. The same is true for charisma and sex appeal. By themselves, neither of these can make people famous, but they help.

    How long does fame last?

    The answer to this depends on the methods of transmission. The reputation of a famous chiefly warrior will only last as long as the storytellers who transmit the story. In the case of agricultural states famous people’s memory can be preserved through pictures or painting, writing and monuments. Here fame can last over generations.

    What do famous people and their publics give to each other?

    There is great social distance between famous people and their populations. There are few personal facts about them and their private lives are sequestered from the general population. What do famous people give to their population? Usually, they will bestow political or spiritual blessings. They might claim to heal their populations but they are too distant to give people any psychological satisfaction. There is no reciprocity in their relationship with the public. For famous people, members of the population are interchangeable. They do not depend on the audience for anything. With rare exceptions prior to the 20th century, most famous people were men. Before the 20th century capitalism had not reached its consumer stage, and for this reason famous people could not be commodified and sold to the public as we shall see is true about celebrities.

    What is Celebrity?

    Celebrity as a form of notoriety did not occur until the end of the 19th century with the rise of mass communication. This included the first newspapers in the seventeenth century, then photography in the 19th century and finally cinema, radio and television in the 20th century. By the end of the 19th century, religious and political authorities were in decline. Military generals alone maintained their fame throughout the two world wars. New heroes and heroines came from three domains –  movies, music and sports. While prior to the 20th century ascribed fame was a rarity, no celebrity inherited their status. They were discovered and gained their reputation through the work they did to achieve what they had. It was very difficult to be a celebrity, but the chances were better than it was with primary fame. This is because class mobility made it possible for middle-class and even working-class people to become a celebrity.

    Theories of Celebrities

    In his book Celebrity, Chris Rojek identifies seven theories of celebrity. The first is the subjectivistic theory of Max Weber. Weber claims that the basis of celebrity is that the person has charisma. Charisma is an inspiring way a person has about them, that sweeps people away and makes the audience want to be like them. Politically this would go with the “Great Men” of history theory. The second theory is that of Orrin Klapp. In his book Heroes, Villains and Fools: The Changing American Character, he argues that all social groups develop character types that function as role models for leadership. Such roles include good Joe, a villain, tough guy, snob, prude and love queen. Celebrities are personifications of these types.

    The rest of the celebrity theories are all social and/or historical. In his book The Stars and The Cinema, Edgar Morin argues for the opposite of Weber’s charisma. He says that celebrity is not due primarily to the subjective power of the celebrity but is a projection of the pent-up needs of the audience. Celebrities are transformers, accumulating and enlarging the dehumanized desires of the audience. Likewise, Richard Dyer also focuses on audiences. His post-structural theories, in his books Stars and Heavenly Bodies, he claims the key to understanding celebrities is how audiences construct and consume a particular star’s persona. Discourse theory emphasizes the mass media as productive agents in governing the population and specific audiences. This functions as a kind of crowd control. The books that make this argument include Celebrities and Power and Claims to Fame written by D Marshall and J Gamson. The most one-sided sociological theory is the Frankfurt School. Like discourse theory, they argue that all organized entertainment is in the service of crowd control. Involvement of the masses with their celebrities has no redeeming value. They are all forms of false consciousness. This is argued for in Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man and Aesthetic Dimension. Lastly, there is the work of Chris Rojek who emphasizes how much the point of history matters as to when celebrities emerge. He articulates this in his book Leisure and Culture.

     Celebrities have fans

    Movies, radio and TV carried with them a host of mediators between celebrities and those who followed them. These mediators – the press, press agents, fan clubs – barge  their way into the lives of celebrities so that those who were interested – fans – could find out all about them. Through movies, radio interviews and television appearances the notoriety of celebrities reached more social classes than primary fame. Through fads and fashions, it spread across nations and even became international. The power bases of celebrities were more narrow than primary fame. While many celebrities certainly got into the movies by skill, much of celebrity life was due to  charisma and sex appeal. Economic propaganda was at work when film companies promoted their actors and actresses. At its worst, celebrities were more appearance and less skill.

    Rapid rise and fall

    While famous people built their reputation slowly and their fade-out might take generations, with celebrities it was the opposite. They could rise up instantaneously and fade just as quickly. A good musical example of this is doo-wop groups of the 50s. Many of these groups had one hit and then disappeared from the radio stations forever.

