Recently in Media Category

I've only been following this from a distance, but apparently Associated Press has a problem with bloggers quoting its articles. They sent nasty letters to Drudge Retort demanding they take down quotes, and the reaction in the blogosphere has been, well, predictable.

The latest round? After appearing to back off, AP set up a tollbooth for quoting as few as 5 words. At $2.50 per word, no less.

I wonder how that affects me. I'm not a non-profit organization, so I wouldn't qualify for their discount. But I don't have ads, so can't be classified as a commercial activity, either.

Fortunately, there may be some relief coming later this week. As a hobbyist, I can't afford the consequences of quoting the article directly, since it was written by an AP reporter. Instead, I'll quote random words and phrases from numerous other AP articles:

New York - The Associated Press, following criticism from bloggers over an AP assertion of copyright, plans to meet this week with a bloggers' group to help form guidelines under which AP news stories could be quoted online.

If you want to read the article I didn't quote, try here.

I hope that AP comes to it's senses soon - this is hard!

Update: Ace counter-offers.

A Fox News employee who says she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder after being bitten by bedbugs at work filed a lawsuit on Thursday against the owner of the Manhattan office tower where she worked.

Maybe if they didn't provide beds for their employees....

From AP:

LOS ANGELES - Hollywood writers who have long complained of being underpaid and getting little respect said Thursday they would go on strike for the first time in nearly 20 years to fight for a bigger piece of the television and movie industry action.

Damn. Until this passes, TV and movies are doomed to become a wasteland of remakes and reruns.

That's according to an Associated Press-AOL News poll:

WASHINGTON - Increasing numbers of people looking for political news are going online — with more than a third now saying they check the Internet for such information.

That group is more likely to be younger, better educated and male than the population in general, an Associated Press-AOL News poll found.

Hey, that's me! Well, except for the younger part. Sigh.

I found this part interesting considering that both the left and right blogosphere spend a considerable amount of time and energy poking well-deserved holes in mainstream news coverage:

While the online browsers go to a wide variety of sites, they overwhelmingly trust what they see on the news sites.

That's 70% who trust news sites, according to the poll. Of course, they don't specify what defines "political web sites" that the news sites are compared with. I think it's a given that blogs are included, but there are other political web sites as well.

Still, I see this as a plus for the blogosphere. Although some days it doesn't seem that way, the news sites by and large are doing a better job than they were a few years ago because they know how much more closely they're being watched. Eo ipso, the blogs are having a larger effect than the surface numbers suggest.

That's a good thing, folks.

It also underlines the need for bloggers to continue watching and correcting. Even with their frequent errors and proclivity toward bias, the MSM will always score high on this type of poll. No group of bloggers is likely to replace AP or Reuters anytime soon.

For the vast majority of political bloggers, that translates into a hobby with job security. What color lining this gives your clouds is up to you.

Or maybe not. Seems like it was less than first reported.

I don't listen to Rush very often, but what I've heard didn't resemble this.

I largely agreed with Glenn's "premortem", and also with his sentiment from today regarding being taken for granted. I expect my elected officials to spend the time between elections earning my next vote. This Republican Congress has has fallen short in that area. Spending and immigration are the two biggest bumbles in my view.

Nonetheless, I am prepared to pull the handle for them once again. Considering that even two years in charge (in the most rosy scenario) gives the left lots of time to dismantle the things that Republicans did right, and it's simply not worth the risk of sitting it out.

There's a new conservative talk radio network that started today - Wide Awakes Radio.

I've been listening for the last 2 hours - it's been interesting. They're having an abundance of first day glitches fueling some added spontaneity. While some might find it somewhat embarrassing, I think it's a fascinating view into just how difficult it is to put together a seamless live broadcast.

Over the coming days, I'm sure the glitches will fade. I'm looking forward to listening in on all of the hosts (schedule here), but particularly the Kit And Heidi show (Euphoric Reality) and Ric Ottiano (Release the Hounds!), representing two of the blogs featured on my incredibly short and highly selective blogroll.

Best of luck, folks, on the new venture!

Update: Apparently they have a limited amount of bandwidth available and they're swamped. So if you're having problems getting to their blog or the live stream, keep trying!

AP reports that leaks and media outlets divulging classified information is a global problem.

Warning - the article lists to port - it's not hard to figure out where the author sides. Nonetheless, it's a roundup that adequately shows the opportunism of the media in other countries.

