Mediaboss Marketing

Earlier this week, conservative media watchdog Media Research Center published a post about right-wing radio host Mark Levins latest book and their claim that the establishment media is ignoring Levin despite the book being a runaway best-seller.

To make their case, they pointed to the manner in which Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) was treated when his last book was released, claiming that nobody called up Levin for an interview, effectively censoring him:

They will allow a discussion of public policy as long as it matches their worldview. Think Sen. Al Franken. He is no Mark Levin intellectually, but thats irrelevant. His book came out a few weeks ago and he was the progressives toast of the town, celebrated all over the news shows, public TV and radio, and the late-night comedy shows. The Washington Post and New York Times rolled out 1,300-word rave reviews.

But once again, Levin is being shunned by the thought police. Witness that though its a runaway best-seller, now seven days consecutively, the establishment media have censored him completely, with not a single interview granted.

Aside from the fact that Levin has made several appearances on Fox News over the past two weeks, including spots on Watters World and Fox & Friends over the weekend apparently the MRC doesnt count the highest-rated cable news network as part of the establishment it appears theres one media personality who is disputing the conservative watchdogs take.

In his newsletter last night, CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter pointed out that he saw the MRCs claims of censorship as an opening to get Levin to finally appear on his show Reliable Sources. According to Stelter, however, Levin wanted nothing to do with CNN or his program. Stelter wrote:

I saw this as an opportunity to re-up our months-old requests for Levin to come on Reliable Sources. Surely, since MRC says hes been censored, hed jump at any chance at a non-Fox interview? But when I emailed him the offer on Thursday, he replied, Are you kidding me? Buddy, Ive zero respect for CNN or you. Youre a propagandist.

So, is it really censorship when one man, who already has access to a large platform, refuses to appear on certain outlets because he feels they are propaganda? Doesnt seem like it.

[image via screengrab]

Follow Justin Baragona on Twitter: @justinbaragona

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

More:
Brian Stelter Rebuffs MRC 'Censorship' Claim By Revealing Mark ... - Mediaite

Those who spread fake news through the social media are also liable under the proposed bill. Flickr photo by Stanley Cabigas (CC BY 2.0)

Philippine Senator Joel Villanueva filed a billin late June that would criminalize the malicious distribution of false news. Media groups are warning it could lead to censorship.

Villanuevas Senate Bill No. 1492 or An Act Penalizing the Malicious Distribution of False News and Other Related Violations defines fake news as those which either intend to cause panic, division, chaos, violence, and hate, or those which exhibit a propaganda to blacken or discredit one's reputation.

The billassigns penalties to those who publish fake news and even to those who share it, potentially criminalizing social media users who may not fully understand the implications of simply sharing an articlewith friends.

Prison sentencing under the proposed law depends on the status of the entity who publishes or spreads the so-called fake news. A private individual found guilty of publishing or spreading fake news can face a prison term of up to five years. Agovernment official's sentence would be double that of a private individual. And a media entity or social media platform spreading fake news could be detained for up to 20 years.

Villanueva explained the rationalebehind these penalties:

The effect of fake news should not be taken lightly. Fake news creates impression and beliefs based on false premises leading to division, misunderstanding and further exacerbating otherwise strenuous relations.

He added that the passage of the bill will encourage our citizens, especially public officers, to be more responsible and circumspect in creating, distributing and/or sharing news.

Journalism Professor Danilo Arao reviewed the four-page bill and summarized his objections:

Definition of false news or information under Sec. 2 is so broad that it includes practically anything perceived to cause, among others, panic and hate (obviously hard to define)

Media organizations could be subjected to censorship under Sec. 3 of the proposed law because even fair commentary or investigative reports that are perceived to tarnish the reputation of a public official could be flagged as false news.

Arao further disputed theneed for a special law mentioning public officials, reasoning that they are already assumed to be following a code of conduct.

In a TV interview, a spokesperson fromthe Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility said the proposed legislation is unnecessary because Philippine libel law already addresses the issues raised by the senator.

