Archives for category: Media
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Chris Hughes: It’s Time to Break Up Facebook

By dianeravitch
May 12, 2019 //
15

Chris Hughes co-founded Facebook with Mark Zuckerberg. He is no longer part of the company but left with a considerable fortune. For a time, he was publisher of The New Republic. In this essay, which appeared in The New York Times, he says again and again that he really likes his old friend Mark. Great guy. A good, kind person. But dear friend Mark has too much power, and no one should have that much power.

Here is an excerpt.

America was built on the idea that power should not be concentrated in any one person, because we are all fallible. That’s why the founders created a system of checks and balances. They didn’t need to foresee the rise of Facebook to understand the threat that gargantuan companies would pose to democracy. Jefferson and Madison were voracious readers of Adam Smith, who believed that monopolies prevent the competition that spurs innovation and leads to economic growth.

A century later, in response to the rise of the oil, railroad and banking trusts of the Gilded Age, the Ohio Republican John Sherman said on the floor of Congress: “If we will not endure a king as a political power, we should not endure a king over the production, transportation and sale of any of the necessities of life. If we would not submit to an emperor, we should not submit to an autocrat of trade with power to prevent competition and to fix the price of any commodity.” The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 outlawed monopolies. More legislation followed in the 20th century, creating legal and regulatory structures to promote competition and hold the biggest companies accountable. The Department of Justice broke up monopolies like Standard Oil and AT&T.

For many people today, it’s hard to imagine government doing much of anything right, let alone breaking up a company like Facebook. This isn’t by coincidence.

Starting in the 1970s, a small but dedicated group of economists, lawyers and policymakers sowed the seeds of our cynicism. Over the next 40 years, they financed a network of think tanks, journals, social clubs, academic centers and media outlets to teach an emerging generation that private interests should take precedence over public ones. Their gospel was simple: “Free” markets are dynamic and productive, while government is bureaucratic and ineffective. By the mid-1980s, they had largely managed to relegate energetic antitrust enforcement to the history books.

This shift, combined with business-friendly tax and regulatory policy, ushered in a period of mergers and acquisitions that created megacorporations. In the past 20 years, more than 75 percent of American industries, from airlines to pharmaceuticals, have experienced increased concentration, and the average size of public companies has tripled. The results are a decline in entrepreneurship, stalled productivity growth, and higher prices and fewer choices for consumers.

The same thing is happening in social media and digital communications. Because Facebook so dominates social networking, it faces no market-based accountability. This means that every time Facebook messes up, we repeat an exhausting pattern: first outrage, then disappointment and, finally, resignation….

Facebook has earned the prize of domination. It is worth half a trillion dollars and commands, by my estimate, more than 80 percent of the world’s social networking revenue. It is a powerful monopoly, eclipsing all of its rivals and erasing competition from the social networking category. This explains why, even during the annus horribilis of 2018, Facebook’s earnings per share increased by an astounding 40 percent compared with the year before. (I liquidated my Facebook shares in 2012, and I don’t invest directly in any social media companies.)…

The vibrant marketplace that once drove Facebook and other social media companies to compete to come up with better products has virtually disappeared. This means there’s less chance of start-ups developing healthier, less exploitative social media platforms. It also means less accountability on issues like privacy.

Just last month, Facebook seemingly tried to bury news that it had stored tens of millions of user passwords in plain text format, which thousands of Facebook employees could see. Competition alone wouldn’t necessarily spur privacy protection — regulation is required to ensure accountability — but Facebook’s lock on the market guarantees that users can’t protest by moving to alternative platforms….

Hughes is especially concerned about Zuckerberg’s “unilateral” power over the speech and expression of two billion people. A fine of $5 Billion is a slap on the wrist. When facing a threat of a fine that large, Facebook’s stock value went up by $30 billion.

Hughes has two recommendations:

First, that Facebook be broken up by compelling it to divest itself of WhatsApp and Instagram.

Second, that the federal government create a regulatory agency to oversee tech companies and assure consumer privacy.