Via AP/Yahoo:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's national security adviser said Thursday a "huge treasure" of documents and computer records was seized after the raid on terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's hideout, giving the Iraqi government the upper hand in its fight against al-Qaida in Iraq.

National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie also said he believed the security situation in the country would improve enough to allow a large number of U.S.-led forces to leave Iraq by the end of this year, and a majority to depart by the end of next year. "And maybe the last soldier will leave Iraq by mid-2008," he said.

Al-Rubaie said a laptop, flashdrive and other documents were found in the debris after the airstrike that killed the al-Qaida in Iraq leader last week outside Baqouba, and more information has been uncovered in raids of other insurgent hideouts since then.

He called it a "huge treasure ... a huge amount of information."

When asked how he could be sure the information was authentic, al-Rubaie said "there is nothing more authentic than finding a thumbdrive in his pocket."

"We believe that this is the beginning of the end of al-Qaida in Iraq," al-Rubaie said, adding that the documents showed al-Qaida is in "pretty bad shape," politically and in terms of training, weapons and media.

"Now we have the upper hand," he said at a news conference in Baghdad. "We feel that we know their locations, the names of their leaders, their whereabouts, their movements, through the documents we found during the last few days."

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, meanwhile, pressed forward with his initiative to crack down on violence in Baghdad. Government forces fanned out across Baghdad for a second day, setting up checkpoints and frisking motorists.

I discussed the potential cascade effect stemming from Zarqawi's death here, and it appears to be coming true. AP's reporting is a welcome change from their usual fare. While I hope they keep it up, the reality is that bad habits are difficult to break.

I wonder how the rest of the media will treat this?

...get the message to a French publisher that stealing photos is unacceptable. It had appeared that they were going to do the right thing by Michael, but apparently they've crawfished on him.

Read this. Then follow the link at the bottom of the post to a page that lets you know how you can help.

I'll be there as well.

H/T InstaPundit.

The age of lowered standards:

Australians try to find ugliest sheep

I didn't know it had to be one or the other:

Survey: iPods more popular than beer

I'd find a new dry cleaner:

Gonzalez backers press suit after 6 years

Maybe I'm just tired, but it really seems that Michael Georgy of Reuters is hoping for the worst:

Iraq's Diyala region could be spark for civil war

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - If there is one place that suggests Iraq's sects and ethnic groups can't live together, it is blood-stained Diyala Province.

Well?

Stephen Colbert's sad performance last weekend is still generating lots of buzz on the blogosphere. Even the New York Times is weighing in with a story today that focuses not on the performance itself but the reaction to it:

Mark Smith, a reporter for The Associated Press who is president of the White House Correspondents' Association, acknowledges that he had not seen much of Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central before he booked him as the main entertainment for the association's annual black-tie dinner on Saturday night. But he says he knew enough about Mr. Colbert — "He not only skewers politicians, he skewers those of us in the media" — to expect that he would cause some good-natured discomfort among the 2,600 guests, many of them politicians and reporters.

What Mr. Smith did not anticipate, he said, was that Mr. Colbert's nearly 20-minute address would become one of the most hotly debated topics in the politically charged blogosphere. Mr. Colbert delivered his remarks in character as the Bill O'Reillyesque commentator he plays on "The Colbert Report," although this time his principal foil, President Bush, was just a few feet away.

Over at Huffington Post they've been typical of left-wing thought on the issue. Any suggestion that Colbert wasn' t funny gets derided in the comments as if the notion was somehow sacrilege. But for many of the posters and commenters this isn't about funny. It's about the lack of media coverage in the first couple of days after the dinner. Chris Durang writes:

"Tell me if you don't think it's newsworthy he said all this IN FRONT OF THE PRESIDENT"

Peter Daou derides a media that has been decidedly anti-Bush for not being even more anti-Bush:

The AP's first stab at it and pieces from Reuters and the Chicago Tribune tell us everything we need to know: Colbert's performance is sidestepped and marginalized while Bush is treated as light-hearted, humble, and funny. Expect nothing less from the cowardly American media.

The wider view of this is, of course, about the left and their anger. Colbert gave an unimpressive performance, but he insulted George Bush, Laura Bush, and many others in the administration. The seething fringes of outer moonbattia don't care if the NSA wiretapping program is legal. They don't care if Plame wasn't covert. They don't care that Bush isn't single-handedly responsible for global warming. They don't care that there still isn't a civil war in Iraq. They just want Bush to look bad. They want him to fail. And they want him to suffer. And to a decidedly petty and small-minded audience, he delivered.

