McCain 2008 Ad on Daily Kos: "Surrender is not an option"

McCain 2008 Ad on Kos

by atticus
Apr 26, 2007

MCCain 2008? Surrender is not an option ? WTF

Get that crap advertisment off of here does daily kos really need that kind of money?


Permalink | 54 comments

---
Related

Frameshop: MCCAIN IS NOT AN OPTION (sign the petition today)

McCain 2008 Ad on Daily Kos: "Surrender is not an option"

McCain 2008 Ad on Kos

by atticus
Apr 26, 2007

MCCain 2008? Surrender is not an option ? WTF

Get that crap advertisment off of here does daily kos really need that kind of money?

Permalink | 54 comments

---
Related
Frameshop: MCCAIN IS NOT AN OPTION (sign the petition today)

Self-styled hippie grandmother reporting in Iraq for Central Texas paper

Click-2-Listen
Sunday, April 08, 2007

By Cindy V. Culp

Tribune-Herald staff writer

The bread in Iraq is heavenly, but the country really needs to work on its dating infrastructure. Or at least, that’s how citizen journalist Jane Stillwater sees it.

Those observations are among many the 64-year-old self-described hippie grandmother has made during her trip to the Middle East. She’s reporting them back via her Internet blog, but they also are being printed by the Lone Star Iconoclast, a weekly newspaper based in Crawford.

Stillwater’s collaboration with the newspaper was born of military regulation and political passion. In order for her to be eligible for an embedded assignment with U.S. troops, she had to be sponsored by a media organization.

A resident of Berkeley, Calif., Stillwater probably could have found a newspaper somewhere in the Golden State that would sign the paperwork. But she opted instead to go through the Iconoclast, which is located in President Bush’s adopted hometown.

The choice was no doubt meant to send a message. The introduction to Stillwater’s blog says her “goal in life (for now) is to send George Bush to jail & support honest politicians.” Similar ideas permeate her writings.

The Iconoclast also is a logical choice because it frequently publishes articles and opinion pieces critical of Bush. Its reputation is such that the only place in Crawford that carries it is the left-leaning Crawford Peace House, said editor-in-chief, W. Leon Smith.

Plus, the Iconoclast has published some of Stillwater’s work in the past, Smith said. So when she e-mailed about a month ago asking if the newspaper would give her media credentials to go to Iraq, Smith didn’t hesitate.

The paper is not paying Stillwater or even defraying the expense of her trip, Smith said. All it had to do was fill out the necessary paperwork for the Army. In return, it is getting the perspective of someone not beholden to a mainstream news outlet or the military, he said.

“It was just a win-win situation for us,” Smith said. “I wish I could go over there.”

Stillwater left for the trip March 28. She flew into Kuwait first and then to Baghdad. She is set to return April 17.

In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle before her trip, Stillwater said she wanted to go to Iraq so she could size up the situation for herself. She was tired of getting news about the war from television journalists who flew there first-class and then produced reports that seemed more like photo-ops than truth, the article says.

Stillwater was able to snag a round-trip ticket for $1,072, an amount she saved up for by living the same thrifty lifestyle she always has, the newspaper reported. Although she has lived in subsidized housing for 27 years, she has always been able to squirrel away money for adventures by doing things like eating only peanut butter sandwiches and wearing clothes she finds discarded on the street or buys second-hand.

“I don’t go to movies, I don’t do anything,” Stillwater told the Chronicle. “You can save a lot of money that way.”

So far, Stillwater has not yet been embedded with a unit, according to her blog. But she is staying at a military base camp in Iraq, which has given her some perspective on Army operations and the situation in Iraq.

Her dispatches focus partly on politics, partly on trivia. Many times the two collide, tied together by humor.

In one post, for example, Stillwater comments on how well stocked the chow hall is, offering everything from chicken and salad to coffee and cheesecake. But her observations don’t end there.

“I was about to give this place a whole bunch of Michelin stars for sure, but when I finally sat down at my tastefully decorated table and started to eat, I discovered that every wall in the chow hall had at least two giant plasma TVs nailed up next to the air conditioners and every single one of them was turned to Fox News! Eeuuww. Watching Bill O’Reilly interviewing some lady from the Heritage Foundation while eating? That’s just gross. Two thumbs down.”

In another post, Stillwater says that after a week in Iraq, she has determined there is no way to salvage the country as it is now. Her suggestion on what to do?

“I’d get Exxon or Bush or whoever owns Iraq’s oil money now to give every man, woman and child in Iraq $15,000 and a passport and tell them to get the hell out. I’d send them off to the country of their choice. Tahiti, Iceland, Venezuela, wherever — even America! And I’d make sure they also got $15,000 a year for the rest of their lives. Let them open bakeries in Cleveland! Everyone would be happy. The Iraqis would be happy. The American troops would be happy. Even Exxon would be pleased. And then we could start all over again in Iraq with all new people.”

Anyone wanting to keep up with Stillwater’s trip can read her reports online, either on the Iconoclast’s site at www.lonestaricon.com or on her blog at www.jpstillwater.blogspot.com.

cculp@wacotrib.com

757-5744

Fired blogger wins claim against former employer

Sacked "petite anglaise" blogger wins compensation claim

Fri Mar 30, 4:52 PM ET

A British secretary sacked for blogging on the job under the pseudonym of "La Petite Anglaise" has won a compensation claim case against the Paris office of British accounting firm Dixon Wilson.

A Paris labour tribunal, or "prud'hommes", ruled on Thursday that the firm pay Catherine Sanderson, 34, 44,000 euros (58,800 US dollars), tantamount to a year's salary, following her dismissal last April for alleged misconduct.

Sanderson's blog about daily life built up a sizeable international following, with many people reading her diary-style accounts about work, relationships and the travails of single-motherhood.

"I'm so relieved that good sense has prevailed," Sanderson told AFP on Friday.

The reasons behind the tribunal's decision in the case, one of the first of its kind in France, will be released in two weeks.

Sanderson said managers had discovered from reading the blog that on two occasions she had lied about having nanny problems to take the afternoon off. They also objected to her using the computer in office hours to write the blog.

"I always felt that my dismissal was an unnecessarily harsh sanction and clearly the prud'hommes shared my view,"she said.

Dixon Wilson, which offers tax and financial advice to private clients in Britain and France, refused to comment on Friday. The company has a month to appeal.