A member of the House of Representatives proposed that instead of criminalizing fake news, the congress should work to approve a pending Freedom of Information bill that he says would helpcounter the irresponsible sharing of false information on media and the Internet.

AlterMidya, a network of independent media groups, denounced Villanuevas bill as irresponsible, unnecessary and dangerous attempt to impose a form of censorship on free expression and press freedom.

How does one distinguish between a false report based on an honest mistake and one maliciously spread through print, broadcasting and online?

It would endow the bureaucracy with the arbitrary power to declare any media issuance contrary to government interests as fake news, while approving, loudly or otherwise, even the most fraudulent report from either private or State media so long as it favors whatever regime is in power.

Veteran journalist Luis Teodoro reminded the senator that there are better ways to fight fake news:

Accountability in the exercise of the right to communicate is best enforced, not by the State, but by the media community itself as well as by a public media-literate and responsible enough to detect and not to spread fake news.

Philippine Star newspaper columnist Jarius Bondoc warned that if the bill becomeslaw, it could be abused by authorities who want to silence critics:

The bill is prone to abuse. A bigot administration can apply it to suppress the opposition. By prosecuting critics as news fakers, the government can stifle legitimate dissent. Whistleblowers, not the grafters, would be imprisoned and fined for daring to talk. Investigative journalists would cram the jails.

This is not the first time that a Philippine legislator has filed a bill that seeks to address the negative impact of fake news. Early this year, the Speaker of the House of Representatives proposedregulatingsocial media to prevent the spread of fake accounts and fake information.

Read the original:
Philippine Senator Moves to Criminalize 'Fake News' Could This ... - Global Voices Online

Startup of the week:

Who they are: IranCubator

What they do:Its atech incubator that producesapps focused on achieving social change in Iran, backed by Berkeley-based nonprofit United for Iran.

Why its cool:Launchedthree years ago, IranCubator matches activists with app developers to create technology that can change the lives of Iranian citizens. The program has launched a series of apps in recent months, including womens health app Hamdam. Geared toward women who dont have access to sexual health resources women from conservative families or from rural areas, for example Hamdam provides information on sexually transmitted diseases and contraception, and also offers the only Persian menstruation calendar, according to United for Iran founder and executive director Firuzeh Mahmoudi. And Hamdam offers resources to help women who often arent granted the same legal protections as men answer questions on marriage law, divorce, employment and more.

Another IranCubator app, RadiTo, lets Iranians listen to news programs blocked by the government, such as BBC Persian, as well as audio books and talk shows. Thats crucial in a country that has a reputation as being one of the worlds most restrictive regimes when it comes to accessing information Reporters Without Borders this year ranked Iran 165th out of 180 countries initsWorld Press Freedom Index.

IranCubator also released an appcalled Haami thats geared toward Irans 2.2 million drug users offeringrecovery resources including Narcotics Anonymous information translated into Persian and a personal safety app called Toranj that helps women defend against domestic violence.

To learn more visit United4Iran.org.

Where they stand: Womens health appHamdam, the incubators most popular app, has been downloaded more than 70,000 times since its launch in March.

Only in Silicon Valley:

Bummed out by shoes that dont fit?Iovado promises to fix that problem by combining Silicon Valley technologywithItalian fashion. Customers use the companys app to take 10 pictures of their foot, which Iovado converts into a 3D model. That model is then sent to leather workers in Italy who use it to make a pair of handcrafted shoes built exactly to your specifications. The whole process costs 240 Euros, or about $274.

Iovado had raised almost $65,000 on Kickstarter as of Thursday, surpassing its goal of $22,678.

Run the numbers:

When considering whether to invest in a startup, venture capitalists question female founders differently than male founders, according to a recent study published in the Harvard Business Review. Investors are more likely to ask men about their potential for gains, and women about their potential for losses, according to researchers from Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania, who analyzed interactions between 140 VCs and 189 entrepreneurs at TechCrunch Disrupt New York.