Those on the left who thought Colbert funny found him to be that way not because the jokes were good (they weren't). They laughed because one of their own got a chance to humiliate people they hate. Because so many of the left have made BDS their driving force, they cheer every time there's bad news - no, that's not right - they revel in bad news. And show their disappoinment like spoiled children when they don't get their way.

Consider Arianna's post from yesterday railing on the media:

It says everything you need to know about the current state of TV news -- indeed the current state of our media culture -- that on a day that saw Iraq moving closer to all-out civil war, with at least 76 Iraqis killed and 179 wounded in sectarian attacks, the CBS Evening News devoted one minute and thirty-nine seconds to coverage of Iraq... and one minute and fifty-six seconds to coverage of Anna Nicole Smith's appearance in front of the Supreme Court.

Snip...

Well, it depends how you slice it. CBS' update of the Smith story was given another minute and fifty-eight seconds of precious air time -- two seconds more than last time -- while its coverage of Iraq lasted two minutes and ten seconds. Aha, you may say, that's 12 seconds more than they gave Anna Nicole, and a 31 second increase from the last time the two stories went head-to-head. True, but Monday was also the third anniversary of Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech -- a fairly significant news peg, wouldn't you say?

Nevermind the blatant dishonesty that the left has routinely applied by taking Bush's speech (and the accompanying sign) out of context. Arianna wants the news to be BDS 24/7. She goes on to cite casualty figures and whines because the 6 o'clock news doesn't repeat them often enough.

When you think about it, Arianna's rant about Anna Nicole Smith and the left blogosphere's angst about Colbert are really about the same topic. It's not the comedic value of the jokes. It's about wanting the media to deliver their message to the exclusion of all others. A message that increasingly conveys little more than hatred, despair, and a desire to seek revenge for manufactured wrongs that none of them has suffered from except in their own minds.

I'd have to say Colbert taught us a lot more about his friends than he intended.

about Tony Snow being appointed White House Press Secretary:

Tony's certainly a class act, and I wish him well. Previously, I had said that I would be surprised if he was picked. And I am. Given the media's disdain for Fox News and conservative pundits in general, I wonder if our leftist and overtly hostile press isn't going to be even more combative than they were with his predecessor.

Time will tell, and I'm hoping for the best. I'll miss him as a commentator, though.

New Red, Blue Rings Found Around Uranus

Ick.

Huh?

Plagiarism, that is. This time AP is the accused. Larisa Alexandrovna at Huffington Post writes:

We gave the advocacy groups our notes and article, which they then took to the AP and demanded that the story be covered. The AP was given our article and maybe our notes.

On March 14, 2006, the AP did their own article, left out any attribution to me or my publication and lifted not only my research but also whole sections of my article for their own (making cosmetic changes of course).

We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsmen both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us.

She also claims to have a tape recording of the conversation where AP folks admit to their lack of regard for intellectual property rights when it comes to small online players.

While I'm no fan of her work (we're ideological opposites), she's entitled to the fruits of her labor. If one of her articles is quoted by anyone, she deserves credit.

AP needs to respond to the charge - the sooner the better. If the charges are indeed true (while Larisa's argument seems compelling, I'm trying to be fair and hold my opinion until both sides are heard) then AP needs to promptly and loudly correct the situation.

Those with an interest in seeing blogs continue to gain credibility as an alternative to the "old" media would do well to take notice.

Update (3/26/06 10:33 AM EST): I would have figured this would be an issue of equal concern to left and right, considering all the concern about plagiarism in the last week. So far there seems to be a collective silence from the blogosphere. I guess these issues are only noteworthy if some political hay can be made. Truly disappointing...

Chicago Requires Driver's Ed for the Blind

Well, of course. Their accident rate is much lower that way, and they get lower insurance rates.

with this title:

Milosevic Death May Affect War Tribunals

Gee, ya think?

That's the take of French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy on the violent demonstrations over the Danish cartoons:

"I am totally shocked and find it unacceptable that -- because there have been caricatures in the West -- extremists can burn flags or take fundamentalist or extremist positions which would prove the cartoonists right," he told LCI television.