    Fans and their celebrities

    People who had fame prior to the 20th century had no fans. Fandom was the result of the work of cultural mediators who get the lowdown on celebrities. Because musicians, sports figures and especially actors and actresses partly made their living from box office turnout, they could not ignore their fans. For those fans these “intimate strangers” become increasingly important. It is not only movie magazines where celebrities “tell all”.  They appear on television interviews on late night shows or, if they are on the way out, they appear on television game shows.

    Celebrity fans expect much more than the crowds that followed primary famous people prior to the 20th century. Fans are psychologically involved with actors and actresses and receive the vicarious satisfaction of living through stars. They are titillated and awe-struck. Fan clubs are set up and fans expect responses to their letters, becoming upset and even violent when a star fails to respond. This can lead to the stalking of celebrities or even fans killing themselves when celebrities die. Fans collect relics and autographs and their homes become shrines to celebrities. At the same time, fans are fickle and change loyalties quite easily.

    There is minor reciprocity through fan attendance at concerts, films and sporting events. Fans cheer and boo depending on how a star responds. A good example of this is when a musician plays at a concert. The fans call out for the old songs, a trip down memory lane, while the artist wants to play new work. A most extreme case is Van Morrison and his fans. Watch the first thirty seconds of this video.

    This impact of the demands of fans has a great psychological impact on celebrities as they are driven from normal public life and in many cases leads to psychological disorders. Some of these disorders include paranoia and mania narcissism and what Reisman used to call “other directedness” . Celebrities become commodities, bought and sold just like other commodities. This leads to what is called achievement fatigue and achievement mirage. Rojek identifies “achievement fatigue” as when celebrities view their status as a burden and a sequence of diminishing returns. Achievement mirage is the recognition that their status is shallow and false.

    Secondary Fame

    It is too simplistic to polarize fame and celebrity. While it is safe to say there was once fame without celebrity, it would be naïve to argue that celebrity is the absence of fame. For example, just because the emphasis of fame is on actions and skill that doesn’t mean that celebrities whose identity is largely based on appearance, charisma and sex appeal are not also skilled. We can easily agree that Robert Duvall, Prince, and Aaron Judge all have skill. Secondly, fame is simply a mixture of fame and celebrity. Celebrities’ fame is all mixed up with their fan base, their psychological needs in a way that primary fame is not.

    Table 1 is a summary of the differences between fame and celebrity.

    Fame vs Celebrity

    Fame Category of Comparison  

    Celebrity

     

    5,000 years ago

    Agricultural civilizations to the end of the 19th century

    Time period End of 19th century to present
    High

    Religious (Catholics, Protestants) and political authority (Kings)

    Military heroes, artists

    Evaluation of authority Low

    Decline of religious and political authorities

     

    Heroes and heroines in movies, music and sports

    Ascribed or achieved

    Achieved – Renaissance artists in open competition

    How their status was achieved Achieved (being discovered)
    Rare How easy to accomplish? Very difficult but more frequent (class mobility opens up some possibilities)
    Public strangers

    (crowds)

    Targeted audience Mass strangers

    (fans)

     

    Literature, theatre

    Monuments

     

    Oral – storytelling, mimes, minstrels. Folk tales, mystery plays

    Mediums of transmission Mass communication

    Newspapers, photography, cinema, radio, television

     

     

    Beyond locales, to regions spread to empires through reputation Scope – how far it expands Beyond locales to regions nations and in some cases international
    Legitimacy, charisma,

    competency

    Power bases Charisma, Sexual power

    Competency

     

    Survives over generations How long does it last? Ephemeral

    Instant recognition

     

    Reputation, skills

    Actions (military, artists)

    Inheritance (kings, aristocrats)

     

    What are its characteristics? How a person appears physically, skills and actions in some cases
    Most distant Degree of exposure Less distance because of fan magazines, television appearances

     

    Blessings, healings

    Awe

    What the audience receives Vicarious satisfaction of living life through stars

    Titillation, awe

     

    No reciprocity

    (does not need audience)

    Nature of person of Notoriety and audience Minor reciprocitythrough fan attendance at concerts, films, sporting events—cheering, booing (needs audience)
    Little impact

    Character

    Star pathologies Significant impact – lack of privacy, psychological disorders

    Narcissism mania, schizophrenia, paranoia

     

    None

    Not attached

    Audience pathologies Fan pathologies: Stalking

    Killing themselves when celebrities die

     

    Larger than life

    Not commodities

    How are notorious people held? Larger than life Celebrities become commodities
      Relics of the dead – Signed autographs

