Mediaboss Marketing

Guests wait at the inauguration ceremony of Somalias President Farmaajo. It is not taken long for his administration to experience its first crisis.

The presidency of Somalias Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo is only eight months old but already his administration faces its first crisis and it is one of their own making.

For a country that has experienced years of civil war, division and instability, one would imagine that the greatest challenges facing Somalias new administration would be internal. But nothing is ever straightforward in Somalia. So it is that the first real test for President Farmaajo has been sparked by the announcement made last week by the foreign minister of neighbouring Ethiopia that Somali authorities had played a facilitation role in the capture of Abdikarin Sheikh Muse.

Muse is a member of a liberation movement in the Ogaden region, an almost entirely ethnically Somali area ceded to Ethiopia in the colonial era, and ever since the source of near constant tension and numerous wars in the region.

The long history of animosity between the two countries makes the involvement of Somalia in the apprehension of a man wanted by Ethiopia notable; but the details have made it an outrage in Somalia. Muse has long been a resident in Mogadishu and, though heavily involved in the Ogaden liberation movement, is thought to have been born in Somalia. The countrys constitution expressly forbids the extradition of Somali citizen to foreign countries.

To add to the potential illegality of Somalias involvement in the arrest, one has to consider the platform on which candidate Farmaajo ran his campaign. The leader of a party founded as recently as 2012, Farmaajos background was modest compared to many of his rivals. Without the establishment credentials, his popularity was instead based on his strong nationalism, and in particular a frostiness, not to say hostility, to Ethiopia. This provided Farmaajo a unique selling point when compared to incumbent president Hassan Sheikh Mohamuds perceived cosiness with the government in Addis Ababa.

Farmaajos strong national and security-based rhetoric have led to many questions about just what role his administration had in the arrest of arrest, even abduction, of Muse. Was this a case of extraordinary rendition? What did the president know and when did he know it? Did he give the go ahead or, perhaps more worryingly, was this done behind his back?

For such a matter to become a true scandal though, it cannot simply be an error, or a violation of law, it must hint at a deeper fear, underlying flaw or insecurity.

Somalis have never truly recovered from the trauma of their countrys breakdown. Amongst the many catastrophes witnessed in the civil war, the military intervention by Ethiopia remains a deep and unhealed wound. The sight of the Ministry of Defence occupied by Ethiopian troops the thought of regional rivals rifling through all of the countrys secrets is a nightmare that still haunts the national psyche. That this matter involves the president apparently reversing his rhetoric and bowing before the Ethiopian authorities hits just these traumas.

For many years too, Somalis have had to live with the humiliation of Somalia being an international punchline, a byword for failure. After years of struggle to build their nation once again, this episode raises fundamental questions. To have a Somali citizen snatched from Somali soil with the apparent complicity and even involvement of the Somali government makes many wonder if their homeland is still nowhere near being an independent and functioning state.

In a case that involves as much baggage as this, it is impossible to separate the questions of legality, history, local custom and realpolitik. With no clear statement from the president or his administration on their involvement in the case, there has been nothing to stem the growing anger and sense of disappointment.

Many had high hopes for this new government, viewing it is a clean break with the past, one with a strong sense of identity. All of this has now been thrown into doubt. This is the first real test of Farmaajo as president, and at the moment he is failing it.

This article first appeared on The Huffington Post

See the article here:
Somalia: Who Is Really In Control In Mogadishu? - Horseed Media

ANNA KOVACEVICH/THE HOYAFormer Obama Communications Director Jen Psaki and former Trump Communications Director Mike Dubke discuss their respective experiences in the White House.

Emma Kotfica is a staff writer for The Hoya.

President Donald Trumps habit of communicating his unfiltered perspectives to the public through Twitter poses a unique challenge for the White House communications team, according to former White House Communications Director Mike Dubke.