Indeed. It's interesting to see Europe struggling with multiculturalism, after years of claiming superiority in this area. But it also highlights the dangers of multiculturalism to every nation - many European nations are now deciding whether to shift their national values with the introduction of each new immigrant.

We've been struggling with the same issues over here, to the point that we actually ignore immigration laws in some cities so that illegal immigrants feel safe applying for college grants and food stamps. But there is at least one major difference in the conflict here and that being waged across the Atlantic.

Our response to the pressures of multiculturalism has been timidity and appeasement in the face of protests, lawsuits, and media pressure. Europe, on the other hand, is threatened with violence for it's offence of publishing a few cartoons. And surprisingly, there are a few in the European media willing to fight back.

But the cultural clash has grave consequences stemming directly from the larger conflict between Islam and the rest of the world:

Early Friday, Palestinian militants threw a bomb at a French cultural center in Gaza City, and many Palestinians began boycotting European goods, especially those from Denmark.

"Whoever defames our prophet should be executed," said Ismail Hassan, 37, a tailor who marched through the pouring rain along with hundreds of others in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

"Bin Laden our beloved, Denmark must be blown up," protesters in Ramallah chanted.

In mosques throughout Palestinian cities, clerics condemned the cartoons. An imam at the Omari Mosque in Gaza City told 9,000 worshippers that those behind the drawings should have their heads cut off.

"If they want a war of religions, we are ready," Hassan Sharaf, an imam in Nablus, said in his sermon.

About 10,000 demonstrators, including gunmen from the Islamic militant group Hamas firing in the air, marched through Gaza City to the Palestinian legislature, where they climbed on the roof, waving green Hamas banners.

"We are ready to redeem you with our souls and our blood our beloved prophet," they chanted. "Down, Down Denmark."

Religion of peace indeed. But while Europe's press is taking the high road, European governments are taking the traditional liberal tack of appeasement. I hope Europe realizes that it's liberal tendancies toward appeasement will ill serve them in this era. The behavior they reinforce will be used again, with perhaps consequences closer to home.

The muslims interviewed in the media would have you believe that this is about respect. Respect, though, is earned - and not through threats of violence. Respect is not earned by burning flags, or firing weapons into the air. Respect is not earned by holding a sign calling for a second holocaust.

When a government chooses to make religion it's cornerstone, it opens itself up to political critisism on that cornerstone. Since muslims can't draw a distinction between religion and politics, it can hardly expect westerners to do so either.

It's been said by many before, and it's worth saying again - when Islam cleans it's own house of the rampant killing in the name of Mohamed, maybe there will be some reason to protest the stereotypes depicted in the Danish cartoons. Until then, blaming others for the stereotypes that they themselves have reinforced deserves contempt.

Shut Up, They Explained

The left's regulatory war against free speech.

The subject of new media in relation to campaign finance reform has been brought up numerous times in the last couple of years. This column by Brian C. Anderson in today's Wall Street Journal keeps the flame alive and burning.

It's a rather long column, but well worth the time to read. This should continue to be an issue with which we have no disagreement with the left side of the blogosphere.

Deborah Howell, Ombudsman of the Washington Post gets a valuable lesson about the left as she gets a flood of obscene and vicious attacks over a column she wrote. The money quote:

"But it is profoundly distressing if political discourse has sunk to a level where abusive name-calling and the crudest of sexual language are the norm, where facts have no place in an argument. This unbounded, unreasoning rage is not going to help this newspaper, this country or democracy."

Welcome to the family, Deborah.

H/T Lorie at Polipundit.

Or at least that's the take of Francisco Pinto Balsemao, head of the European Publishers Council:

European publishers warned Tuesday that they cannot keep allowing Internet search engines such as Google Inc. to make money from their content.

"The new models of Google and others reverse the traditional permission-based copyright model of content trading that we have built up over the years," said Francisco Pinto Balsemao, the head of the European Publishers Council, in prepared remarks for a speech at a Brussels conference.

His stance backs French news agency AFP which is suing Google for pulling together photos and story excerpts from thousands of news Web sites.

"It is fascinating to see how these companies 'help themselves' to copyright-protected material, build up their own business models around what they have collected, and parasitically, earn advertising revenue off the back of other people's content," he said.

Think about this very carefully. How many bloggers use the same stories and also advertise on their blogs? Yes, I know the numbers are different, and most bloggers don't make much. But it's somewhat chilling to consider what the major news organizations potentially have in their toolbox should they deem it necessary.

