RadioBanter - Fake news from Washington

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Shortwave (https://www.radiobanter.com/shortwave/)

- - Fake news from Washington (https://www.radiobanter.com/shortwave/65106-fake-news-washington.html)

Fake news from Washington

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans. But Federal agencies are
busy feeding "news" videos to TV, as if TV news doesn't already have
sufficient credibility problems.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/19/politics/19gao.html?

The New York Times
February 19, 2005
Administration Is Warned About Its 'News' Videos
By ANNE E. KORNBLUT

WASHINGTON, Feb. 18 - The comptroller general has issued a blanket
warning that reminds federal agencies they may not produce newscasts
promoting administration policies without clearly stating that the
government itself is the source.

Twice in the last two years, agencies of the federal government have
been caught distributing prepackaged television programs that used
paid spokesmen acting as newscasters and, in violation of federal law,
failed to disclose the administration's role in developing and
financing them.

And those were not isolated incidents, David M. Walker, the
comptroller general, said in a letter dated Thursday that put all
agency heads on notice about the practice.

In fact, it has become increasingly common for federal agencies to
adopt the public relations tactic of producing "video news releases"
that look indistinguishable from authentic newscasts and, as
ready-made and cost-free reports, are sometimes picked up by local
news programs. It is illegal for the government to produce or
distribute such publicity material domestically without disclosing its
own role.

Mr. Walker, who as comptroller general is chief of the Government
Accountability Office, Congress's investigative arm, said in his
letter: "While agencies generally have the right to disseminate
information about their policies and activities, agencies may not use
appropriated funds to produce or distribute prepackaged news stories
intended to be viewed by television audiences that conceal or do not
clearly identify for the television viewing audience that the agency
was the source of those materials."

"It is not enough," he added, "that the contents of an agency's
communication may be unobjectionable."

Mr. Walker's letter was made available late Friday afternoon by
Democrats on Capitol Hill. Asked for a response Friday night, the
White House had no immediate comment.

The two best-known cases of such video news releases - one concerning
the new Medicare law, the other an antidrug campaign by the Bush
administration - drew sharp rebukes from the G.A.O. after separate
investigations last year found that the agencies involved had violated
the law.

Those cases were followed by disclosures that the government had paid
at least one conservative commentator, Armstrong Williams, to promote
the administration's No Child Left Behind education measure and had
put two other conservative writers on the federal payroll to help
develop programs. These episodes have prompted calls from Democrats
for stricter oversight of the administration's publicity practices,
which have cost millions of dollars of federal revenue.

In the Medicare case, a video made in the style of a newscast featured
a spokeswoman named Karen Ryan who claimed to be reporting from
Washington on Medicare law changes strongly backed by the
administration but opposed by many Democrats, who consider them a
windfall for the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. In part of
one script, she said that "all people with Medicare will be able to
get coverage that will lower their prescription drug spending."

Often there is an intermediary in the process: a public relations firm
hired by a government agency to produce a polished video and direct
other aspects of a publicity drive.

One centrally involved firm is Ketchum, a giant in the public
relations industry whose representatives arranged for both the
Medicare video and the contract with Mr. Williams, a pact that is now
under investigation by three government agencies. Ketchum has received
$97 million in government public relations contracts since 2001.

The G.A.O. letter did not caution agencies to curtail their publicity
practices, telling them simply to adhere to disclosure requirements.

"Prepackaged news stories," Mr. Walker wrote, "can be utilized without
violating the law, so long as there is clear disclosure to the
television viewing audience that this material was prepared by or in
cooperation with the government department or agency."

But Democrats said they hoped the letter would lead to tougher
scrutiny of what they describe as an aggressive publicity machine
within the administration.

"The G.A.O. is sending a clear message to the Bush administration:
shut down the propaganda mill," Senator Frank R. Lautenberg of New
Jersey said in a statement on Friday. "The G.A.O. is simply telling
the White House to stop manipulating media, stop paying journalists
and be straight with the American people."

Joel Rubin wrote:

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans.

Huh? I've got a stack of VOA QSL's here.

What's your problem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

The point is that in this country it is illegal for the government to
trick the governed, or to attempt to trick the governed. That is how
totalitarians behave.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:40:48 -0500, dxAce
wrote:

Joel Rubin wrote:

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans.