Sixty-seven percent of questions posed to male founders had to do with promotion focusing on hopes, achievements, advancement and ideals, according to the study. On the other hand, 66 percent of questions asked of female founders had to do with prevention they focused on safety, responsibility, security and vigilance. For example, VCs were more likely to ask men how they will acquire new customers, and ask women how they will prevent current customers from leaving.

Those lines of questioning make a difference, the researchers argue. The male-led startups they studied raised five times more funding than those led by women.

Click here:

Following a string of female startup founders who have spoken out about sexual harassment they faced from male investors, entrepreneur Perri Chase this week addressedthe more subtle nuances of the investor/founder relationship. In a blog post titled I had sex with an investor & I am sorry, Chase described a meeting over drinks with an angel investor she hoped would back her startup. Whenhe started hitting on her, Chase wrote, it became clear that he hadnt intended theinteraction to be a pitch meeting. She says she made a consensual choice to reciprocate his advances.

In all that has been emerging this week it dawned on me that I gave him permission to act this way, Chase wrote. My sleeping with him is actually part of the problem.

But its complicated, Chase wrote, adding that in a world where its common to meet investors over happy hour, the line between professional and social interactions can become blurred, and clarifying it needs to become a priority.

Photo: A screen shot from the United for Iran website.

Tags: 500 startups, App, Iran, sexual harassment, startup

See the original post:
Early Stage: Using apps to fight censorship, drug addiction and sexism in Iran - SiliconBeat

Media Matters for America

How anti-choice zealots cry censorship whenever they are challenged Media Matters for America Most recently, Lila Rose, founder of the anti-abortion group Live Action, appeared on the June 26 edition of Tucker Carlson Tonight and claimed that Twitter was censoring Live Action's ads. Beyond alleging that Twitter was biased against the anti ...

Read the rest here:
How anti-choice zealots cry censorship whenever they are challenged - Media Matters for America

Nosy Floridians now have another outlet for their moral outrage. Now anybody in the US state can formally complain about books used in public schools, and schools are required to hear them out.

Last week governor Rick Scott signed a bill that allows any Florida resident to formally challenge new or old materials, like books and movies, available in public schools. In drafting the bill, lawmakers specifically added language that expanded the complaint process to include anyone, not just parents.

Original law:

Each district school board must adopt a policy regarding a parents objection to his or her childs use of a specific instructional material, which clearly describes a process to handle all objections and provides for resolution.

New law, with new language highlighted:

Each district school board must adopt a policy regarding an a parents objection by a parent or a resident of the county to the his or her childs use of a specific instructional material, which clearly describes a process to handle all objections and provides for resolution.

The law also lays out specific guidelines on how schools should field complaints to materials used in class, included in school libraries, and placed on reading lists. Previously the law said that when schools wanted to add new materials, parents had to file a petition within 30 days of the introduction, and that schools had to list the petition on their site and hold a public forum about it. The new version of the law adds that the petition can be filed by anyone, not just a parent; that forums will be overseen by a formal hearing officer, who cant be an employee of the school district; and that schools now have 30 days to hold the forums, instead of seven.

It adds three reasons that material can be challenged:

The purported goal of the bill is to create more transparency around what Florida kids are learning in school. But it effectively institutionalizes censorship, with broad criteria like not suited to student needs. Critics fear that the new legislation constitutes a big step toward the suppression of information on evolution and climate change. And it can be used as a formal process to keep out classics and new works that Floridians think are inappropriate.

According to the office for intellectual freedom (OIF), a part of the American Library Association, the added red-tape will ultimately be used to pressure individual teachers into sticking with safe choices. The goal of this bill is to tie up educators with so much process and challenge and review that they give up on trying to teach contemporary authors on difficult subjects, says OIF director James LaRue, And to intimidate anyone who crosses a political line.

He adds, This is not about education; its about politics.

Excerpt from:
Censorship: A new law in Florida lets any resident try to ban books ... - Quartz