In normal times, policymakers in D.C. might listen and consider such a bold proposal. But these days, given a federal administration dedicated to deregulating everything, Hughes’ ideas will have to wait for new leadership.

 

Categories Accountability, Competition, Deregulation, Education Reform, Media, Technology

Anthony Cody Dissects Alexander Russo’s Defense of Betsy DeVos

By dianeravitch
April 15, 2019 //
19

 

Anthony Cody was taken aback when he saw that pundit Alexander Russo was critical of the media for ganging up against Betsy DeVos when she explained at a budget hearing why she was defunding the Special Olympics. Russo seemed to think that the media critique of DeVos may have been the work of “advocates and trolls,” special interests blowing up a story that was a Nothingburger. Russo treated the hearing as a ho-hum event, nothing new.

But Cody, who sat behind DeVos throughout the hearing, saw plenty that was new.

First, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro grilled DeVos about the new report by the Network for Public Education which documented that the federal Charter Schools Program had wasted nearly $1 billion on charter schools that either never opened or closed soon after opening. The basic issue was that the Department of Education was handing out millions of dollars without fact-checking the applications. Yet DeVos was seeking a $60 million increase for this slipshod, wasteful program while asking to cut or eliminate many other programs. Russo didn’t find that newsworthy.

There was another important story that Russo found to be not newsworthy. Anthony Cody became part of that story because of the expression on his face as he sat directly behind DeVos.

He writes:

“In fact, I wound up being a part of a whole OTHER viral story that Russo doesn’t even mention – the moment when Lucille Roybal-Allard asks DeVos to explain her absurd belief that larger class sizes may benefit students. And although I am indeed an advocate (if not a troll) I had very little to do with this clip going viral — 8.4 million views at last count.”

Cody complains that Russo has tried to set himself up as the “ethical minder” of education journalism. But anyone with an ethical barometer should be appalled every day by the unethical actions of DeVos, as she rolls back civil rights protections, undercuts students who were defrauded by for-profit “colleges,” and campaigns against the nation’s public schools. She is a novelty: the first person to lead either the Department of Education (established in 1980) or the U.S. Office of Education (established in 1867) who was actively opposed to public schools. That should be a daily story, kind of like having an Environmental Protection Agency head who doesn’t believe in protecting the environment.

I have my own beef with Russo.

In the spring of 2010, I published The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education.

It got a lot of attention because I had been deeply embedded in prominent rightwing think tanks (the Koret Task Force at the Hoover Institution and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute), and in the book  I renounced policies and a worldview I had espoused for years. It became a national bestseller. The very fact that anyone had changed her mind was a big deal.

Many months later, I was contacted by Russo. He invited me to meet with him at a cafe near my home in Brooklyn. We had a nice getting-to-know-you chat. I told him that I had cast the deciding vote in his favor as a judge of the Spencer Fellowships, and he thanked me. Towards the end of our meeting, he asked if I would be willing to read his book about the Green Dot charter chain and write a blurb for the jacket. I agreed to do so. I found the book informative and I wrote a blurb.

Some weeks later, a friend sent me Russo’s latest article, in which he criticized me and said I could not be trusted because I changed my mind and could do it again. I am paraphrasing here. Basically, he implied that I was an intellectual or political whore, lacking in sincerity or conviction.

I was stunned. As soon as I got over the shock of being attacked by someone I thought was a friend, I called his publisher and asked to speak to his editor. When I reached her, I said I wanted my blurb off his book. She explained that the jacket was in production, and it was too late. I read to her what Alexander Russo had written about me, and there was a long pause. She said, “I agree with you. We will take your blurb off the jacket.”

I have never mentioned his name since then, and hope I never again have reason to do so.

 

 

Categories Betsy DeVos, Class size, Education Reform, Ethics, Media

Jeff Bezos Refuses to be Extorted by AMI, Parent Company of the National Enquirer

By dianeravitch
February 9, 2019 //
42

AMI, the parent company of the National Enquirer, tried to extort Jeff Bezos, the multibillionaire owner of Amazon and the Washington Post. The lawyers threatened to post embarrassing photographs of him if he didn’t make certain statements that were untrue. Instead of bowing to their demands, he published their letters. His letter is wonderful.