Huh? I've got a stack of VOA QSL's here.

What's your problem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

David wrote:

The point is that in this country it is illegal for the government to
trick the governed, or to attempt to trick the governed. That is how
totalitarians behave.

You need to try to explain things AFTER you take your meds, 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Edijucate yourself and learn how to read between the lines
-- .....................
.....................
and you won't be tricked.
cuhulin

-=jd=- wrote:

On Mon 21 Feb 2005 09:48:20a, David wrote in message
:

The point is that in this country it is illegal for the government to
trick the governed, or to attempt to trick the governed. That is how
totalitarians behave.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:40:48 -0500, dxAce
wrote:

Joel Rubin wrote:

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans.

Huh? I've got a stack of VOA QSL's here.

What's your problem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Hmmm... dxAce replied that he has received "a stack of VOA QSL's" in
response to another poster mentioning that it was prohibited. Then you
(David) replied that it's "illegal for a government to "trick the
governed" ala "totalitarians". Exactly how does offering a reception report
and requesting a QSL in return equate to "tricking" anyone? Exactly how
does offering a reception report and requesting a QSL in return indicate a
totalitarian form of government? Just so we have a point of reference for
where your mind is at, do you find it particularly difficult to distinguish
the difference between a mere reception report and the subsequent receipt
of a QSL from a "video news release" or a "prepackaged news story"? If I
were to request a QSL from a foreign language broadcaster (one I was not
fluent in), would I have been "tricked by totalitarians" somehow - merely
by offering a reception report and receiving a QSL in return?

Thank you.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

The thread is about government initiated fake news, not QSL cards.

On 21 Feb 2005 15:46:12 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Mon 21 Feb 2005 09:48:20a, David wrote in message
:

The point is that in this country it is illegal for the government to
trick the governed, or to attempt to trick the governed. That is how
totalitarians behave.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:40:48 -0500, dxAce
wrote:

Joel Rubin wrote:

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans.

Huh? I've got a stack of VOA QSL's here.

What's your problem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Hmmm... dxAce replied that he has received "a stack of VOA QSL's" in
response to another poster mentioning that it was prohibited. Then you
(David) replied that it's "illegal for a government to "trick the
governed" ala "totalitarians". Exactly how does offering a reception report
and requesting a QSL in return equate to "tricking" anyone? Exactly how
does offering a reception report and requesting a QSL in return indicate a
totalitarian form of government? Just so we have a point of reference for
where your mind is at, do you find it particularly difficult to distinguish
the difference between a mere reception report and the subsequent receipt
of a QSL from a "video news release" or a "prepackaged news story"? If I
were to request a QSL from a foreign language broadcaster (one I was not
fluent in), would I have been "tricked by totalitarians" somehow - merely
by offering a reception report and receiving a QSL in return?

-=jd=-

David wrote:

The thread is about government initiated fake news, not QSL cards.

Perhaps, 'tard boy... but I was responding to Mr. Rubins assertion that it was
somehow illegal or a promotion of propaganda to send someone in the USA a QSL
card.

You however jumped in with your typical 'tard boy ****... and that is indeed
what most everything you spew is... ****.

Please, take your meds, seek some therapy, or do whatever you must to avoid your
little 'episodes'.

Leave the SWL'ing and the DX'ing to the big boys.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

''Hatred'' is some kind of buzz word?

The Executive Branch (and much of the other two) is (are) totally
corrupt but rather than being motivated by my dislike for them I am
compelled to act by my love for the United Statesn and its
Constitution, and my faith that once decent people find out what's
really going on they'll behave like courageous patriots, rather than
like ostriches unable to admit they've been conned.

On 21 Feb 2005 16:34:34 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

David wrote:

''Hatred'' is some kind of buzz word?

The Executive Branch (and much of the other two) is (are) totally
corrupt but rather than being motivated by my dislike for them I am
compelled to act by my love for the United Statesn and its
Constitution, and my faith that once decent people find out what's
really going on they'll behave like courageous patriots, rather than
like ostriches unable to admit they've been conned.

Me thinks it's you who has been conned, 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

They know that. They just want a reason to argue.

"David" wrote in message
...
The thread is about government initiated fake news, not QSL cards.

CW wrote:

They know that. They just want a reason to argue.