Zimbabwe Now: Dictatorship, Oppression and a Diet of Rats

An interview with a Zimbabwe blogger.

$ 7.75

February 28, 2007

$ 7.75

Yesterday I went to the bank.

Wow! I thought. So many people!

Iraqis are not “bank oriented” people, if they have any excess; they tend to keep it at home.

Previous experiences have taught us not to trust banks; they have been known to hold on to your money when you need it in a jiffy!

But looking at the numbers inside that bank, I thought, “I have been out of Bagdad,touch; bad girl.”

I go in, only to find people pushing and shoving one another; fighting, shouting and cursing each other. “This is not normal,” I said to myself.

I try to reach the employee with whom I have business, but my efforts are to no avail. One human current pushes me this way and another pulls me that. A proper riot!

I began to have serious misgivings.

“What is this all about?” I asked a lady who was trying, in vain, to keep from being crushed between two men, to my right, “Have you got any idea?”

“Where do you come from? Don’t you know that the government is giving people relief? At last we are remembered!”

“Really!! That’s excellent!!” It was my good fortune to be at the bank this day! Although half suffocated, I felt elated at being “remembered”. “How much?”

“10 000 Dinars!” (Equivalent to $7.75, purchasing power: 50 eggs).

….. Numbness.. …..

Fighting ….. Rioting ….. Flayed nerves and hot tempers flying ….. for 10 000 Dinars.

Where do I come from?

How many thousands have been decommissioned?

How many thousands were in Saddam’s army, police and intelligence agencies?

Thousands of others – professionals - dismissed from their government jobs on pretext of debathhification?

Yet more thousands displaced; and more still terrorized into a futile stay-at-home existence??

Riots in the bank for ID 10 000, $ 7.75.

And for $100; what would they be prepared to do?

For $500?

For $1000??

How many will cross that line? It’s not easy to see your family starve for principles.

Mercenaries on Iranian payroll.

Mercenaries on American payroll.

Mercenaries on ANY payroll.

Hear! Hear! An army for a pittance. Gather yea all, who have an interest to participate in this charade. Stakes are high! All of Iraq is the stage.

Posted by Correspondent Sahar at 04:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0
---

Editor's note: The are a only a handful of Westerners left reporting from Baghdad. It is simply too dangerous.The Iraqi blogger reporting above is all that is left of the McClatchy newspaper chain in that once great city.

The Washington insider's club and why they can't stand bloggers

Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake on U.S. v. Libby

Jane Hamsher of firedoglake.com, February 21, 2007:

1. The administration lied us into war and tried to abuse its power to punish the whistleblower who told the American public the truth.

2. Scooter is the firewall to Shooter.

3. Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby and other members of the administration conspired to keep federal investigators from uncovering their crimes.

4. The media was complicit in spreading administration propaganda rather than doing investigative journalism, and are now helping to set the table for a pardon.

5. The journalistic standards that have been exposed in the case (witness Tim Russert, Judy Miller, Andrea Mitchell, Robert Novak and others) are reprehensible, and have undermined the public trust in the media.

6. The degree to which this story about the lies that lead to war has been ignored by the media (relative to the feeding frenzy over [the Clinton/Lewinsky sexual scandal]) left a huge opening that the blogs have filled.

Of the paragraphs above, it is paragraph 6 that I find most to be both most clearly true and of longest reach. A lot of left bloggers ranging from the beige, staid TalkingPointsMemo.com to the wild and vulgar Jane Hamsher and the less vulgar Marcy Wheeler FireDogLake.com to community centers like DailyKos and its varied progeny to (to a lesser extent) Democratic strategy sites like MyDD.com have gotten a lot of their fuel and developed a lot of their talent out of the Wilson/Plame/Libby saga, and it is fair to say that this story and its galvanizing effect on the left blogosphere have provided the margin of victory in left netroots development.

Without Plameology, it is likely that the YearlyKos convention would not have happened last year (sidenote: Crablaw is 50-50 likely to attend YearlyKos 2007 in Chicago). For all the talk of the mainstream media being a liberal bastion, it seems to me that the press has bent over backwards to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. I think it's not a left-right issue so much as an insiders' club issue. I have come to perceive more and more while working in DC the strange, clubby environment of Potomac Fever. Georgetown is a university, a 10-block watering hole - AND a remarkably cheerful, extremely expensive and chummy neighborhood where everybody seems to know each other and neighbors become friends with remarkable easy, according to report after report. The neighborhood has subdivisions - the newspaper people live here, the senior lobbyists tend to live on that side of M Street. Alexandria has its own, strange clubby social network. So do McLean and the tonier neighborhoods in Arlington, where single family houses easily top $1 million dollars, more if within 6 blocks of a Metro station. Chevy Chase as well, for even more money.

What DC does not have is a lot of middle-class neighborhoods near the city. A few middle-class strongholds do exist in Northeast near Catholic University and near Eastern Avene in Deanwood. A very substantial majority-black middle-class lives in Prince George's County, but that County is perhaps 1/5 of the metropolitan area and even it has its very wealthy neighborhoods and some substantial poverty, though less than is commonly perceived. But in some cities, middle-class and lower-middle-class life dominate. In Baltimore, that's the case. Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Brooklyn and Queens - you see this. In DC, the concentration of wealth and power is absolutely staggering, especially when you realize that DC is less "showy" than cities like Los Angeles, i.e. the wealth is compiled beneath quiet, tasteful style. A multi-millionaire lobbyist for, say, the pharmaceutical industry is not likely to drive a sports car down K Street; a millionaire Hollywood agent doing similar work for similar money is more likely to show off his wealth.

In this clubbish, genteel Alice-in-Wonderland world a certain psychology sets in. It's not that the politicians get out of touch so much that much of this federal city comes to regard itself as a republic apart. They don't have a voting member in Congress, but who cares; they live down the street from 13 Congressmen so who needs a representative? The traditional news media, the lobbyists, the upper end of the non-profit sector, the upper-level government staffers just below secretary level, the salaried DNC and RNC apparatchiks, Congressmen, Senators and all of their major funders, connectors, contact brokers - they are of a social class and club. The USA?? - why would they want to go traveling in some foreign country like Baltimore or Cleveland?

To understand this world, listen to George Will and Cokie Roberts, read their books and ask yourself who they drink with, and who those people drink with. Then add in David Broder's Rolodex. You get the idea?