At an event hosted by the Georgetown University Institute of Politics and Public Service on Tuesday, Dubke shared his experiences from his three-month tenure in the Trump White House alongside Jen Psaki, White House communications director under President Barack Obama. Psaki was a GU Politics fellow for the spring 2017 semester, and Dubke is a fellow for the fall 2017 semester.

Dubke said Trumps tweets allowed him to communicate his unfettered perspectives to the public and are a powerful medium of communication for the president, but also derailed the administrations message. Dubke blamed news organizations for spending too much time covering the presidents tweeted statements rather than his policy.

What Im concerned about is that our news organizations seem to be jumping from tweet to tweet, and short attention span to short attention span, Dubke said. A single tweet would then dictate what the programming was for the next hour and a half on cable news, which was an amazing power but also an amazing distraction.

Because of Trumps tweeting habit, Dubke said he struggled to control the administrations daily messaging.

The challenge, of course is that this narrative continues to change, and thats what I was dealing with when I was there, Dubke said. Specifically because the president has this direct connect with the American people that, while President Obama had it, never really used it to the same degree [as Trump].

Psaki said not being in control of the narrative is part of the job, not solely a problem faced by the current administration.

The unique thing about being in the White House is that you are responsible for commenting and speaking to everything, so its like the best-laid plans can often change, Psaki said.

Nevertheless, Psaki described the communications director role as one of the best jobs you can have in the White House.

It is way better than the press secretary job, because you get your hands in all of the strategy and you have a seat at the table with the policy teams determining decisions that are going to be made about policy, when things are going to be announced, how they should be rolled out and how they should be talked about, Psaki said. You are a decision-maker in ways that the press secretary is entirely capable of being but cant be because their day is consumed by the press briefings.

Dubke added that communications directors take the fall when plans go wrong.

Youre also blamed for all the bad things that happen, even when its not your fault or youre brought in after the decision has been made to explain the cleanup, Dubke said.

Dubke served as Trumps communications director for three months before tendering his resignation on May 18.

Dubkes former boss has been noted for his attacks on press coverage. Trump routinely criticized the media in campaign rallies and called the press the enemy of the American people in a February tweet. According to Dubke, Trumps frustration with media coverage derives from his understanding of the importance of their role.

I know the president understands the role that the press plays in the democratic process, Dubke said. I think thats where a good level of his frustration comes, where he is hearing things come out of the press that he doesnt believe are true or are a slant on the truth that is trying to paint an entirely different picture.

Have a reaction to this article? Write a letter to the editor.

Read this article:
Media Narrative Difficult to Control, Former White House Comms Directors Say - Georgetown University The Hoya

A veteran Irish jockey has been giving a four-day ban from the sport for punching the back of a horses head at a race last month, the BBC reported Tuesday.

The incident, which animal rights groups and many on social media labeled appalling, took place Aug. 18 at the Tramore racetrack. Davy Russell, a two-time champion jockey in Ireland, lost control of his emotions while atop Kings Dolly after the horse pulled up ahead of a handicap hurdle. Russell didnt just scold the mare; he punched heron the back of thehead.

Russell wasnt immediately punished for striking the horse. Instead the Irish sports governing body, the Turf Club, gave Russell a warning for bringing the sport into disrepute through his violent action.

This failed to satisfy animal rights groups and fans on social media, where video of the incident began to go viral. One tweet, which complained about the lack of punishment and included video of the incident, was retweeted nearly 10,000 times.

Meanwhile, animal rights groups, including the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals, began to speak out.

The ISPCA is appalled by the incident . . . and believes that this behavior is completely unacceptable, the animal rights group said in a statement last week. We are disappointed that the jockey was sanctioned not for hitting the horse but for damaging the reputation of horse racing, under rule 272.

The same jockey was banned for 14 days last year for being rude to a steward, the ISPCA added. It is alarming that the Irish Turf Club treated that breach of its rules more seriously than hitting a horse.

David Murit, the equine consultant for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, appeared to have a softer view of the 38-year-old jockey but still disagreed with the Turf Clubs decision.

Davy Russell is not a bad jockey, and it was out of character, but hitting a horse like he did is completely unacceptable. Its a nonsense, Muir told the Racing Post last week. Where he struck her is a major muscular area and it probably hurt Russell more than the horse but that doesnt make it acceptable. Horses, like any other animal, should be treated with respect, and punching one is disrespectful.

With criticism ramping up, the Turf Club asked its appeal body to review the case, which it did Tuesday and found the original warning unduly lenient, according to the Guardian.

Russell defended himself by arguing the hit was a slap and that he was just attempting to get the horse to concentrate.

At that stage she was out of control and if she had continued in that vein during the race then I would have had a very difficult time trying to control her, he told At the Races (via the Independent). I just needed to let her know there was someone on her back and I thought a slap on the soft of the neck was the appropriate action.

Russell has not publicly commented since his four-day ban was announced.

Social media, of course, had a lot to say, with many complaining the four-day ban remains an inadequate punishment.

Read more:

The best new college football tradition? Iowa fans waving to patients in a childrens hospital

NBA legend Tracy McGrady hosts Labor Day barbecue for 800 Harvey victims

NFL, Florida officials weigh decision on Dolphins-Bucs game as Hurricane Irma gains steam

Brazilian prosecutors investigating evidence of vote-buying in Rio 2016 Olympic bid

Read the rest here:
After social media outrage, Irish jockey gets four-day ban for punching a horse in the head - Washington Post

This article first appeared on the History News Network.

On August 14, President Trump reluctantly read a statement intended to assure Americans that, contrary to an impression left by his earlier speech, he condemned the neo-Nazis and white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville.

The next day, he returned to Twitter to complain about the press:

Keep up with this story and more by subscribing now

Made additional remarks on Charlottesville and realize once again that the #Fake News Media will never be satisfied . truly bad people!

Trump has been picking fights with the media since he declared his candidacy. But these latest outbursts reveal more than ordinary presidential frustration with the press. And theyre no ordinary way of expressing that frustration.

Trump has long played on racism against African-Americans to attract white supremacists. He does the same when he demonizes the media.

The president is deploying, consciously or not, a classic trope from the Russian anti-Semitic fabrication, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, published in 1905.

When he says fake media, anti-Semites hear Jewish-controlled media, which exerts disproportionate power over other media outlets and public opinion.

Anti-Semites understand what Trump is doing. They blame the whining Jew media for forcing Trump to condemn the Nazis who marched in Virginia.

The Protocols are the Bible of the anti-Semitic movement. They purport to be the minutes of a meeting where Jewish elders detail their plan to conquer the world.

In the part of the Protocols titled Control of the Press, it is revealed that Jews control every aspect of the press to protect their new worldwide government from attack or criticism.

The unnamed narrators admit their real aim is a false-flag attack on the legitimate press: Among those making attacks on us will also be organs established by us, but they will attack exclusively points that we have pre-determined to alter.

Fake news, then, begins as Jewish infiltration of the legitimate press and transforms into complete domination: Not a single announcement will reach the public without our control.

Arthur Sulzberger, chairman and publisher of The New York Times, at the Digital Life Design (DLD) conference at HVB Forum on January 23, 2011 in Munich, Germany. Miguel Villagran/Getty

The first American to put the Protocols before a mass audience was Henry Ford. In the 1920s his newspaper, the Dearborn Independent, alleged that American Jews worked to advance the interests of an amorphous International Jew.

As the Protocols presaged, Ford lumped all Jews into an anonymous cabal who aimed to seize control of world banks, industry, and government.

Of all the distinguished Jewish Americans whom Ford libeled, it was a relatively obscure lawyer, Aaron Sapiro, who finally sued. When Sapiros case came to trial in 1927, Ford decided to issue an apology in order to avoid a damaging jury verdict.

He said,

I deem it to be my duty as an honorable man to make amends for the wrong done to the Jews as fellow-men and brothers, by asking their forgiveness for the harm I have unintentionally committed.

But many skeptics refused to believe Ford meant it. In Europe, anti-Semites contended that Jewish bankers forced the apology out of Ford. Publishers who wanted to reprint Fords anti-Semitic publications insisted that the statement had been faked to assuage the International Jew.

Having followed the Sapiro trial through a German reporter he planted in the courtroom, Adolf Hitler called the apology Fords subjugation to the All-Jewish High Finance.

In time, Ford eliminated all doubt. In 1938, he accepted the highest civilian honor Hitlers government could bestow. Photographs of a smiling Ford wearing the Grand Cross of the German Eagle splashed across the world.

The automaker could not have repudiated his own apology more effectively. Accepting the medal made it clear he had not capitulated to the core of the Jewish danger.

Thus the language and tactics that Trump uses today have already been validated by one of Americas foremost proponents of anti-Semitism. The president declares that the mainstream media filter must be eluded. Ford did this by buying his own newspaper, while Trump does it with Twitter. The result is the same.

In 2016, Trump signaled his neo-Nazi/radical right sympathies by initially refusing to reject David Dukes endorsement. Recently, Trump waffled when pressed to condemn those who declare Jews will not replace them.

What links Trump and Ford most strongly are their anti-Semitic methods. Both refract their beliefs through relentless attacks on the very media that they use to advance their businesses and polish their images.

Trumps collusions with white supremacists, his declaration that many sides are morally responsible for Charlottesville, and his defenses of the fine people carrying swastikas and torches are shocking.

But they are also eerily reminiscent of Fords genteel anti-Semitism, which flourished when most everyone knew who was behind the fake media and believed instead the businessman in charge.

Victoria Saker Woeste is a Research Professor at the American Bar Foundation and the author of Henry Fords War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech.

Read this article:
Are Trump's Attacks on the Press a Dog Whistle to Anti-Semites? - Newsweek

File picture shows Datuk Jailani Johari, Deputy Minister of Communication and Multimedia speaking at the Institute of Journalists Malaysias Journalism Now forum, May 12, 2015. Picture by Saw Siow FengKUALA BERANG, Sept 5 All media and online portals in Malaysia must be aware that their operations are subjected to the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (Act 588).

Communications and Multimedia Deputy Minister Datuk Jailani Johari said the Act had long been introduced to control the reporting of news which were slanderous in nature, especially those disseminated by online portals.

The Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (Act 588) has two main provisions which enable enforcement action to be taken on complaints related to offensive contents on the Internet under Section 211, (ban on the uploading of offensive contents) and Section 233 (on inappropriate use of the facility and network services).

Under Section 211, anyone who is guilty of flouting Subsection (1) can be fined not more than RM50,000 or jailed not exceeding two years, or both. They can also be fined a further RM1,000 daily or part of a day the offence is perpetuated after being found guilty.

He said this to reporters after the annual general meeting of the Terengganu branch of the Federation of Peninsular Malay Students (GPMS), here, today.

Jailani, who is also Hulu Terengganu Member of Parliament, was commenting on the issue raised by GPMS deputy president Ezaruddin Abd. Rahman on Sept 2 that the government should introduce an act to control slanderous media reports, especially those disseminated by news portals or social media.

Whatever offences committed online are offences in the real world. So, online media practitioners or netizens must be more responsible in managing the contents uploaded on their portals. Differentiate contents which criticise, insult, instigate, sow hatred or are slanderous and false in nature to avoid action being taken later, he said.

Meanwhile, from 2016 to Feb 1, 167 cases of Internet and social media abuses were investigated by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), including the dissemination of false contents and information via WhatsApp, Facebook and Twitter. In the same period, 1,375 websites were also blocked because of their false contents. Bernama

More:
All media in Malaysia subjected to Act 588, says deputy minister - Malay Mail Online