No arguement here, simply pointing out the facts.

The facts flew right over your head, didn't they?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

running dogg wrote:

-=jd=- wrote:

On Mon 21 Feb 2005 09:48:20a, David wrote in message
:

The point is that in this country it is illegal for the government to
trick the governed, or to attempt to trick the governed. That is how
totalitarians behave.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:40:48 -0500, dxAce
wrote:

Joel Rubin wrote:

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans.

Huh? I've got a stack of VOA QSL's here.

What's your problem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Hmmm... dxAce replied that he has received "a stack of VOA QSL's" in
response to another poster mentioning that it was prohibited. Then you
(David) replied that it's "illegal for a government to "trick the
governed" ala "totalitarians". Exactly how does offering a reception report
and requesting a QSL in return equate to "tricking" anyone? Exactly how
does offering a reception report and requesting a QSL in return indicate a
totalitarian form of government? Just so we have a point of reference for
where your mind is at, do you find it particularly difficult to distinguish
the difference between a mere reception report and the subsequent receipt
of a QSL from a "video news release" or a "prepackaged news story"? If I
were to request a QSL from a foreign language broadcaster (one I was not
fluent in), would I have been "tricked by totalitarians" somehow - merely
by offering a reception report and receiving a QSL in return?

-=jd=-

Ask "tianli". He seems to think that requesting a QSL from China Radio
International equates to approval of the Chinese Communist Party.
Furthermore, he thinks that buying Chinese made radios and other
products equates to same.

I think you're mistaken, as usual. I don't think that was the point Tianli was trying
to make at all.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

www.dogpile.com DXing And How To Obtain QSL Cards.
fed govt is not going to interfere with anybody listening to Shortwave
Radio and Ham Radio Operators who like to obtain QSL Cards as part of
their Hobby.
cuhulin

You seem to have issues with linear thought.

Once again: propaganda is illegal, immoral, and ultimately harmful to
we the people. Bush, nonetheless, insists on employing it. He is a
traitor. His supporters would be traitors too if they weren't so far
removed from reality as to have an insanity defense.
\
On 22 Feb 2005 00:57:50 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Mon 21 Feb 2005 04:28:31p, "CW" wrote in message
:

They know that. They just want a reason to argue.

"David" wrote in message
...
The thread is about government initiated fake news, not QSL cards.

Are you agreeing with Rickets that requesting a QSL from VOA equates to
being tricked by a totalitarian govt.?? I must be blind as a bat. I can't,
for the life of me, find the slimmest, remotest, wispiest thread of
commonality between the two. I bet Rickets *ROOLZ* at playing "Six-Degrees
of Kevin Bacon"!

-=jd=-

David wrote:

You seem to have issues with linear thought.

You simply seem to be having trouble swallowing those meds. You got something
else in your mouth, 'tard boy?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Propaganda is illegal? Listen to all that propaganda from CanaDUHDUHDUH!
y'all talk funny too :{)
cuhulin

The right,proper way to obtain QSL cards,in my opinion,is to EARN
them.Anybody can buy them from eBay or elsewhere.And no,I do not own any
QSL cards,not a single one.
cuhulin

On 21 Feb 2005 15:46:12 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Mon 21 Feb 2005 09:48:20a, David wrote in message
:

The point is that in this country it is illegal for the government to
trick the governed, or to attempt to trick the governed. That is how
totalitarians behave.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:40:48 -0500, dxAce
wrote:

Joel Rubin wrote:

Here, the VOA can't send a QSL card to Dubuque, because it might
promote a propaganda service to Americans.

Huh? I've got a stack of VOA QSL's here.

What's your problem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Hmmm... dxAce replied that he has received "a stack of VOA QSL's" in
response to another poster mentioning that it was prohibited. Then you
(David) replied that it's "illegal for a government to "trick the
governed" ala "totalitarians". Exactly how does offering a reception report
and requesting a QSL in return equate to "tricking" anyone? Exactly how
does offering a reception report and requesting a QSL in return indicate a
totalitarian form of government? Just so we have a point of reference for
where your mind is at, do you find it particularly difficult to distinguish
the difference between a mere reception report and the subsequent receipt
of a QSL from a "video news release" or a "prepackaged news story"? If I
were to request a QSL from a foreign language broadcaster (one I was not
fluent in), would I have been "tricked by totalitarians" somehow - merely
by offering a reception report and receiving a QSL in return?