It just goes to show that if you are a billionaire, you can laugh at extortionists.

The issue: AMI apparently doesn’t like the Washington Post coverage of the murder of Jamaal Khashoggi. It has a long history of protecting Trump and paying off women who want to sell their story of having a liaison with him.

Of interest to readers of this site: Austin Beutner, the superintendent of the LA public schools, was on the board of directors of AMI after his company invested in AMI.

Evercore Capital Partners, the controlling shareholder of American Media, Inc. (“AMI”), announced today that it has agreed to a recapitalization of AMI in partnership with Thomas H. Lee Partners (“THL”) that values the Company at $1.5 billion.

Evercore and THL investors will each fund approximately one-half of the total equity of $508 million in the recapitalization. Following the transaction, Evercore and THL will jointly control AMI.

“AMI has strong, well-established titles, consistent and substantial free cash flow, and terrific growth potential through advertising, pricing, brand extensions, the integration of the Weider transaction and new acquisitions. We are excited about the opportunity to partner with Evercore and David.”

The transaction will be structured as a recapitalization in which the original investors in the May 1999 purchase of AMI, led by Evercore, will sell their interests to the new investor group.

American Media Chairman, President & CEO David J. Pecker said, “This new capitalization of AMI better allows us to build a larger media company and makes the multi-billion dollar funds from Evercore and THL available to us. Thanks to the efforts of Austin Beutner and Evercore, our recent acquisition of Weider transformed us from a tabloid publisher into a consumer magazine company, and this new transaction will let us pursue even bigger targets. Thomas H. Lee Partners’ investment will be a great addition for AMI, not only in terms of capital, but also in their wealth of experience.”

Austin M. Beutner, Evercore President, said, “It has been a great and very profitable partnership with David Pecker and the team at AMI over the last four years and we look forward to the next phase of growth. As the company has proven itself in building significant value through acquisitions, and as the acquisition environment is becoming more favorable, we felt it prudent to recapitalize AMI in order to provide greater financial flexibility. We have partnered with our friends at THL in the past and look forward to continuing together the successful execution of AMI’s long-term strategy.”

Evercore Partners and Mr. Pecker acquired American Media in May of 1999. AMI purchased the Globe later that same year. Since then they have significantly enhanced the position and performance of AMI’s six tabloids, launched four successful new titles, become the leader in the country music magazine market, and recently purchased Weider Publications, the leading worldwide publisher of health and fitness titles, for $350 million. EBITDA has nearly doubled under their ownership.

 

 

Categories Los Angeles, Media

John Merrow: Reed Hastings Values Profit Over Principle

By dianeravitch
January 12, 2019 //
50

John Merrow deplores the willingness of billionaire Reed Hastings to pull one of its programs at the request of the Saudi government.

Merrow warns that Hastings is setting a dangerous precedent, where any government can demand censorship of any program that offends its laws or sensibilities. And Netflix will cave.

Merrow goes on to tell interesting insider stories about how Davis Guggenheim basically tried to appropriate Merrow’s footage of Michelle Rhee firing a principal on air to use in his propaganda film “Waiting for ‘Superman.'” Merrow expected to receive a reasonable payment for his work, and Guggenheim, with Hastings’ support, basically told him to take a walk or get lost or something. Eventually, Merrow’s production team did get paid, but he realized what unprincipled people he was dealing with. He wondered whether Guggenheim would edit his slick propaganda film which painted Rhee as a goddess of school reform, to acknowledge the cheating scandal that happened on her watch. Of course not!

Categories Media

Steven Schneider: Why Are Public School Students Disappearing from Movies and TV?

By dianeravitch
January 10, 2019 //
27

Stephen Singer has made a surprising observation: Public school students are being erased from TV, Movies, and Other Media. Why?

You will find his answer here.