So of course it's reasonable to expect that if Vice-President Cheney and Scooter Libby dropped the dime on Valerie Plame to slap and humiliate her and her husband, or lied about hearing it from Russert first, or whatever, the entire Washington culture is likely to take care of this matter as an in-house issue. Not something to be handled by some sawed-off arrogant former mob prosecutor from Chicago. Special U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald is not part of their world. Neither are the vulgar, keyboard-punching activists with strange names like "Emptywheel" and "Atrios" and "Majikthise." The contempt dripping from George Will and Cokie Roberts in their various discussions of the blogosphere as a concept - not for specific things said or done by specific bloggers, but its very existence as a hated, hostile phenomenon - is amazing, and deserves a full post in its own right. They have their culture, and they handle things their way. The U.S. Code and the FBI be damned; if the Washington insiders do it, then it is not illegal.

If Libby is convicted, I think the effect on Washington's chummy political culture will be devastating, perhaps far more devastating than it will be for Dick Cheney and President Bush. And bi-partisan long knives will come out for the dirty hippie bloggers like never before. THAT will be the longer legacy of Jane Hamsher and Marcy Wheeler's Plameology blogging.

Comments (3) | Trackback

A big win for the LA 8

Tue Jan 30, 2007

Judge Einhorn of immigration court rendered his decision on Tuesday January 30, 2007 in (LA 8) case. The court “finds that the government has failed to carry its burden of proving respondents deportable based on clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence. Therefore, the proceedings against Hamide and Shehadeh are TERMINATED.) The decision said.

Please visit our web site for more information. Please click on the word decision in the body of the article to read the decision. [Editor's note: See article below]

Thanks to all who helped in this case,

Michel Shehadeh
---

The Los Angeles Eight Case

Government Seeks Deportation for Magazine Distribution in 1980s

^{When Administration defenders claim that "there have been no abuses" of the Patriot Act, ask them about the case of Khader Hamide and Michel Shehadeh. The government seeks to deport these two long-time permanent resident aliens under the Patriot Act for having distributed magazines and raised humanitarian aid in the 1980s in Los Angeles. It seeks to punish these men, neither of whom has ever even been charged, let alone convicted, of a crime, under a law enacted in 2001 for conduct engaged in fifteen years earlier, at a time when the conduct was perfectly legal. And it seeks to deport them for classic First Amendment activity ? the distribution of a magazine.}

^{The case of Hamide and Shehadeh will prove a critical test of the limits of the expansive amendments to immigration law made by the Patriot Act. And because the activities for which the government seeks to deport Hamide and Shehadeh are protected by the First Amendment, it also will prove a test of the scope of immigrants' First Amendment rights. This is the first case in which the government has sought to deport anyone under that Act for distributing literature, and one of the first in which the government has invoked the Patriot Act's "material support to terrorist organization" grounds. It is also one of the longest-running immigration cases in the United States, having begun 18 years ago, in 1987, under an anti-communist immigration law dating back to the 1950s. The case, a kind of modern-day Bleak House, has generated several landmark judicial opinions, and been up to the Supreme Court. It is now back in immigration court, where trial is set to begin July 13, 2005, before Immigration Judge Bruce J. Einhorn.}

^{Born in the West Bank, Khader Hamide and Michel Shehadeh came to the United States in their college years and have now lived here thirty four and thirty years, respectively. They are lawful permanent residents and hard-working fathers--Hamide, father of three U.S. citizen children, supplies luxury coffee shops; Shehadeh, father of two U.S. citizen children and married to a U.S. citizen, works as a freelance writer and lives in Oregon.}

^{They are now charged with being deportable for having provided "material support" to a "terrorist organization." The organization is the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a faction of the PLO headed by George Habash. The government claims that Hamide and Shehadeh provided the PFLP with "material support" in Los Angeles in the mid-1980s by distributing its magazine, and by holding two community dinners at which they helped raise money for political activities and humanitarian aid. The money went to support political work in the United States in support of Palestinian self-determination, and humanitarian aid to various social service groups in Lebanon, the West Bank, and Gaza. But the government claims that the recipients were tied to the PFLP, and that therefore Hamide and Shehadeh are deportable.}

^{The case began in 1987, when immigration authorities arrested seven young Palestinians and a Kenyan woman--dubbed the "LA 8" by the media--on charges of being affiliated with the PFLP. At that time, the oovernment claimed that they were deportable for being affiliated with a group that "advocated the doctrines of world communism," a deportable offense under the McCarran-Walter Act, a law enacted in 1952, at the height of the McCarthy era. At the time, FBI Director William Webster testified before Congress that the eight "had not been found to have engaged themselves in terrorist activity." Hearings Before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Nomination of William H. Webster to be Director of Central Intelligence, 100th Cong. 1st Sess. 94-95 (April 8, 9, 10, May 1, 1987). Mr. Webster further admitted that they "were arrested because they are alleged to be members of a world-wide Communist organization which under the McCarran Act makes them eligible for deportation ... if these individuals had been United States citizens, there would not have been a basis for their arrest." Id.}

_{In 1989, a federal court declared the McCarran-Walter Act charges unconstitutional. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm. v. Meese, 714 F. Supp. 1060 (C.D. Cal. 1989). The court ruled that the First Amendment protects all persons within the United States equally, whether citizens or foreign nationals, and that deporting foreign nationals for their political associations violated the First Amendment. The following year Congress repealed that McCarthy-era law. The government nonetheless pursued deportation under new charges.}

^{In 1995, the same federal court blocked the deportations under the new charges from going forward on the grounds that the government, in violation of the First Amendment, had selectively targeted the group for constitutionally protected political activities. The court reviewed 10,000 pages of evidence submitted by the government, but found evidence only of constitutionally protected political activity. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm. v. Reno, No. CV 87-2107, at 32 n.14 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 1996).}

^{In 1996, however, Congress stripped federal courts of authority to hear such selective-enforcement challenges to deportation, and in 1999 the Supreme Court ruled that the cases could go forward. Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm., 525 U.S. 471 (1999).}

^{The case is now back in immigration court, where trial is scheduled to being July 13, 2005. The government claims that Hamide and Shehadeh provided material support to the PFLP. Hamide and Shehadeh deny providing such support. They admit that they distributed magazines and sponsored two community dinners, but maintain that they raised money only for domestic political activities of the Committee for a Democratic Palestine, a U.S.-based political organization that engaged in political activity in support of Palestinian self-determination ? and for a handful of charitable social service organizations in Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank. The trial will focus on Hamide and Shehadeh's political activism in the 1980s, and whether it can be seen as "material support" to the PFLP.}

^{Hamide and Shehadeh have challenged the retroactive application of the Patriot Act to their conduct, engaged in twenty years ago. They also argue that their activities were protected by the First Amendment, and that they did not support the PFLP.}

Documents Leaked to Web Prompt First-Amendment Debate

Legal Affairs

Morning Edition, January 17, 2007 · A federal judge in Brooklyn, N.Y., is considering whether bloggers are entitled to the same free speech protections given to reporters for newspapers and other media. The case involves leaked documents belonging to the pharmaceutical giant, Eli Lilly.