    Homes are shrines

     

    Long term loyalty

     

     

     

     

    Loyalty

     

     

     

     

    Fickle – rarely exclusive or lifelong

    Fads, fashions

    Simmel—fashion makes people radioactive

    Men – with rare exceptions Gender representation Men and women

    (technological amplification makes it easier for women)

     

     Fame vs Celebrity in the History of Politics

    The impact of the electronic age on politics

    Up until now we have limited our discussion of celebrity to movies, and to a lesser extent music and sports. What about politics? In her wonderful book Eloquence in an Electric Age: The Politics of Political Speechmaking, Kathleen Hall Jamieson contrasts politicians and the public before the end of the 19th century to politics in the 20th century. For us, contrasting politics before and during the electronic age overlaps exactly with the time period we are contrasting fame and celebrity. In other words, we can use her work to understand the evolution of fame to celebrity to politics. As we shall see, politicians before the electronic age were famous, whereas after the electronic age they were celebrities.

    Means of communication, accessibility private life and the length of speeches

    The setting for political fame was communicating directly in public or through newspapers. At the end of the 19th century, first indirectly through the movies and then later through radio first and then television, politicians more and more became celebrities. Before the end of the 19th century the private life of politicians was protected. However, especially after television, the private life of politicians became public. A political public speaker (like Webster, Sumner or Clay) was an orator who could go on speaking for hours to audiences who were interested in politics and came from miles around and stood in agricultural fields. The contents of what the speaker had to say was usually fiery, full of imagery of swords and conquest. But especially after World War II, when politicians now had to compete with movie stars, sports figures and musicians, audiences with shorter attention spans expected politicians to speak briefly, be more entertaining and willing to take the needs of the audience into account.

    Politicians as preachers of news vs politicians as reactors to news

    Before the electronic age, famous politicians expected people to remember their words. But by the mid-20th century, what mattered more was not only how the politician came across on TV, but what was presented on TV in news (the Vietnam war). Whereas famous politicians were ahead of their audiences because they could simply report on what was going on politically while their audience had no way of knowing about that. But once television began reporting the political news, there was a period where the celebrity politicians had to answer questions about the news that the audience had already seen on television. This contributed to the growing skepticism and disrespect for celebrity politicians.

    On the hot seat: celebrity presidents and instantaneous communication

    Famous politicians used to only have to deal with a local audience. If a famous politician made a mistake at a local stump stop only the locals would have noticed it. It might be written up in the newspaper but the visual impact on the audience is blunted. Celebrity politicians are dealing with thousands of people all over the country whom the politicians cannot see. But for a celebrity president to make a mistake is a huge deal and thousands of people watching have all seen the same thing at the same time in their own private living rooms.

    From rhetoric and newspapers to broadcast media

    Famous politicians had to deal with critics who would challenge their oratory style. Their speeches were printed in newspapers. Celebrity politicians were not expected to be skilled in rhetoric because their speaking time was much shorter, at most it was 30 minutes. Newspapers no longer printed the speeches of politicians because people either listened on the radio, saw the speech on television or didn’t bother to watch or listen at all. Because the pace of life had quickened audiences had neither the time nor the interest to read these speeches. Furthermore, advertisers who controlled newspapers would never tolerate that much space taken up with a political speech. Broadcast media of radio and television displaced newspapers.

    From argumentation with many sides to playing tag with two sides

    Orators of the 19th century spent a fair amount of time defining their terms to the public and then laying out all the alternative prospects just as a lawyer or a rhetorician lays out their case. They presented all the available evidence. In addition, fame politicians used words to create imagines in their audiences. Celebrity presidents didn’t bother with definitions as audiences were not expected to hold definitions in their heads. Perhaps for fear of losing people, celebrity politicians flattened out the alternatives of the debate to two sides. Furthermore, celebrity presidents act like they are playing tag. They hit and they run. Those with the fastest quip win. Whereas public speaking requires a certain degree of an ability to think on the spot and field spontaneous questions from a relatively informed audience, celebrity “town hall” meetings are choreographed with the questions from the audience preselected as are the audiences themselves. Celebrity politicians don’t use words to help the audience create images. They use images from television to begin with and their words followed the images (captions).