Categories Media

Leonie Haimson Blasts Chalkbeat for Its Biased Coverage of Ed-Tech and “Personalized Learning”

By dianeravitch
December 20, 2018 //
49

Leonie Haimson is one of the nation’s sharpest critic of scams, especially in the area of ed-tech and online learning.

She is outraged that Chalkbeat posted an uncritical article about the scams now sold to schools. He clearly wanted to lump together the critics of Common Core (those “right wingers” [like me]) and the critics of “personalized learning,” who have the retrograde belief that children should be taught by teachers, not computers.

Pay attention to the funders of Chalkbeat (Gates; Walton; Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, and others who are pushing online learning and “personalized learning.”) They are listed at the end of this post. Don’t overlook the Anschutz Foundation. He is an evangelical Christian who produced “Waiting for ‘Superman,'” that anti-public school, anti-union propaganda film.

She writes:

Matt Barnum has posted an article at Chalkbeat on the controversy over online learning. I spent nearly an hour talking to him about its myriad problems, including the negative experiences of parents and students in schools where online learning predominates, serious privacy concerns because of all the data-mining by vendors that is involved, and a serious lack of research evidence — but the only quote he used from our conversation is one sentence: that the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy which I co-chair. has worked with allies in right-wing groups on the privacy issue.
Instead, when I spoke to him about this, I emphasized that the concerns about the expansion of online learning and its impact on privacy was shared by groups and individuals of all political persuasion, left right and center, and many parents with little interest in politics at all. That’s why our campaign against inBloom was so successful, and that’s why in NY State and elsewhere, parents and teachers in all nine states and districts that were participating were able to force them from dropping out of the program to share their children’s personal data and make it more accessible to vendors without parental consent. But he left that part out of my quote and his story as a whole, because it did not fit into his pre-ordained narrative.

Indeed, Barnum seemed eager to mischaracterize the opposition to so-called personalized learning as led by conservatives. He is also quick to frame the pushback vs Common Core in a similar fashion –as driven by many of the same right-wing groups — when one of the most successful protests against the standards occurred here in NY state, led by NY State Allies for Public Education, a coalition of mostly left-wing and politically moderate parents and teachers who also oppose the expansion of ed tech.

Barnum didn’t mention any of the other progressive groups, medical associations, and researchers across the country who are very concerned about the expansion of online learning in schools, including Screens and Kids, Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, the ACLU, Commonsense Media, National Education Policy Center, Parents Across America, the Badass Teachers Association and many others.
Nor did he bother to interview any of the many prominent progressive critics of ed tech like Diane Ravitch, Peter Greene or Audrey Watters. Nor did he acknowledge that Silicon Valley parents themselves are increasingly rejecting computerized learning, as reported in the terrific NY Times series by Nellie Bowles.

Instead, he quotes only one non-right wing critic of online learning by name– Merrie Najimy, the President of the Massachusetts teachers – while featuring many paragraphs of rosy spin from defenders of ed tech, like Diane Tavenner of Summit and Bethany Gross of CRPE, both funded by Gates and Zuckerberg.

Barnum cites a CRPE report also paid for by Gates that apparently says, oh yeah, teachers really like personalized learning – while ignoring the survey results in our Educator Toolkit for Teacher and Student Privacy, which showed widespread concern among teachers and administrators alike about the expansion of digital apps and online programs in our schools. He also quotes Randi Weingarten who, surprisingly, has nothing but kind words about the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, which has done absolutely nothing that I can think of to earn her confidence.

Amazingly, Barnum also manages to write an entire piece about edtech and personalized learning, Summit, Gates and Zuckerberg without once mentioning the issue of data privacy, the widespread occurrence of breaches, the potential misuse of algorithms, and the over-reach of student surveillance in schools. The only mention of the word “privacy” is in the one sentence that quotes me about working with conservative allies on the issue.

Quite an achievement and yet more evidence of a serious blind spot in Chalkbeat’s education coverage, reminiscent of their failure to cover the parent opposition against inBloom that started here in New York and led to such a firestorm across the country that more than 120 state student privacy laws have been passed as a result of the inBloom controversy since 2013.