Specifically, the documents concern the drug Zyprexa. It's a schizophrenia drug and the company's best-seller. Lilly had turned over the documents to lawyers representing patients who were suing the company.

As is common in such cases, the documents — thousands of pages of internal Eli Lilly e-mails, research studies and marketing reports — were kept confidential by court order. But last month, they leaked out and were obtained by several organizations, including The New York Times and NPR.

On Dec. 17, 2006, the Times ran the first of several stories based on the leaked documents. According to the Times, they showed that Lilly had engaged in a decade-long effort to play down the risks of Zyprexa — risks such as excessive weight gain and diabetes. Lilly strongly disputes the description of what the documents show.

For a couple of days, you could judge for yourself, because the Zyprexa documents were posted on the Web by individuals to whom they were also leaked.

On Dec. 18, Lilly obtained a temporary court order to get its documents back. The New York Times refused, but the Web links were shut down. Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein will be asked to restore the links.

Fred von Lohmann of the Electronic Freedom Foundation in San Francisco will argue that the order to shut down the Web links violated the protections of the first amendment.

"Courts in the United States, thanks to the First Amendment, are not allowed to issue what are called 'prior restraints,' Von Lohmann said. "After all, the Pentagon Papers were also allegedly improperly obtained. And the courts have said over and over again 'It doesn't matter if the documents were improperly obtained. Courts do not issue stop-the-presses orders against people who happen to get the documents after they had been released.'"

Von Lohmann's client is anonymous. "John Doe" posted entries on a Wikipedia Web site about the Zyprexa documents. He doesn't have the stature of the reporters involved in the Pentagon Papers case. They worked for The New York Times and The Washington Post.

Neil Richards, a professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, says this case squarely poses the question of whether "John Doe" deserves the same protections as the established media.

"A number of people have made claims to be the press," Richards said. "The Supreme Court, in interpreting the First Amendment, has defined the press very broadly because it doesn't want to foreclose new types of people who are engaged in press-like activities from claiming First Amendment protection."

Richards thinks the court will decide that "John Doe" is a full-fledged member of the press.

But to release the documents on the Web, Richards says, Judge Weinstein will also have to decide that the public interest in knowing what's in the documents outweighs Lilly's interest in protecting its trade secrets.

For its part, Lilly says releasing the documents could harm patients and physicians, because the documents tell only part of the story about Zyprexa.

A ruling could come at any time.

by Snigdha Prakash

Here

King of the Iranian bloggers

Last update - 11:56 12/01/2007

By Meron Rapoport

Hossein Derakhshan's T-shirt is the only thing that gives him away. "I love Tehran," it says. Actually the shirt is the only thing that would lead one to guess that the affable, young-and-restless technology aficionado is not from here. He's from Iran, and proud of it. He was born in Tehran, grew up there and thinks it's the most fantastic city in the world. Even today, even now. Because even though Derakhshan cannot live in Iran at present, he is still an Iranian patriot. He despises Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but admires Khomeini; he's a total atheist, but thinks that an Islamic republic is the solution for the future; he's a friend of Israel, who thinks that Ahmadinejad's anti-Israeli policy is the leader's stupidest mistake, but he's also an enthusiastic supporter of the Iranian nuclear program and believes it would be very good for Iran to have an atom bomb. Good for Iran - and good for Israel.

Based on all we think we know about Iran, Canada-based Derakhshan ought to be totally out of the ordinary, an endangered species. He's a journalist who never misses an opportunity to say that his president is stupid, a well-known blogger who preaches to a cyberspace that is free of censorship and oversight. But these two qualities, explains Derakhshan, are not unusual in Iran. The Iranian press slaughters Ahmadinejad on a daily basis, and blogs are a big hit. Some 700,000 bloggers are active in Iran today, he estimates, from radicals who curse spiritual leader Ali Khamenei to madrasa students in the holy city of Qum. Even Ahmadinejad himself started his own blog a little while ago.

It's not by chance that Derakhshan speaks about blogs as if he were talking about religion. Dr. Michael Dahan of Sapir Academic College, who studies the phenomenon of blogs in general and of those in the Middle East in particular, says that Derakhshan could be considered the spiritual father of the bloggers in Iran. This is the man who also found a technological solution to writing blogs in Farsi and also gave the blogger movement its ideological cast - promoting a free space for discussions about everything that's happening in Iranian society.

Thus, it was not surprising to find him as a guest at the conference held this week at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Be'er Sheva, entitled "Reform, Opposition and Conflicts in the Middle East." Derakhshan spoke during the session led by Prof. Yoram Meital about "Blogging as a Realm of Opposition in the Middle East." Derakhshan's visit to Israel, his second within a year, had two purposes: to show his Iranian readers that Israel is not an enemy, and to explain to Israelis that the terrible image they have of Iran is distorted and without connection to reality.

Two freest countries

Hossein Derakhshan was born into the Islamic Revolution. He is 31, meaning he was four years old when millions of Iranians toppled the shah's regime and eagerly welcomed Khomeini upon his return from exile. Derakhshan grew up in a religious family and received a religious education, though this did not stop him from working at one of the popular liberal newspapers, Asr-e Azadegan (Hour of Liberation). The newspaper was closed under the reformist president Mohammed Khatami, but Derakhshan easily found work at another paper. In 2000, his wife received a visa to emigrate to Canada and Derakhshan emigrated with her (they have since divorced).