You're combining two different things from two different postings.

The point is that the VOA is prohibited from interacting in certain
interactions with U.S. citizens and residents because Congress didn't
want to create a domestic propaganda agency. (By the way, note the
sponsorship scandal in Canada.)

I had thought it included QSL cards but apparently not. But, for
example, when they have contests, you always hear that this contest is
not open to citizens or residents of the U.S.

On the other hand, the Bush administration has been making "news"
segments for local stations and distributing them to U.S. TV stations
without disclosing their origin and agenda.

http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/usia/usiahome/overview.pdf
(USIA publication)
(Page 36)

[quote]
Since its founding, USIA has been
prohibited by Congress from directing its
informational programs toward its own
citizens. By design, under the United States
Information and Educational Exchange Act
of 1948, USIA’s informational programs
have been directed only to overseas
audiences. An amendment to that act in
February 1990 authorized the Director of
the U.S. Information Agency to make
certain products available to the Archivist of
the United States for domestic distribution.
Motion pictures, films, videotapes, and
other material prepared for dissemination
abroad are available 12 years after
material is first sent abroad, or, in the case
of material not disseminated abroad, 12
years after the preparation of the material.
[close quote]

"David" wrote in message
...

Once again: propaganda is illegal, immoral, and ultimately harmful to
we the people.

Propaganda is illegal? Someone better go round up Michael Moore, George
Soros, MoveOn.org and the rest of their ilk. They already got Dan Rather.

It doesn't state anywhere that they were "fake"!

In fact, it has become increasingly common for federal agencies to
adopt the public relations tactic of producing "video news releases"
that look indistinguishable from authentic newscasts and, as
ready-made and cost-free reports, are sometimes picked up by local
news programs.

This is done routinely by many organizations and "interests" not just the
government. The TV media love it because it is "ready to air" with no cost
to the media outlet. If you have watched a "medical" news bit you have
seen a "video news releases" by a health organization with their own agenda.
Free advertising with the media sometimes airing them with little to no
verification.

It is very prevalent in the TV media business.
Sometimes you may not even realize what you are watching.

"running dogg" wrote in message
...

Ask "tianli". He seems to think that requesting a QSL from China Radio
International equates to approval of the Chinese Communist Party.
Furthermore, he thinks that buying Chinese made radios and other
products equates to same.

Mind reader, eh!? Very poor at that.
If not please quote me. Tap tap tap...

This site must be yours http://www.running-dog.co.uk/

tianli_ wrote:

"running dogg" wrote in message
...

Ask "tianli". He seems to think that requesting a QSL from China Radio
International equates to approval of the Chinese Communist Party.
Furthermore, he thinks that buying Chinese made radios and other
products equates to same.

Mind reader, eh!? Very poor at that.
If not please quote me. Tap tap tap...

This site must be yours http://www.running-dog.co.uk/

Nope, not me. I'm an American.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

When the government does it it violates many laws.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:27:24 -0600, "MnMikew"
wrote:

"David" wrote in message
.. .

Once again: propaganda is illegal, immoral, and ultimately harmful to
we the people.

Propaganda is illegal? Someone better go round up Michael Moore, George
Soros, MoveOn.org and the rest of their ilk. They already got Dan Rather.

Name ONE.

"David" wrote in message
...
When the government does it it violates many laws.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:27:24 -0600, "MnMikew"
wrote:

"David" wrote in message
.. .

Once again: propaganda is illegal, immoral, and ultimately harmful to
we the people.

Propaganda is illegal? Someone better go round up Michael Moore, George
Soros, MoveOn.org and the rest of their ilk. They already got Dan Rather.

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/elect...propaganda.htm

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:58:15 -0600, "MnMikew"
wrote:

Name ONE.

"David" wrote in message
.. .
When the government does it it violates many laws.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:27:24 -0600, "MnMikew"
wrote:

"David" wrote in message
.. .

Once again: propaganda is illegal, immoral, and ultimately harmful to
we the people.

Propaganda is illegal? Someone better go round up Michael Moore, George
Soros, MoveOn.org and the rest of their ilk. They already got Dan Rather.