There is more to read, and you should open the link to see her many links to other articles and reports.

Chalkbeat should be ashamed. Its sponsors are showing their hands.

Here is a list of Chalkbeat funders.

Ann & Hal Logan via The Denver Foundation*
Anna and John J. Sie Foundation*
Anna-Maria and Stephen Kellen Foundation
Awesome Without Borders
Azita Raji and Gary Syman
Ben & Lucy Ana Walton*
Better Education Institute, Inc.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Brett Family Foundation
Brooke Brown via the Carson Foundation*
Buell Foundation
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Carson Foundation
Chan Zuckerberg Initiative
Charles H. Revson Foundation
Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation
Christopher Gabrieli
CME Group
COGEN Co-working
Community Foundation of Greater Memphis
Community Foundation of New Jersey
Democracy Fund
Donnell-Kay Foundation
Doug and Wendy Kreeger
EdChoice
EDU21C Foundation
Elaine Berman
Eli Lilly and Company Foundation, Inc.
Elizabeth Aybar Conti
Elizabeth Haas Edersheim (In Kind)
Emma Bloomberg
Ford Foundation
Fry Foundation
Fund for Nonprofit News at The Miami Foundation
Gail Klapper
Gates Family Foundation
GEM Foundation
George T. Cameron Education Foundation
Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation partnership with the Knight Foundation
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (In Kind)
J.R. Hyde III Family Foundation Donor Advised Fund of the Community Foundation of Greater Memphis
Jim and Marsha McCormick
Kate Kennedy Reinemund and Jim Kennedy
Ken Hirsh
Kresge Foundation
La Vida Feliz Foundation
Lenfest Community Listening and Engagement Fund
Lilly Endowment Inc.
Maher Foundation
Margulf Foundation
Mark Zurack
Memphis Education Fund
Naomi and Michael Rosenfeld
Overdeck Family Foundation
Debra and Paul Appelbaum
Peter and Carmen L. Buck Foundation
Polk Bros. Foundation
Quinn Family Foundation
Ralph C. Wilson, Jr. Foundation
Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation, Inc.
Rick Smith
Rob Gary and Chris Watney
Rob Gary via the Piton Foundation*
Robert J. Yamartino and Maxine Sclar
Robert R. McCormick Foundation
Rose Community Foundation
Scott Gleason of O’Melveny & Myers (In Kind)
Scott Pearl
Silicon Valley Community Foundation
Skift (In Kind)
Spencer Foundation
Steans Family Foundation
Sue Lehmann
Susan Sawyers
Thalla-Marie and Heeten Choxi
The Assisi Foundation
The Anschutz Foundation
The Barton Family Foundation, a donor-advised fund of The Denver Foundation*
The Caswell Jin Foundation
The Colorado Health Foundation
The Colorado Trust
The Crown Family
The Denver Foundation
The Durst Organization (In Kind)
The Glick Fund, a fund of the Central Indiana Community Foundation
The Indianapolis Foundation, a CICF affiliate
The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
The Joyce Foundation
The McGregor Fund
The Moriah Fund
The Skillman Foundation
The Walton Family Foundation
Victoria Foundation
Walentas Foundation Ltd.
Washington Square Legal Services/NYU Business Transactions Clinic (In Kind)
Wend Ventures
Widmeyer, A FinnPartners Company (In Kind)
Will and Christina McConathy*
W.K. Kellogg Foundation
Yoobi (In Kind)

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Media, Technology

Education Week: Bias or Bad Reporting?

By dianeravitch
October 27, 2018 //
34

Education Week posted an article by Madeline Will reporting that the National Education Association had lost 17,000 members since the Janus decision. The NEA has more than 3 million members. It had already reported that it immediately lost 88,000 members who were paying “agency fees,” paying dues reluctantly while collecting benefits negotiated by the union. The NEA has projected a possible loss of up to 300,000 members and planning to cut its budget.