Even though the newspaper where he worked closed, Derakhshan describes the press in Iran in a surprisingly positive light. "During the time of President Khatami, the conservatives feared that the reformists were really America's emissaries, who wanted to topple the regime without a battle, and therefore they closed down newspapers then," he explains. "Today, this fear has passed. Except for criticism of the spiritual leader Khamenei, you can write criticism of anyone. The press is so rough on Ahmadinejad that not long ago, he went to Khamenei and complained to him about the criticism. Khamenei told him that it was true that he was getting some harsh criticism, but that there was nothing to be done about it, that that's how the game works."

With the exception of Israel, asserts Derakhshan, Iran is the freest country in the Middle East. He cites a recent event at Tehran University, where the students greeted President Ahmadinejad with boos, and one student even burned a picture of the president right in front of him. Not a single student was arrested. "You couldn't do that in any other Middle Eastern country," he says.

His description of life in Tehran is surprising, too. "I love Tehran," says Derakhshan, who has made his home in Toronto in recent years, but also travels frequently in Europe. "It's a huge, lively and varied city that's alive 24 hours a day. The restaurants are open until four in the morning." In fact, it's rather similar to Tel Aviv, he says, in terms of both architecture and character. "Young people in Tel Aviv and Tehran are listening to the same music and using the same drugs."

But don't get the wrong idea. Derakhshan does not think that Iran is a paradise. And he has plenty of reason for feeling this way. Before he left Tehran, he was summoned for questioning by the security forces and forced to sign a document of apology for things he'd written against the regime. In 2001, shortly after he immigrated to Canada, he began writing his blog, entitled "Editor: Myself" (at www.hoder.com).

For several years, it was the most popular blog in Iran, until the authorities decided to block access to it two years ago. This happened after he violated one of the iron rules of the Iranian press: It is forbidden to express criticism of spiritual leader Khamenei. "I wrote a post entitled 'Khamenei: A Well-Meaning Dictator,'" Derakhshan recounts. "I actually wrote pretty good things about Khamenei, but ever since then they've blocked my blog."

Expanding space

What matters most to Derakhshan is that bloggers have managed to create a steadily expanding space for public discussion. A space where supporters of reforms can exchange views, but also argue with conservative bloggers, who are also very active on the Web. And all of this space, which has no center and no hierarchy, says Derakhshan, is protected by the government.

Despite all the problems, Derakhshan believes in the Iranian revolution, in Khomeini and the Islamic republic. It's odd to hear such things coming from a young man who looks thoroughly Western, sitting on the lawn at Ben-Gurion University on a warm afternoon, but this is what he says.

"Khomeini's revolution is as important as the French Revolution," he maintains. "The central ideas of Khomeini were equality and independence. I believe in them. I used to be more critical of the idea of an Islamic republic. Today I think that this is a post-modernist idea, that it's a correct idea. I'm an atheist, I don't care at all about Mohammed and about religion, but it's impossible to disqualify religion like they did in Turkey. It doesn't work, and it leads to counter-reactions. Religion is an organic part of our society. It needs to be given a new interpretation. This is what Iran is offering the Muslim world."

What about equality? I wouldn't imagine that women in Tehran often use that word to describe the regime.

Derakhshan: "True, women are forced to wear a hijab, but that's only an external matter, it's only part of the story. Women in Iran have a much greater presence in society than women in other Middle Eastern countries. In Parliament, for example, in public positions. The marriage laws have also changed a lot in women's favor in the past 15 years, as a result of the ceaseless efforts of the women's organizations."

As for Ahmadinejad, Derakhshan says that he, like many Iranians, is embarrassed by the president "the way a lot of Americans are embarrassed by Bush." Ahmadinejad was elected on the basis of promises to improve the standard of living, Derakhshan explains, but instead all he does is talk from morning till night about Israel, about Holocaust denial and nuclear capabilities.

Derakhshan is convinced that the Iranian public is either put off by these things or simply not interested in them. He says that the Iranian public is not hostile toward Israel. Perhaps even the opposite. "The Iranians remember that the Palestinians supported Saddam Hussein when he fought against Iran," he says. "And some also remember that Israel tried to transfer arms to Iran in the Iran-Contra episode, and that's something in Israel's favor."

He adds: "You have to distinguish between rhetoric and actions. Iran has no desire to destroy Israel. If it did, Tehran would have permitted Hezbollah to use long-range rockets against Tel Aviv in the last war. Ahmadinejad is not Hitler. The one who controls the army is Khamenei, and he is not pleased by Ahmadinejad's declarations. Iran and Israel have a common interest: They live in a region controlled by Sunni Muslims."

And Derakhshan has yet another surprise up his sleeve: His opposition to Ahmadinejad's policy doesn't mean that he's opposed to the Iranian nuclear project. On the contrary, he believes that it would be good for Iran to have nuclear arms. Only with them can it protect itself from its threatening neighbors: nuclear Pakistan, Iraq and the whole Sunni Middle East. And Israel, too, will benefit from an Iran that is strong and secure, he says.

And what if Israel attacks the Iranian nuclear facilities?

"Then it will be seen as the long arm of America, and the attitude toward it will follow accordingly."

The Mouse as Hater

01.06.07

2:43 am by thomas

The web is abuzz with the latest outrage from ABC/Disney. There is a hate-filled talk radio station here in San Francisco called KSFO, owned by ABC Radio, and a local blogger got ticked off enough by their programming to go and do something about their hate speech.

The blogger - Spocko - posted MP3s of some of the nasty shit that KSFO broadcasts and then wrote to the sponsors and advertisers on these programs with links to the audio files. It worked. Several large advertisers are going to remove their sponsorship from KSFO and this got the lawyers at Disney busy.

Disney forced Spocko’s blog offline by dropping a DMCA request on his hosting provider. It seems that these corporations are too big and stupid to learn their lessons: Attacking a blogger is like sticking your hand into a hornets nest.

Now Disney can try to deal with posts like this one on hundreds of blogs all around the world. Good luck, you morons.

And here’s what all of this is about:

Articles with quotes from the broadcasts and statements by Spocko:

ABC/Disney Endorses Hate Speech

Disney Threatens Media Critic

Spocko vs. The Rat

…and here are links to the MP3s:

Online Blogintegrity

If you listed to even only a few of these, you will understand. This stuff is fascist hate speech of the worst possible kind. No honest company should be associated with vile, nasty shit like that.