Oh, and by the way - I got this story from Yahoo/Associated Press.

I posted yesterday on Lamar's refusal to give the Dems billboards that it felt were a "personal attack". Here's the Dems somewhat unusual twist on the situation:

While Lamar's form contract reserves to the company the right to refuse to run a billboard advertisement, Lamar's conduct in this instance raises serious questions about whether the company is unlawfully or improperly using corporate resources to favor or benefit the Republican Party or Rep. Schmidt.

So by refusing to display a personal attack on a political opponent, Lamar is "unlawfully" benefitting Republicans? Neat twist, eh? By the way, I'm not defending Rep. Schmidt's comments on the house floor, but she did apologize and had her unfortunate remaks striken. Yet the Democrat's billboard won't say this. The entire text for the ad:

"Shame on You, Jean Schmidt: Stop Attacking Veterans. Keep Your Eye on the Ball -- We Need a Real Plan for Iraq"

"Stop Attacking" suggests that it has happend more than once, and is still occuring. We know this to be untrue - it was once, and she apologized. So what we have is a classic personal attack - misleading or dishonest verbage combined with the omission of her apology and the striking of her remarks (also known as lying by omission). Yet the Dems would have you believe that they want the public to be informed:

Rep. Schmidt's constituents are entitled to know what she is saying on the floor of the U.S. House and the DNC has a right to tell them.

If that's what they really believe, then they should tell the whole story. Failure to do so is dishonest, and yet again displays why the Democrats don't deserve to regain power ever again.

I didn't post on the horrid Ted Rall cartoon yesterday. Nick at Conservative Dialysis addressed it pretty thoroughly, and I couldn't add to his analysis.

Today Ted dredges up a little more bile in his weekly op/ed subtitled "How Ragtag Insurgents Beat the World's Sole Superpower"

He wants to rewrite history on the Afghan war - something not even Nancy Pelosi would dare do. He claims the Afghan was not only lost, but claims our troops, to the last man, acted dishonorably and even criminally:

Banditry and looting soon made the average Afghan nostalgic for the security that accompanies tyranny. On the other hand, since U.S. soldiers quickly gained a reputation for shoving, kidnapping, robbing and even torturing innocent Afghans, perhaps their small number was a good thing.

If any of you reading this are veterans, this is what Ted Rall thinks of you. He doesn't stop there, however. He moves on to describe our Guard and Reserve:

As inexperienced weekend warriors shot up carloads of civilians from rooftops above invisible checkpoints, it soon became apparent that our forces were undereducated, poorly trained and excessively preoccupied with their own safety. The Americans' cultural insensitivity, often beyond the point of brutality, transformed people grateful to be liberated into insurgents in a matter of months.

If you ever served as a weekend warrior, that's what Ted Rall thinks of you. Oh - by the way - below the fold is another one of his cartoons in which he accuses our troops of homosexual rape. Just in case the above wasn't enough.

Linked with:
Conservative Cat
bRight & Early
Don Surber - then again, maybe not. No, I don't know why. MT 3.2 isn't as good with trackbacks as I would like.
Basil's Blog

Well, what do ya know? Seems the tape was real. Via Bill Quick at Daily Pundit:

I just got off the phone with Laurie Goldberg, Senior Vice President for Public Relations with CNN. Her statement confirms the authenticity of the tape recording and reveals the actions CNN took after learning of the incident:

"A Turner switchboard operator was fired today after we were alerted to a conversation the operator had with a caller in which the operator lost his temper and expressed his personal views -- behavior that was totally inappropriate. His comments did not reflect the views of CNN. We are reaching out to the caller and expressing our deep regret to her and apologizing that she did not get the courtesy entitled to her. "

You really have to be amazed at the luck of the CNN switchboard operator. Frustration mounting from call after call from folks complaining about the X, and he happens to snap on the call that has a tape recorder owned by a PR firm on the other end. Perhaps he launched such a tirade at several callers. Very unprofessional, and Kudos to CNN for cleaning house.

Who knows? Maybe he has a future at MoveOn.org.