Where does the report come from about the recent loss of 17,000 members? The 74, an anti-union, pro-privatization website funded by billionaires and founded by anti-union Campbell Brown. What was the source of The 74 report? Mike Antonucci, a writer who specializes in spying on unions and sending out any bad news he can find. Antonucci is probably the most virulently anti-union reporter in the nation. He calls his website the “education intelligence agency.” He won an award from the National Right to Work Committee in 2004. He writes for The 74 and also for the rightwing Center for Education Reform. Both organizations are allies of Betsy DeVos.

Wouldn’t you think that a responsible journalist would identify the biases of her sources? Might she at least identify them as “anti-union,” which is an accurate description?

Meanwhile, the Janus decision will allow non-dues-paying members to enjoy the benefits negotiated for them by the union to which they do not pay dues. They are called “free riders.”

Categories Media, Unions

Do You Live in Tulsa? “Backpack” Is Coming to You!

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2018 //
5

Lucky you!

TulsaKids magazine is hosting a screening and panel discussion of Backpack Full of Cash on September 20th followed by a week long run of the film at the Circle Theater there.

Here’s TulsaKids Magazine blurb about the event and the link to their page http://www.tulsakids.com/Web-2018/Backpack-Full-of-Cash-Screening-and-Panel-Discussion/

When: Thursday, Sept. 7, 7-9:30 p.m.

Where: Circle Cinema, 10 S. Lewis Ave.

What and Why:

With the expansion of charter schools in Tulsa and around the state, parents and others interested in public education have questions. What is a charter school? How are charter schools funded? Who controls charter schools? Last spring, Oklahoma teachers walked out to call attention to, not only low pay, but lack of resources in the schools. Are charter schools helping or hurting already strained resources?

To help you learn more, TulsaKids Media is sponsoring a screening of the documentary “Backpack Full of Cash” followed by a panel discussion on Thurs., Sept. 20, 7 p.m., at Circle Cinema.

Panelists include: Dr. John Cox, public school superintendent and candidate for Oklahoma State Superintendent; Eric Doss, director of quality charter services, Oklahoma Public School Resource Center (former administrator for Tulsa School of Arts & Sciences); Jennettie Marshall, Tulsa Public Schools Board member; Rob Miller, superintendent of Bixby Public Schools, Oklahoma Assistant Superintendent of the Year; Darryl Bright, Citizens United for a Better Education System.

Come join this important community dialogue.

Remember: Students and Teachers always get a discount at Circle Cinema! Tickets are $9.50 for adults, and $7.50 for students, teachers, military and seniors.

Learn more about the film at http://www.backpackfullofcash.com., and purchase tickets at http://www.circlecinema.com.

Categories Education Reform, Media, Oklahoma, Resistance

Pete Tucker: Why is the Washington Post Wild for Maryland’s Republican Governor and Hostile to His Opponent?

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2018 //
11

Pete Tucker, a freelance journalist in D.C., is puzzled by the Washington Post’s spin on the Maryland Governor’s Race.

He amply documents the Post’s friendly coverage of Republican Governor Larry Hogan, and its consistently unfriendly treatment of his Democratic opponent, Ben Jealous.

Hogan supports school choice. Hogan appointed Checker Finn and Andy Smarick, two hard-line advocates of school choice, to the State Board of Education. Ben Jealous supports public schools and was endorsed by the Network for Public Education Action Fund.

Tucker writes:

“In 1966 Ann Todd and Fred Jealous couldn’t get married in their home state of Maryland because they were an interracial couple. Five decades later their son Ben Jealous is the Democratic nominee for Maryland governor.

“If Jealous wins in November he will become Maryland’s first African-American governor, and the nation’s third-ever elected black governor. (Jealous hopes to share this latter distinction with two fellow Democrats also endorsed by Bernie Sanders: Andrew Gillum of Florida and Stacey Abrams of Georgia, who would also be the first-ever black woman governor.) There are presently no black governors in office.