    From speechwriting to teleprompters

    Famous politicians in the 19th century wrote their own speeches. This means they had to distinguish the logos of a speech from the ethos and the pathos and they had to be sensitive to timing – kairos. Celebrity politicians do not have to know anything about rhetoric as they don’t write their own speeches. The speeches are given to them. Because their speeches are televised they don’t have to be ready for audiences’ immediate reactions whether they are verbal or non-verbal. For celebrity politicians, they simply speak their lines. No thinking by them has gone into crafting their speech. In some cases their responses are guided through a teleprompter.

    From respect to disrespect of the past

    Famous politicians of the 19th century were expected to remember not only their previous arguments, but the political literature of the past. Also quoting poetry demonstrated that a politician was well-rounded. While their public audiences might not be able to quote literature from the past themselves, they respected politicians who could. By the mid 20th century, the audience respect for the past dwindled and they are more likely to be bored by a politician referring to their past arguments or political literature of the past. They might easily say “who cares”?

    From hellraiser to moderate

    Famous politicians of the 19th century were expected to be powerful, but predictable. There was nothing wrong with riling their audiences up. Famous politicians emphasized the points of disagreement with other politicians and they ignored the points of agreement. Famous politicians expect people to think and vote accordingly.

    In reaction to the terror of instantaneous communication and in order to compensate for possible mistakes, celebrity politicians attempt to make up for losing points by seeming to be a “regular guy”. By mid-20th century, psychology has had an impact on the public and politicians begin to use personal examples to become “intimate strangers” to their audiences. Celebrity politicians are expected to be more folksy and inflaming the audience might seem demagoguery at best, or pathological at worst. Please remember that celebrity politicians in the 50s were anti-communists and they were expected to be moderates, not extremists like the communists or the fascists. Celebrity politicians want to appear not too extreme. They want to emphasize the unity of the nation so that the audience will identify with them. Celebrities want to cross a line to gain emotional rapport. They are not far from a hope for mass collective therapy. Engagements were choreographed to resemble conversations more than speeches.

    How the electronic age helped women politicians

    Public speaking without loudspeakers, let alone radio and television mediations, was a man’s game, because men’s voices usually carried further than women’s. Even if a woman was a good speaker her power would be muffled if not everyone could hear her or her voice was straining. Radio and television definitely assisted female politicians in being taken more seriously. Furthermore, 19th century politicians in Yankeedom was a men’s club. Their wives and children were nowhere to be found. But for celebrity politicians their wives and children were never far out of view. In the 19th century it was possible for single male politicians to be elected. By the middle of the 20th century it became next to impossible to run if you were not married. This is as true for men as it was for women.

    From party to personality

    What is the relationship between the political candidate and his party? In the 19th century, the party had predictable stances that didn’t change much over decades. The personality of the candidate running was not essential to his winning or losing. However, beginning with the introduction of television, this began to change (certainly in the case of J.F. Kennedy). By the middle of the 1980s political candidates were treated as commodities and party politics began to lose its identity. All you have to do is trace the trajectory of the Democratic Party from the time of JFK to today to understand how the party of FDR has morphed into a neoliberal right-wing party. The personalities of the politician mattered far more than their parties. This can be seen in Part IV of Adam Curtis’s documentary, The Century of the Self.

    Two Forms of Notoriety in Politics: Fame vs Celebrity

    19th Century Category of Comparison 20th Century
    Public communication

     

    Setting Mass communication

    Movies, radio, Television

    Private living rooms

    Private lives protected Politicians Private/ public lives Private lives known
    Public interested

    Would walk for miles to spend two hours standing in a field listening to a speech about national affairs

    How involved is the audience? Audiences restless

    Short attention span

     

    Orator Type of engagement Speaker
    Fire and sword

    Conquest

    Type of speech Intimate discloser based on conciliation
    Lincoln Webster, Sumner, Clay Examples of politicians John F Kennedy, Nixon, Clinton
    90 minutes to two hours Length of speech Shorter, less than 30 minutes
    Newspapers reprinted text How do newspapers treat speeches? Advertising takes over newspapers – can’t waste advertising space on politics
      Steps in Argumentation

     

     
    Spent time defining their terms Defining terms Don’t bother – Don’t have time
    Explored the range of available evidence

    Routinely laid out the

    range of policy alternative for examination – like rhetoricians or lawyers building a case

    How expansive is the argument? No scrutinization of alternatives in depth

     

    Argue by hitting and running

    Four or five sides How many sides of an argument? Flattened to two sides
    Study of rhetoric and poetry Study of rhetoric and poetry Study of rhetoric In decline

    Interest in mass persuasion

    Tested the ability to recall previous arguments and the literature of the past Importance of Memory Americans can’t refer to previous literature

    Little in contemporary education cultivates memory

    Newspapers

    Marconi – wireless telegraph

    Mass media Broadcast media of radio and tv increased information – displacing the newspaper
    Yes – speaking and thinking go together Does the speaker write the speech? No – speechwriters

    Speaking and thinking separated

    Heard only by those in the local field Newspapers printed the speech for people in far regions to hear

    Delayed

    Scope of speech Instantaneous

    Heard in 90% of homes in US and in 27 other countries all at the same time.