As to the rest of the entire X matter, I'm gonna be stubborn and say this changes little. It remains not just my personal but also my professional opinion that the X appeared as a result of scenario like the one I posted yesterday, or something very similar. And although Team Hollywood gets vindication on the authenticity of the call, it doesn't prove that CNN as a network set out to paste an X on Cheney's face. Moreover, much of the remainder of Team Hollywood's press release simply appears to be hyperbole: For example:

Millions from across the country telephoned CNN to alert the network about an accidental "X" over the Vice President's face, only to be told that the "X" was intentional against the present administration. CNN callers flooded the Internet and online communities with calls to boycott the network.

Out of "millions" of calls, why no one else making the claim? I'm sure that CNN also got more than a few calls from other news organizations (i.e., competitors), and most would be taping the call. Where are the stories? And how would anyone outside of CNN's call center be able to make any claim as to the content of "millions" of calls?

The statements catering to bloggers don't wash as well. When I spoke to Preska Thomas (which occurred Tuesday just prior to Bill Quick's call), she told me that bloggers were among those who had called complaining of CNN's call center. Where are the posts from these bloggers?

So with the one exception of the tape (really great work, Mr. Quick - hats off to ya!), I stand by my earlier assessment - there's still no indication that the X was much more than a glitch.

That is, unless the Trilateral Commission issues a report stating otherwise.

Side note: Thanks to Alexandra for the link and the kind remark.

Upon further reflection, I'm going to firm up my previous opinions on the whole "X" thing.

CNN says "glitch", Drudge says "staffers laughed". Who's right? I say both. My theory is that some control room guy put the X on one of the control room monitors to amuse himself and his coworkers. The malfunctioning switch allowed it to bleed over to the broadcast feed. Is such a glitch possible? I've been teaching electronics for over 13 years (and repairing the same for much longer), I've seen similar malfunctions, although I'll have to admit my expertise is in aviation and defense, not television studio gear.

As for Team Hollywood? Hoax. I was skeptical from the beginning, and said so. The mention of bloggers and trilateral commission set me off - I mean, why would a blogger run to a PR firm to inquire about CNN? Especially one that seems to have no clients but themselves (at least currently), and haven't updated their web site in over a year. This looks like an attention grabbing scheme to me. The trilateral commission is purely tin-foil hat stuff - anyone invoking that old canard should be regarded with a jaundiced eye. I'm sorry to say a few folks may have been snookered, though.

Unless something really compelling comes up to get me to change my mind, I'm gonna let it go. I'll still track blogger reaction is it remains interesting, though.

Update: It's just common sense, so I'm not surprised that someone else came to pretty much the same conclusion. It was just a matter of time.

But I honestly don't know what to make of it:

CNN Caught Off-Guard; Recording Proves Damaging 'X' Over Vice President's Face was Intentional Says Team Hollywood

SANTA MONICA, Calif., Nov. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following statement concerning CNN's airing of an 'X' over live video of Vice President Cheney was released today by Team Hollywood:

Monday morning, Nov. 21, 2005, at 11:00 AM, as CNN aired Vice President Dick Cheney's speech live from the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, the cable network flashed onscreen, repeatedly, a large black 'X' over the Vice President's face, while a headline at the bottom of its screen read, "CHENEY: I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS WRONG TO CRITICIZE."

Unfortunately for CNN, a large number of their demographics also participate in Internet communities and Blogs, representing a large portion of their viewership and posing a threat to news cable and newspaper subscriber's fees.

Millions from across the country telephoned CNN to alert the network about an accidental "X" over the Vice President's face, only to be told that the "X" was intentional against the present administration. CNN callers flooded the Internet and online communities with calls to boycott the network.

Likewise, the international marketing consulting firm Team Hollywood Inc., responsible for a database of over 11 million Americans, both Democrats and Republicans from across the country, was consumed with the calls. "The volume of calls to our company became an issue that could not be ignored," stated Joan Friedman of Team Hollywood. "We needed a statement on behalf of the Internet community callers and their newsworthy Blogs, so we made the call."

When the founders of the company, Preska Thomas and Kevin Finn, made contact with the network, to their surprise they were bullied and harassed in the same way by the Headline News desk. Callers were repeatedly told by CNN, "Tell the President and Vice-President Dick Cheney to stop lying." Team Hollywood's conversation with the newsdesk was recorded. When the tape is played back, amongst political statements being made by the network were the words that the "X" was intentional, as an act of free speech by CNN.