Personally, I will finally sell all my Disney stock. We bought Pixar shares back in the day because we really liked what that company stood for. But now that these shares have been converted to Disney stock, I can make a timely statement about what I think of ABC/Disney by selling off the shares of a bunch of fascist enablers.

Posted in Rants

Permalink

S-ICE: Another Assault On Freedom of Speech and Poaching in FBI Territory

Posted on Fri Dec 22nd, 2006 at 10:08:24 AM EST

“Our liberty depends on freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” - Thomas Jefferson

After reviewing the story written by Hector Carreon of La Voz de Aztlan about his encounter with DHS special agents on December 23, 2005 at his residence, in the Los Angeles, CA area I concluded that we had two issues with the Hector Carreon’s case: DHS’ attempt to intimidate a journalist and news reporter for exercising his First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and secondly, DHS investigating a suspected terrorist organization, which it is not an enforcement action within the DHS jurisdiction. This is FBI's territory. Although Mr. Carreon did not identify the DHS special agents by name or the agency, I assume the agents were from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Los Angeles ICE District Office. It is possible the agents asked Mr. Carreon not to publish their name or the agency they worked for “under the name of national security.”

Mr. Hector Carreon did not have to give up his Constitutional Rights that easy. What he did in essence was giving our U.S. government consent to search his house and allow DHS to obtain copies of all of La Voz de Aztlan subscribers’ personal data.

If I were the FBI-SAC Los Angeles after reading Mr. Carreon’s narrative, I would pick-up the phone and make some calls not only to his/her Los Angeles ICE counterpart but to the FBI Director. In summary, DHS and assuming ICE was involved, they were basically poaching into FBI exclusive territory: investigations of terrorist organizations within the USA.

Now, if there is such alleged coordination between DHS-ICE and the FBI’s Joint Terrorist Task Force, why was not an FBI agent present during Mr. Carreon’s consented search of his residence? One more thing, let’s assume that the FBI was already conducting an investigation on Mr. Carreon and his La Voz de Aztlan for possible terrorist activities, what DHS did in essence was to obstruct and sabotage an FBI investigation. This of course does not imply by any means that Mr. Carreon and his organization is connected with any terrorist group.

I don’t know if the above case had something to do with the sudden retirement of the Los Angeles ICE SAC Loraine Brown.

The Hector Carreon case is similar to my co-publisher Bill Conroy’s case, but the government’s intention and motives were not the same. In the Conroy’s case the DHS-OPR goons only wanted to intimidate him and to tell his bosses about his Narco News stories. On the other hand, the Carreon case was a pure “terrorist related investigation,” and of course to intimidate him and give him a "warning" about his stories exposing government corruption in the USA and abroad.

The Hector Carreon Story

DHS: "La Voz de Aztlan has raised eyebrows in Washington" by Hector Carreon - La Voz de Aztlan - Los Angeles, Alta California, January 12, 2006 - (ACN)

On the morning of December 22, 2005, I noticed a business card that was left at the door of my home. The card was from the US Department of Homeland Security and had a handwritten note that said "Please call". That afternoon I called Los Angeles and spoke with the special agent whose name was on the card. The DHS agent said they wanted to speak to me about "The Aztlan Movement" and my organization. I answered, "Do you mean La Voz de Aztlan?" I added, "La Voz de Aztlan is a news and information service." The special agent wanted to come to my home to speak to me personally on the following day. We made a 8:30 a.m. appointment.

The knock on my door came at precisely 8:30 a.m. on December 23, 2005 as my family was making final preparations for Christmas Day. On the other side of my glass door were two gentlemen dressed in professional business suits. I opened the door and we introduced each other. I escorted them to my living room and introduced the two special agents to two of my family members that were present. We all sat down and the lead government agent began the conversation.

Among the first statements said by the special agent in charge was, "La Voz de Aztlan has raised eyebrows in Washington". He proceeded to ask numerous questions about Aztlan. He said that he was not from the area and wanted to know as much as possible about the "Aztlan Movement" and my organization. I reiterated that "La Voz de Aztlan" is not an organization per se but merely an Internet news service for Mexican and Mexican-Americans in the US Southwest and in Mexico. I added that La Voz de Aztlan, however, had attracted readership and subscriber from around the globe.

He asked what Aztlan meant to me. I answered that Aztlan has many levels of meaning. I said that "Aztlan" in the name of our news publication is mostly symbolic. I gave both special agents the historic and cultural basis for "Aztlan" . I mentioned that there exists historical Mexica documents and old Spanish maps that point to an actual region called "Aztlan" that existed in pre-Columbian times near the "four corners" area of the US Southwest. I mentioned that according to ancient Mexica (Aztec) lore, they were to migrate south to establish the great city of Tenochtitlan (present day Mexico City) at a place where they were to see a "sign". The sign would be "An eagle on top of a cactus with a serpent in its beak". One of the special agents immediately recognized this "sign" as being part of the Mexican flag.

At this point the conversation turned into "Aztlan" being a separatist organization and whether I believed that the Southwest should separate from Washington and become part of Mexico. I said that there are many youths of Mexican descent that believe in such a possibility but that my personal beliefs are more in line with those of Professor Armando Navarro of the University of California and of Professor Charles Truxillo of the University of New Mexico. The special agent asked me whether I believed in the armed and violent overthrow of the US government. I answered "no" and that I believed in making social and political changes through the "ballot box".

The lead special agent also asked questions concerning a news report we had on a legendary Iraqi sniper that our troops have nicknamed "Juba". The report included a link to a video on the server of "The Internet Archive" at www.archive.org. "The Internet Archive" is funded by the US Library of Congress but the video appears to have been produced by Al-Queda. We have now removed two reports on "Juba" because of the concerns communicated to us by the DHS.

There were numerous other questions concerning my education, employment and military record with the US Army 2nd Armored Division. They asked what kind of weapons I own and where in the house I kept them. They asked whether I had friends and who were my associates. They asked about Ernesto Cienfuegos, Roberto Cruz and my association with Dr. Armando Navarro. They also asked how I got along with my neighbors.

At about this point, the second special agent got up and approached me with a clip board and a document. He requested that I print my name on a line at the top and sign at the bottom. I ask what it was for and he answered that it was permission for them to examine my computer. All this time the special agent in charge was in constant radio communication with someone at a remote location. I had to decide on the spot whether to grant permission or insist on a court warrant. I decided that it would be the best course to continue to fully cooperate with the federal agents and I sign the document. Right after I signed, the lead agent radioed someone and within five minutes two more special agents arrived to my home with suitcases of electronic equipment. The lead agent asked me to escort them to my computer room where they spent two hours copying the hard disk of my computer. I do not know what else they did down there because I was kept busy by the other two agents upstairs answering additional questions.

It was clear to me that the Department of Homeland Security had conducted previous surveillance and investigations because they already had much information on myself and our news publication "La Voz de Aztlan". The special agent in charge gave me the distinct impression that they were acting on high level orders from Washington. We suspect Congressman Tom Tancredo, the AIPAC or both. We are presently preparing a "congressional inquiry" in an attempt to find out who was behind this frightening invasion of privacy and government action that has "chilled" our constitutional freedom of speech and of the press.
http://www.aztlan.net/homeland_security_incident.h tm

REFERENCES

DHS eyes House members Agent who spoke with rep suspended - Sara A. Carter, Staff Writer - San Bernardino County Sun Article - 09/27/2006

Congressmen who visit the U.S.-Mexico border unannounced are being monitored by the Department of Homeland Security, and at least one U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent has been suspended for speaking to a congressman without first getting supervisory clearance, according to documents obtained by the Daily Bulletin.

Congressional members interviewed by the newspaper said they were unaware until recently that Border Patrol agents were required to file Significant Incident Reports - normally used for shootings and other serious border incidents - when congressional members made unannounced visits in the summer along the U.S.-Mexico border.

A second document obtained by the paper reveals that one agent was suspended for 10 days without pay for speaking with Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, who made an unannounced visit to the border in May.

"Preventing Congress from speaking freely to federal employees violates at least two federal statutes, and agents are fearful of telling the truth," said King, who recounted several visits to the Mexican border when Border Patrol agents would not speak with him for fear of reprisal.
http://www.sbsun.com/ci_4401381

The National Alliance for Human Rights

The Dr. Armando Navarro mentioned in the Hector Carreon's search incident is coordinator of the National Alliance for Human Rights, a network of leaders, activists, scholars and organizations committed to the promotion of human rights, social justice and political empowerment of the Latino community in the United States. Since its formation in the year 2000, the National Alliance for Human Rights has been at the forefront of issues affecting Latinos. Armando Navarro, Coordinator, (951) 333-6819
http://www.nationalallianceforhumanrights.org/

homeland security going after journalist Greg Palast reposter Greg Palast is facing a criminal complaint from the Department of Homeland Security stemming from his filming the Hurricane Katrina investigation for Link TV and Democracy Now.

Palast, Pascarella Face Homeland Security Charges Published by Greg Palast September 7th, 2006 in Articles by Zach Roberts

Yes, the rumor's true. Greg Palast is facing a criminal complaint from the Department of Homeland Security stemming from his filming the Hurricane Katrina investigation for Link TV and Democracy Now. The film's producer, Matt Pascarella, is also facing the legal wrath of Big Brother.

It appears the complaint is about filming a sensitive national security site owned by Exxon petroleum. It seems that photographing major Bush donors is now a federal offense.

Reached at an undisclosed location, Palast says, "Let's not get over-excited. They haven't measured us for our orange suits yet."

During questioning by Homeland Security, Palast asked, "Hey, aren't you supposed to be looking for Osama? Or for guys with exploding shoes? ... We're journalists." At Palast's request, Homeland Security confirmed that Louisiana is, indeed, still part of the USA but did not respond when asked if the First Amendment applies there.

Watch part one and part two of Palast and Pascarella's film. (In association with BigNoise Films) BigNoise Videographer Jaqui Soohen has not been charged http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/09/345676.sh tml

Free Political Expression Is Protected by the First Amendment

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, however, protects the right of political expression of citizens and citizen groups. The First Amendment provides that:

"Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech." This Amendment was incorporated in our Constitution, at the urging of James Madison, to protect "indispensable democratic freedoms."

Freedom of speech and association were viewed by the Framers of the Constitution as essential to democracy. As the courts have explained:

(i)f popular elections form the essence of republican government, free discourse and political activity formed the prerequisite for popular elections.

Thus, "freedom of speech plays a fundamental role in a democracy. . . [I]t 'is the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other freedom.'"

The Supreme Court has held, therefore, that political expression is "at the core of our electoral process and of First Amendment freedoms."

[T]he First Amendment right to 'speak one's mind . . . on all public institutions' includes the right to engage in "'vigorous advocacy' no less than 'abstract discussion.'" Advocacy of the election or defeat of candidates for federal office is no less entitled to protection under the First Amendment than the discussion of political policy generally or advocacy of the passage or defeat of legislation.

Thus, the Court has concluded that "it can hardly be doubted that the constitutional guarantee [of the First Amendment] has its fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for political office."

To date, the federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have vigorously protected the First Amendment right of citizens and citizens' groups to free political expression. The seminal case is Buckley v. Valeo, decided in 1976, which struck down, on First Amendment grounds, many of the speech limiting provisions of the post-Watergate amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act.

Other important decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court protecting free political expression and association are NCPAC v. Federal Election Commission, Federal Election Commission v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, and Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee.
http://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/missionstatement .html

By Miguel Contreras,

Speaking truth to power equals big bucks

December 3, 2006
Op-Chart
New on the Web: Politics as Usual
By K. DANIEL GLOVER and MIKE ESSL

Excerpt

You might think that with the kind of rhetoric bloggers regularly muster against politicians, they would never work for them. But you would be wrong.

Over the past few years, bloggers have won millions of fans by speaking truth to power — even the powers in their own parties — and presenting a fresh, outsider perspective. They are the pamphleteers of the 21st century, revolutionary “citizen journalists” motivated by personal idealism and an unwavering confidence that they can reform American politics.
--MORE--

Big media versus cyber surfers

Dotcom mania returns

Glynn Davis

Published : Wed 22 Nov, 2006


There’s no doubt about it, the big media companies are in a spin. They are under threat from a growing band of small, fleet-footed upstarts who are creating websites of user-generated content.

The problem with these sites for Big Media is that they are proving such terrific social networking platforms that they are attracting young people in their millions and are quickly becoming their preferred media option above the traditional formats of newspapers and TV.

Needless to say, the likes of News International, Trinity Mirror, Emap, Daily Mail and Pearson, along with the large media agencies such as WPP, are struggling to work out how best to react to this phenomenon. They are facing a market where their audience of the future is drifting away in their droves.

Evidence of the seriousness of the situation was the move by the mighty Rupert Murdoch to purchase social networking site MySpace last year for $580m. At the time this was regarded as a pretty full price but in recent months it has been called the deal-of-the-century by some media industry professionals.

This is because, compared with the recent $1.65bn that Google splashed out for the video sharing website YouTube, it may well be a steal. Whatever the potential of such sites you cannot escape the fact that these are ludicrously high prices to pay for businesses that have yet to generate any meaningful revenues.

Big media versus cyber surfers: Broadband internet taking TV and print audience

It might not be too off-the-mark to suggest that these social networking sites are as insanely valued as any of the dotcom stocks that roamed the virtual planet of the late 1990s. We have entered another period of internet land grab where the biggest pockets initially prevail, but also run the risk of paying a high price for their actions. Witness yesterday’s hot website, old pals get together, Friends Reunited. Bought last year by ITV for £120m, now it is falling fast in consumers’ affections, according to a recent YouGov Brand Index poll.

Murdoch famously missed most of the boat on the dotcom boom-and-bust luckily avoiding pumping too much of his cash into helping further inflate the bubble.
But this time he is pretty gung-ho about investing in internet businesses.

And so he might because it is a sensible countermeasure to put in place as the media industry is undergoing a seismic shift with consumers moving from the print and TV channels and onto online platforms. Research from Credit Suisse found that households with internet access watched four to five hours less TV a week than those without, and for 12-to-24-year-olds the internet is now the dominant entertainment source.

But let’s not forget that a marriage between old and new media can end in tears as we have seen all too clearly before. Remember the Time Warner purchase of AOL – what a disaster that was. And then there were the internet purchases by German-based media giant Bertelsmann by its Chief Executive Thomas Middelhoff who had designs on creating a world leader in new media. This time around the company prefers to cautiously develop its own social networking site rather than splash out on a costly bolt-on acquisition.

What we are really questioning about these moves by Big Media today is that they are paying too high a price for social networking and user-generated-content businesses when there are scant traditional metrics available to calculate their true worth.


Big media versus cyber surfers: Youth market tough to crack

Yes, we admit that they do draw in millions of youngsters who are spending increasing amounts of their time on such sites – sharing stories, videos and music with their new like-minded "friends".

And we also admit that this young demographic has become ever-more important to advertisers in recent times as Big Media doesn’t want to run the risk of entirely losing their links with this audience who are choosing to shun traditional media channels. But in all this frenzied activity there seems to have been a few points missed. For one thing, while these sites attract many millions of young people, there is very little cash spent when they get there. This is because one of the most appealing aspects of these sites is that they effectively represent free entertainment. This makes the prospect of monetising them all the more difficult for their Big Media owners.

They are seeking to engineer revenue from them in a way that avoids rocking the boat and pushing them too much towards being a corporate entity. If this were to happen then we would undoubtedly see a migration of many of their users to the numerous other sites that are springing up and are deemed to be of a more cutting-edge and less corporate bent.

It is therefore a mighty fine line that Big Media treads in trying to extract cash out of these people who are not only difficult to find, but when they are found then they are very reluctant recipients of advertising. They are therefore a particularly expensive group to access.


Big media versus cyber surfers: Affluent 50+ forgotten as ad spend rushes the Net

This makes them a very different beast to the over-50s who are generally a cost-efficient bunch to access because they are easy to find as many remain relatively heavy users of traditional media (although they are also increasingly frequent users of the internet). And they are pretty receptive to advertising as they are used to receiving it through these recognised points of contact.

The only thing is that these people have pretty much been forgotten about as the media companies and brand owners have chosen to flock to the latest online sites in search of the lesser-spotted (or more spotty as the case may be!) 18-to-30 year-olds.

With this desertion is it any wonder that we have seen a fall off in the levels of TV advertising. For example, ITV experienced a fall of around 18% in the third quarter and Channel 4 suffered a 6%-7% decline this year, and predicts the same next year.
Could it be that Channel 4 has suffered less of a fall because it has pandered more to the whims of the 18-to-30 year-old market with its myriad reality TV shows and this has ensured it has retained more of its advertisers?

In contrast, advertising online has continued to grow. IPA Bellwether found that the number of companies spending more than 15% of their marketing budgets on the internet had risen sharply this year to the point that it is now double the level of the peak of the dotcom boom in 2000.

The advertising that has been delivered – via the traditional channels of print and TV – to older consumers has been largely irrelevant, according to US research from Focalyst (involving ad group WPP), which found that almost 25% of people over 42 years old are insulted by the advertising messages that companies are sending them.

The view was that overly-general messages, based on stereotypes, were being delivered – in stark contrast to the heavily segmented approach taken by advertisers when trying to appeal to the 18-to-30 market – because of the belief that many people in this age group were unwilling to change brands.

However, the research found that this was untrue and that as many as 66% of people based their purchasing decisions not on "brands" but on "value", thereby suggesting that this group are not half as stuck-in-their-ways as many media professionals would have us believe.

What also seems to have been forgotten is that this group have plenty of disposable income in their pockets. Unlike many younger people whose live-for-today mentality has played a major part in driving up the personal levels of debt in the UK to unprecedented highs.

For many such individuals the capacity for spending will surely become severely restricted as interest rates gradually move further upwards; unlike their parents who are likely to be far less indebted and have greater freedom to respond with their wallets to well-targeted advertising campaigns.


Big media versus cyber surfers: Fashion victim risk of Big Media make niche plays look good

But until we see such targeted campaigns that appeal to the older consumer then the only people opening their wallets with any great frequency look likely to be the large media companies, as they fight it out for the right to buy the very latest whizz-bang social networking site – yours for only $2bn.

Against this backdrop small media companies look a much more enticing prospect for investors than their larger rivals. With their niche market positions they have proven to be something of a safe haven of late and there looks to be more mileage in this subsector, particularly as consolidation at the bottom end continues to pick up pace.

We believe that business publishers in particular represent an attractive proposition with their relatively secure subscription and advertising bases. While these businesses are also having to react to their audiences moving online this is taking place at a much more manageable speed than with younger consumers who are flocking to the likes of MySpace at an increasing pace.


Regards,

Glynn Davis
for The Daily Reckoning

http://www.dailyreckoning.co.uk/article/221120063.html