    Preacher of news Do politicians control the news? Reactor to news
    Words What moves audiences Images on television are much more powerful than words
    Politics

    No place for personal

    Impersonal, personal Personalized self-disclosure and autobiographical
    Powerful, but not predictable—fear and potential destruction Use of pathos To inflame the audience was a sign of demagoguery
    Areas of disagreement

    stressed

    Agreement ignored

    Passion or moderation Emphasize reconciliation

    Burke – identification

     

     

    Painted pictures with images and  words Relation between words and images Images presented first Words worked as caption pictures
    Lack of voice projection limited women’s political speaking Gender dynamics Technology of radio and TV amplification opens speech up to women

     

    Lone speaker

    Family absent

    Is the family included Wives, children, pets are close by

     

    Stable party platform comes 1st

    Personality secondary

    Party vs personality Unstable party platform Personality as a commodity is primary

    • First published at Socialist Planning Beyond Capitalism

    The post Fame vs Celebrity first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone

    The Biden administration has officially re-designated Ansarallah – the dominant force in Yemen also known as the Houthis – as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist entity.

    The White House claims the designation is an appropriate response to the group’s attacks on US military vessels and commercial ships in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, saying those attacks “fit the textbook definition of terrorism”.

    Ansarallah claims its actions “adhere to the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” since it is only enforcing a blockade geared toward ceasing the ongoing Israeli destruction of Gaza.

    One of the most heinous acts committed by the Trump administration was its designation of Ansarallah as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) and as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGT), both of which imposed sanctions that critics warned would plunge Yemen’s aid-dependent population into even greater levels of starvation than they were already experiencing by restricting the aid that would be allowed in.

    One of the Biden administration’s only decent foreign policy decisions has been the reversal of that sadistic move, and now that reversal is being partially rolled back, though thankfully only with the SDGT listing and not the more deadly and consequential FTO designation.

    In a new article for Antiwar about this latest development, Dave Decamp explains that as much as the Biden White House goes to great lengths insisting that it’s going to issue exemptions to ensure that its sanctions don’t harm the already struggling Yemeni people,

    “history has shown that sanctions scare away international companies and banks from doing business with the targeted nations or entities and cause shortages of medicine, food, and other basic goods.”

    DeCamp also notes that US and British airstrikes on Yemen have already forced some aid groups to suspend services to the country.

    Still trying to recover
    So the US empire is going to be imposing sanctions on a nation that is still trying to recover from the devastation caused by the US-backed Saudi blockade that contributed to hundreds of thousands of deaths between 2015 and 2022. All in response to the de facto government of that very same country imposing its own blockade with the goal of preventing a genocide.

    That’s right: when Yemen sets up a blockade to try and stop an active genocide, that’s terrorism, but when the US empire imposes a blockade to secure its geostrategic interests in the Middle East, why that’s just the rules-based international order in action.

    It just says so much about how the US empire sees itself that it can impose blockades and starvation sanctions at will upon nations like Yemen, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Syria and North Korea for refusing to bow to its dictates, but when Yemen imposes a blockade for infinitely more worthy and noble reasons it gets branded an act of terrorism.

    The managers of the globe-spanning empire loosely centralised around Washington literally believe the world is theirs to rule as they will, and that anyone who opposes its rulings is an outlaw.

    Based on power
    “What this shows us is that the “rules-based international order” the US and its allies claim to uphold is not based on rules at all; it’s based on power, which is the ability to control and impose your will on other people.

    The “rules” apply only to the enemies of the empire because they are not rules at all: they are narratives used to justify efforts to bend the global population to its will.

    We are ruled by murderous tyrants. By nuclear-armed thugs who would rather starve civilians to protect the continuation of an active genocide than allow peace to get a word in edgewise.

    Our world can never know health as long as these monsters remain in charge.

    Caitlin Johnstone is an Australian independent journalist and poet. Her articles include The UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society. She publishes a website and Caitlin’s Newsletter. This article is republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.