Kevin Finn said, "The Vice-President is a symbol of the United States, much like the American flag. For CNN to desecrate the image of the Vice President is the same as the Iranians burning the U.S. flag at a rally staged for the whole world via television. It is a slap in the face to all those who serve and have served in the armed forces".

A Democrat caller, Tricia Rosenberg of Beverly Hills, Calif., compared the big "X" across the Vice President's face to the markings of a serial killer's hit list. "I can't believe that CNN resorted to such a tacky object".

Preska Thomas said, "Fair and balanced? I am certain that we have all heard those words before. Not exactly smart as a FOX! News should be non-partisan."

CNN was caught off-guard at the company's headquarters in Atlanta by the recording. The statements that were made through their Headline News desk are not acceptable and there are calls on the Internet for investigation by the FCC, the FBI and the Trilateral Commission.

Trilateral Commission? Is this a joke? Anyone?

Linked with Stop the ACLU

Update: I called and left a message on Team Hollywood's answering machine. Preska Thomas called back a few minutes later. She played me the tape of the conversation - it was fast and I write slow, so I only got parts of it. Unfortunately, I called from a cell phone and could not tape it.

The tape was of Preska's voice inquiring as to why the X was placed over Cheney's head. A male voice at CNN (presumably) said things like "it's just a comment or opinion someone was making..." "showing the X was freedom of speech" "we did it to make a point" "the point is tell them to stop lying" "if you don't like it don't watch" "tell your president to stop lying"

Please remember this is completely unconfirmed. I don't personally know these folks and cannot place any confidence in the story until I know more. I've emailed someone who I feel has the resources to get to the bottom of this. More as it develops. There's still a chance that this is a hoax.

Update 2: From anywho.com:

Unable to return results...

Reason: No listings were found.

We searched on 2892143 in 310 however; we could not find any listings to display.

Update 3: Remember I came in on the side of "unfortunate glitch" on the "X" issue before. I still feel that way, until I see something compelling to get me to believe otherwise. And Team Hollywood's press release isn't that compelling.

However, this "Team Hollywood" aspect is just weird enough to hold my interest. So I'll be keeping an eye out to see what develops - this could be a PR thing to get Team Hollywood's name out in the news. Or just someone's idea of humor.

Update 4: 23 Nov, 6:00 a.m. EST - At the time I posted this, I was pretty much alone with the news. Since then, several others have posted the above press release with their comments. Here's a few:

RealTeen (cross-posted at Stop the ACLU) seems to weigh in on the side of believing "Team Hollywood"

Bill Quick at Daily Pundit had the foresight (foresight that I lacked) to have a tape recorder handy. He's taking a cautious tone, same as I.

All Things Beautiful thinks the tape may not be authentic

Kit at Euphoric Reality appears to believe it

It'll be interesting to see how reaction shapes up as the day goes on...

Final Update: See here for bottom line.

This is interesting:

WASHINGTON - Fox News is refusing to air an ad critical of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, citing its lawyers' contention that the spot is factually incorrect.

About the ad in question:

The ad says that as an appellate court judge, Alito has "ruled to make it easier for corporations to discriminate ... even voted to approve strip search of a 10-year-old girl." Referring to a document Alito wrote in 1985 while seeking a job in the Reagan administration, it quotes him as saying that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion."

The groups backing the ad include the Alliance for Justice, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, People for The American Way and abortion rights organizations.

Fox isn't going to run the ads based on consultation with its legal department:

Paul Schur, a spokesman for Fox, said that according to the network's lawyers, the ad is "factually incorrect and we've given them an opportunity to fix it."

Of course, this just shores up the left's contention that Fox News is a "right-wing" media outlet:

Said Jim Jordan, a spokesman for the groups: "The entire right wing establishment, from Pat Robertson to Jerry Falwell to Fox News, has circled the wagons around Sam Alito."

My take: Bravo to Fox News. Being responsible for what you put on the air is neither right nor left - it's, well, just being responsible. And there are too many in the media willing to accept deceptive advertising with no thought whatsoever to the consequences. If their legal staff tells them the ad isn't accurate and advises not to air it, Fox News management would be stupid to ignore them.

And before anyone gets the wrong idea, this is less about the content of the ad in question and more about Fox's right to protect it's own interests.

They have a legal staff for a reason, you know. And it's good business to listen to them.

Oh, and if any lawyers are reading this, don't get a big head - you're still a bunch of ambulence chasers. ;-)