“Jealous, the former and youngest-ever head of the NAACP, faces stiff competition, and not just from incumbent Republican Gov. Larry Hogan. The Washington Post – which dominates D.C.’s media landscape, including vote-rich Maryland suburbs in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties – has set its sights on defeating Jealous.

“This may seem bizarre. Why would the Post throw its weight behind a Republican instead of an historic candidate like Jealous? Especially when the Post’s aggressive reporting on President Trump has led to record-breaking readership and heaps of praise from Democrats.

“But the Post’s resistance to Trump is a mirage, and the paper’s politics remain far from progressive.

“Once Trump isn’t around, what will be left for the Post to resist? Surely not war, the Post supports all of them. Not climate change, where the paper’s record is mixed at best and includes support for both fracking and the Keystone XL pipeline. And not inequality, as the Post is owned by the richest man alive, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. Like Amazon, the Post is anti-union – that is, against workers collectively organizing to improve their lot, an essential tool in addressing inequality.

“It’s these stances – along with the Post’s record of targeting candidates with strong African-American and progressive support – that help explain the paper’s backing of Hogan and over-the-top opposition to Jealous (who I am supporting). Still, the extent to which the Post is willing to go to sway the election is surprising.”

The Post coverage emphasizes how “popular” Hogan is.

Tucker says,

“Maryland has twice as many registered Democrats as Republicans, so Hogan needs strong Democratic support to win reelection; and the Post is determined to see that he gets it.

“Hogan, the Post explains, is widely admired for his “winning personality” and “personal appeal.” He’s just a regular guy who is “real down-to-earth,” “follows his gut” and “knows his way around a barroom.”

LWith fawning coverage like this it’s unsurprising that Hogan is “astonishingly,” “stunningly” and “hugely” popular, as the Post tells it. (The word “popular” is used so much one reader asked if the Post had exchanged it for Hogan’s first name.)”

But when the Post covers Jealous, it paints him as a leftist who wants to “soak the rich” to pay for his expensive ideas.

Tucker writes:

“Ben Jealous’s platform – which includes a $15 an hour minimum wage, single-payer health care and free state college tuition – is liked by Marylanders. So the Post downplays these policies (which it opposes), and paints Jealous as a “coup leader” who is too radical to vote for.

“Jealous’s “left-wing advance” is “irresponsible” and “anything but… centrist,” the Post tells readers. His “craven,” “reckless” “left-wing platform” will “blow a Chesapeake Bay-sized hole in the state budget.””

All the more reason for the voters of Maryland to ignore the Post and vote for Ben Jealous and begin to repair the state.

Categories Bias, Maryland, Media

Campbell Brown Warns Newspapers Either to Cooperate with Facebook or Die

By dianeravitch
August 15, 2018 //
57

Facebook hired Campbell Brown–notorious for her hatred of unions and public schools and for her close friendship with Betsy DeVos–to represent the tech giant with news organization.

Recently, she convened a behind-closed-doors meeting with news executives and warned them that if they didn’t cooperate with Facebook, they would be dying “like in a hospice.”

During a closed-door and off-the-record meeting last week, top Facebook executive Campbell Brown reportedly warned news publishers that refusal to cooperate with the tech behemoth’s efforts to “revitalize journalism” will leave media outlets dying “like in a hospice.”

Reported first by The Australian under a headline which read “Work With Facebook or Die: Zuckerberg,” the social media giant has insisted the comments were taken out of context, even as five individuals who attended the four-hour meeting corroborated what Brown had stated.

“Mark doesn’t care about publishers but is giving me a lot of leeway and concessions to make these changes,” Brown reportedly said, referring to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. “We will help you revitalize journalism… in a few years the reverse looks like I’ll be holding hands with your dying business like in a hospice….”

Brown’s warning about the dire prospects for news outlets that don’t get on board with a future in which corporate giants like Facebook are the arbiters of what is and isn’t trustworthy news comes as progressives are raising alarm that Facebook’s entrance into the world of journalism poses a major threat to non-corporate and left-wing news outlets.

Categories Media
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »