Mediaboss Marketing

When one of Australia's biggest political donors sought to deny links to a secretive Chinese Communist Party lobbying organisation, he did so in the style befitting a billionaire.

Chau Chak Wing, who has given more than $4 million to the major parties, instructed his lawyer to write to the chief executive of Fairfax Media, Greg Hywood, and the ABC's managing director, Michelle Guthrie. He demanded apologies, saying: "Chau has no knowledge of an entity referred to ... as the United Front Work Department".

Late last month, Chau also conducted an "exclusive", front-page interview with the Murdoch newspaper, The Australian, in which he claimed he had "no idea" of the existence of the organisation.

"As to the entity referred to by the ABC as the 'united front work department', I have no idea what this is," Mr Chau said in the story, referring to a joint Fairfax Media and Four Corners investigation aired month.

The investigation revealed ASIO's concerns about links between Chinese Communist Party-aligned organisations that seek to advance Beijing's interests, and political donors such as Chau. The Australian citizen, who is one of the nation's bigger donors and philanthropists, has hosted senior ministers, diplomats and former leaders Kevin Rudd and John Howard at conferences held at Chau's palatial Guangdong resort.

The fallout from the Fairfax Media and Four Corners' investigation which comes as the US grapples with allegations that Russia sought influence in America's political system includes a commitment from the Turnbull government to introduce new laws to counter foreign interference and fresh debate about political donations reform.

The United Front Work Department is an obscure but important Chinese Communist Party organisation. President Xi Jinping described its work in a landmark 2014 speech as a "magic weapon" for the "Chinese people's great rejuvenation," and a means for the Party to seize victory.

Academics say the UFWD is dedicated to asserting and spreading Party influence inside China and abroad, which is why it has caught the attention of ASIO.

Get the latest news and updates emailed straight to your inbox.

A simple Mandarin Google search reveals some of Chau's United Front Work Department connections.

A deeper dive into the online archives of Chinese government agencies and media offers more clues: pictures of Chau hosting UFWD leaders; UFWD publications featuring Chau; and documents from government websites listing Chau as a member of UFWD-aligned organisations.

And then there is the file that forms part of the database US army officer Chelsea Manning copied onto a Lady Gaga CD and leaked to Wikileaks in 2010. This "sensitive" file is about Chau and the United Front Work Department. It was written by Guangzhou-based US Consul General Robert Goldberg in 2007 and distributed to American intelligence agencies.

While its contents have not before been made public, the cable has most likely been analysed by ASIO as part of the 'five eyes' intelligence sharing arrangement.

It details a meeting Goldberg held with Chau in Guangdong, a province in China's booming Pearl River Delta region. According to Goldberg, Chau told him in this meeting that "the provincial government, with central government backing, had decided" that a new business organisation in the region was needed to assist "overseas Chinese". Chau was to lead it.

Goldberg wrote that the founding meeting of the Guangdong Overseas Chinese Businessmen's Association "clearly had political implications, with participation by [several Chinese Communist Party figures including] ... the director of the United Front Department".

Despite Chau's "comments to the contrary", Goldberg asserted that the Communist Party involvement in Chau's organisation suggested "its formation has more political meaning than economic that it is part of the party's United Front strategy."

"It strikes us that the Association is essentially a creature of the CPC's [Chinese Communist Party's] United Front program."

Chau's United Front links have also been detailed by the UFWD itself. In 2016, a Guangzhou district United Front Work Department committee published a photograph showing Chau meeting with the local UFWD chief, Xie Wei.

A UFWD report of the meeting with Chau describes the Australian billionaire welcoming "district party standing committee member and UFWD head Xie Wei" as he led a UFWD delegation visiting the headquarters of Chau's business, the Kingold Group, a diversified property development company. Also in attendance was "UFWD deputy head and Taiwan affairs office head Xue Jianbin."

"Kingold Group Chairman and well-known Australian Chinese leader Dr Chau Chak Wing welcomed the party committee delegation's arrival. Both sides entered an intimate discussion, with Dr Chau introducing the current situation of his business's growth and his own situation in promoting China-Australia cultural exchange and trade cooperation to Xie's delegation."

In 2014, a United Front Work Department provincial publication published an article lauding Chau's philanthropy under the website banner "Shantou United Front".

Chau has also previously served on the committee of a Sydney United Front affiliate organisation, the Australian Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China. The body is dedicated to advocating for Beijing's territorial claims, with a focus on Taiwan.

The Fairfax Media and Four Corners' investigation into the Chinese Communist Party's attempts to influence Australian institutions sparked significant debate. The government announced an inquiry into the adequacy of Australia's intelligence agency laws, Bill Shorten called for the issue to be referred to a joint parliamentary committee, and the Coalition and Labor traded barbs in parliament over the links between senior politicians and various donors.

China's Ambassador to Australia Cheng Jingye attacked the reporting that sparked the fall-out, likening it to a re-heated plate of stale fried rice.

Chau, an Australian citizen, not only gave an interview to The Australian (he declined earlier interview requests from Fairfax Media and Four Corners and did not answer a detailed list of questions) but has launched legal action against Fairfax Media and the ABC. Chau claims the coverage has falsely inferred he has betrayed Australia to further Beijing's interests and the work of the organisation he claims to know nothing about the UFWD.

Chau did not respond to questions about why he has disavowed knowledge of the UFWD or why he has also claimed to have "never been a member of an advisory group called the People's Political Consultative Conference", a body managed by the United Front Work Department. A Chinese government website describes Chau as a past member of a CPPCC in Tianhe.

A hint about Chau's attitude towards the media may lie in the fact that he owns a Guangdong newspaper, the New Express, in a country where the press is vetted by propaganda authorities.

The 2007 diplomatic cable asserts that Chau "is thought to have used his considerable connections to take over" the paper, which Consul General Goldberg describes as affiliated with the provincial Communist Party. This was "an unusual transaction given government sensitivity to media control in China." It's a sensitivity Chau appears adept at managing.

In a rare interview about the New Express in 2009, Chau said that "the Chinese government has found this newspaper very commendable because we never have any negative reporting."

Read this article:
Wikileaked: Billionaire Australian donor's Beijing links detailed in 'sensitive' diplomatic cable - The Sydney Morning Herald

This article first appeared on the American Enterprise Institute site.

Its been almost 70 years since English novelist Eric Arthur Blair, writing under the pseudonym George Orwell, penned 1984, his famous dystopian novel which depicted life in Oceania, a state in perpetual war with omnipresent government surveillance, strict state control of the media, and cynical government manipulation of the populace.

The state prosecutes thought crime and independent thinking. The Inner Party strictly controls policy, even as members of the Outer Party fill other bureaucratic slots in order to keep the state functioning. Historical revisionism is rife and alliances shift rapidly.

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

After years of war against Eurasia, Oceanias policy suddenly switches, hence the declarative statement, Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia, no matter the reality of previous years.

Orwell wrote his masterpiece in the wake of World War II and against the backdrop of the expansion of communism throughout Eastern Europe and its attempts to make inroads into Western Europe.

Photographs of Eric Blair, whose pen name was George Orwell, from his Metropolitan Police file, c.1940. The National Archives UK

The reason 1984 remains so relevant today, however, is that uncomfortable takes on fake news and government disdain for individual liberty remain too real in too many places. After President Donald Trumps inauguration, 1984 shot up the rankings on Amazon, leading the publisher to print an additional 70,000 copies.

Whatever disdain people might have for Trump and his unwillingness to confront even the reality of his past statements and positions, the United States is not Oceania and any suggestion otherwise is an exaggeration. The judiciary is independent and the media free. What countries then come closest to the Oceania of Orwells creation?

North Korea is, of course, the most totalitarian country on earth. Foreign media consumption is not allowed. Children are indoctrinated from birth, if not from North Korean schools then by their own families who fear the consequence of any question or remark, however innocent, that could contradict or somehow cross the Dear Leaders line.

Dissidence, real or suspected, will lead to punishment not only for the individual but for generations of his or her family. Heroes one day transform into despicable human scum.

Turkmenistan, at least under the late leader Turkmenbashi, came close. He named days and months after himself and his family, and constructed a gold statue that rotated with the sun.

But, while Turkmenbashi sought absolute obedience, his regime was more authoritarian than totalitarian. Eritrea, too, is authoritarian in the extreme especially with regard to press freedom and free expression but is not organized enough to be truly totalitarian.

If Orwell were alive today, the country which might best conform to 1984 might well be Turkey. The issue isnt simply President Recep Tayyip Erdogans corruption or authoritarianism. In that, he is really no different from Russian President Vladimir Putin or Venezuelan dictator Nicols Maduro.

Rather, it is how Erdogan has seized control of the media in order to impose narratives that change as rapidly as Oceanias wars against Eastasia and Eurasia. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was Erdogans best-friend, for example, until he wasnt.

But woe to any Turk that points out how Erdogan cultivated Assad and even vacationed with him. Turkeys relationship with Russia is enough to give any observer whiplash, moving from cautious trade partners to sanctions and military bluster to the tightest of allies over the course of a year.

The same has become especially apparent in the aftermath of the July 15, 2016 abortive coup, which Erdogan blames on friend-turned-rival Fethullah Glen, a US-based theologian.

After the Erdogan-Glen dispute about finances and corruption spilled into the open in 2013, the Erdogan-controlled Turkish press turned on a dime, ascribing ever-more outlandish conspiracies to a man with whom they were infatuated just months before.

Remember, just a few years earlier, Turkish police were seeking the author and all copies of an unpublished manuscript critical of Glen. While the book was unpublished and therefore no libel had occurred Erdogan and Turkeys police sought to prosecute the case because, at the time, to think negatively about Glen or his followers was intolerable.

But that was then and this is now. Erdogan and his press today ascribe a name the Fethullahist Terror Organization to his organization and hundreds of thousands of his followers and demand the Turkish press pick up the narrative.

The state propels the same accusations they once sought to suppress. In effect, Erdogan has always been at war with Eastasia. Likewise, even though Erdogans coup-night narrative is full of holes, Turkish journalists and academics are not allowed to ask questions about the inconsistencies.

The scariest part of Turkeys descent into Orwellianism is how many people outside Turkey have been willing to play along. Some American institutions seem to find little wrong in Erdogans theories, or they self-censor because they seek donations from firms Erdogan or his family members control.

Individual analysts at best remain silent and at worst affirm Erdogans theories in the press because they maintain energy sector or consulting contracts and prefer not to antagonize the Turkish president, whatever their private thoughts might be. Turkish-born analysts equivocate because they worry that Erdogan might retaliate against their families.

Some Western journalists self-censor to maintain access, and even Freedom House appears at best to lack moral clarity and at worst side with access over censorship.

What has happened in Turkey is tragic. The issue is no longer simply freedom of speech but rather freedom of thought. As tens of thousands are jailed and more than 100,000 fired, even more have become non-persons, no longer entitled to jobs, school, legal representation, or government benefits all because of suspicions about what they think.

Meanwhile, those who want to get ahead or even merely survive must parrot Erdogans lines, no matter how contradictory they might have been to those the president muttered only weeks or months before. Time in Turkey is running backwards, and the country increasingly seems mired in 1984.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. A former Pentagon official, his major research areas are the Middle East, Turkey, Iran and diplomacy.

More here:
Which Country Today Is Most Like Orwell's 1984 Authoritarian Nightmare? - Newsweek

By Ed Rogers The Washington Post

Hysteria among the media and Trump opponents over the prospect of "collusion" between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin may have hit its crescendo this week. That's right: The wailing from the media and their allies about Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with some "Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer" (whatever that means) may be the last gasp of this faux scandal. Good riddance.

Predictably, The New York Times started the ball rolling with front-page coverage, going so far as to argue, "The accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help." As if this were some breakthrough moment. The Times followed up with a headline yesterday that the meeting request and subject matter discussed in the prior story were transmitted to Trump Jr. via an email. Holy cow. The Times is so desperate to move the story that the meeting's arrangement over email is being made into Page 1 news. You would have thought it had come through a dead drop under a bridge somewhere.

And, of course, CNN has been apoplectic in its breathless coverage, running one story after another about this "development" on the air and online. But Politico takes the prize for the most over-the-top, made-up news, claiming that Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting could amount to a crime.

As I have written before, there are always people hovering around campaigns trying to peddle information and traffic in supposed silver bullets. There should be nothing to report on when a private citizen who works at a campaign takes a meeting with a friend of a friend offering information about an opponent. And yet, the media wants to make it a smoking gun.

If taking meetings with such people is a crime, then I hope there is a statute of limitations - because I would have been a repeat offender.

Don't get me wrong. Trump Jr. should not have taken the meeting. These offers of information on the down-low are greeted with eye-rolling, and red flags are almost always clearly visible. No senior campaign official, much less a family member of the candidate, should take such a meeting.

Having the meeting was a rookie, amateur mistake. Between human curiosity and a campaign professional's duty to get the dirt when you can, Trump Jr. likely felt that the person had to be heard. However, the meeting should have been handed off to a lackey. Said lackey would have then reported the scoop or lack thereof and awaited further instruction.

Anyway, Trump Jr. took the one-off meeting, and nothing happened. Is that not proof of non-collusion in and of itself? If you choose to believe otherwise, your disdain for President Donald Trump is getting the best of you and you need help.

Regarding the delusion that a crime actually occurred in any of this, my favorite allegation is that by having this meeting and listening to what was said, Donald Trump Jr. somehow could have violated the law. According to Politico, Trump Jr.'s "statements put him potentially in legal cross hairs for violating federal criminal statutes prohibiting solicitation or acceptance of anything of value from a foreign national, as well as a conspiracy to defraud the United States."

I'm just barely a lawyer, but I know over-lawyering when I see it. I mean, by that standard, what if someone walked into a campaign and suggested an idea that led to that candidate's victory? Would it have been a crime to accept "a thing of value" in the form of an idea? Of course not.

This whole thing is getting weird.

For many in the media and elsewhere, the collective grievances that they have against Trump personally, the White House as a whole and Trump's policies somehow justify their zealous promotion of the "collusion scandal." But not because the story is valid. Rather, the media know that they are not getting to Trump with anything else. Today, much of the "news coverage" of Trump and Co. is about payback. The media thinks they aren't getting the truth and so they don't have to deliver it either. It is a bad cycle that is not working for the White House or the media.

-----

Rogers is a political consultant and veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses.

More:
Commentary: The media's mass hysteria over 'collusion' is out of control - Canton Repository

Hysteria among the media and Trump opponents over the prospect of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin may have hit its crescendo this week. Thats right: The wailing from the media and their allies about Donald Trump Jr.s meeting with some Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer (whatever that means) may be the last gasp of this faux scandal. Good riddance.

Predictably, the New York Times started the ball rolling with front-page coverage, going as far as to argue, The accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help. As if this were some breakthrough moment. The Times followed up with a headline that the meeting request and subject matter discussed in the prior story were transmitted to Trump Jr. via an email. Holy cow. The Times is so desperate to move the story that the meetings arrangement over email is being made into Page 1 news. You would have thought it had come through a dead drop under a bridge somewhere.

And, of course, CNN has been apoplectic in its breathless coverage, running one story after another about this development on the air and online. But Politico takes the prize for the most over-the-top, made-up news, claiming that Trump Jr.s meeting could amount to a crime.

There are always people hovering around campaigns trying to peddle information and traffic in supposed silver bullets. There should be nothing to report on when a private citizen who works at a campaign takes a meeting with a friend of a friend offering information about an opponent. And yet, the media wants to make it a smoking gun.

If taking meetings with such people is a crime, then I hope there is a statute of limitations because I would have been a repeat offender.

Dont get me wrong. Trump Jr. should not have taken the meeting. These offers of information on the down-low are greeted with eye-rolling, and red flags are almost always clearly visible. No senior campaign official, much less a family member of the candidate, should take such a meeting.

Having the meeting was a rookie, amateur mistake. Between human curiosity and a campaign professionals duty to get the dirt when you can, Trump Jr. likely felt that the person had to be heard.

After seeing Tuesdays email exchange dump from Trump Jr., I double down on the idea that this meeting was a rookie, amateur mistake. Even a lackey should not have taken this meeting. It was bad judgment, but not collaboration with the Russians.

Just imagine: Trump Jr. is sitting there when he gets an email from a music promoter screaming with red flags and some comical language (does Russia even have a Crown prosecutor?) and he takes the bait. Wince! Anybody should have known better.

Anyway, Trump Jr. took the one-off meeting, and nothing happened. Is that not proof of non-collusion in and of itself? If you choose to believe otherwise, your disdain for President Donald Trump is getting the best of you and you need help.

Regarding the delusion that a crime actually occurred in any of this, my favorite allegation is that by having this meeting and listening to what was said, Trump Jr. somehow could have violated the law. According to Politico, Trump Jr.s statements put him potentially in legal cross hairs for violating federal criminal statutes prohibiting solicitation or acceptance of anything of value from a foreign national, as well as a conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Im just barely a lawyer, but I know over-lawyering when I see it. I mean, by that standard, what if someone walked into a campaign and suggested an idea that led to that candidates victory? Would it have been a crime to accept a thing of value in the form of an idea? Of course not.

This whole thing is getting weird.

For many in the media and elsewhere, the collective grievances they have against Trump personally, the White House as a whole and Trumps policies somehow justify their zealous promotion of the collusion scandal. But not because the story is valid. Rather, the media know they are not getting to Trump with anything else. Today, much of the news coverage of Trump and Co. is about payback. The media thinks they arent getting the truth and so they dont have to deliver it either. It is a bad cycle that is not working for the White House or the media. With this much intensity, it is hard to see how this ends well.

Ed Rogers is a contributor to the PostPartisan blog, a political consultant and a veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses and several national campaigns. He is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group.

Follow this link:
Ed Rogers: Media's mass hysteria over 'collusion' out of control - LubbockOnline.com

Eleven years ago, Ted Owen had a dream: to persuade the Olympic planning committee in Beijing that video games belonged in the 2008 Games. The skepticism was overwhelming. And despite the best efforts of the founder of the Global Gaming League, the Olympics came and went without a game controller in sight.

Today, that dream doesnt seem so far-fetched. Several major networks, including ESPN, NBC and TBS, regularly air eSports programming. And the organizers of the Asian Games, a pan-continental multi-sport event held every four years, have confirmed eSports as a demonstration event in 2018. At the 2022 Games in Hangzhou, China, it will have full medal status.

The explosive rise of eSports in the past decade has caught many off-guard, perhaps none more than the traditional or offline sports world. Game Five of the 2017 NBA Finals the most-watched Game Five since 1998 was watched by 24.5 million people. But the 2015 world finals of online game League of Legends nabbed 36 million unique viewers, according to Riot Games.

Meanwhile, overall NFL ratings were down 9% in the 2016 regular season and fell 6% during the playoffs, according to MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson.

Thats leading networks to escalate their involvement in competitive gaming.

Its impossible to ignore the impressive growth eSports has had, both in the U.S. and globally, says Rob Simmelkjaer, senior VP of NBC Sports Ventures. We always want to be tapping into what people love and how theyre spending their time and what theyre choosing for their entertainment. For any sports media company, this is becoming an essential component of your strategy.

Ironically, while both the broadcast and gaming worlds are quick to talk about the growth of eSports, theyre still figuring out how best to capitalize on them. ESports is in its infancy and everybodys still figuring out how to crack the code, not only producing or distributing it, but creating the best value for ad sales, creating the best viewer experience, says Craig Barry, executive vice president and chief content officer for Turner Sports. This is part of the evolutionary process of setting up something brand new.

Theres certainly big money for players. The International (a tournament for the game Dota 2) has given out more than $55 million in prize money since its launch in 2011. League of Legends has awarded more than $36 million, says Ben Schachter, an analyst with Macquarie Capital.

But on the game-publishing side, its still mostly a marketing play. While publishers Activision and Electronic Arts have launched eSports divisions, neither has made a significant contribution to earnings so far. Take-Two Interactive Software has held two eSports tournaments, with little financial return.

The tournaments we did were test cases to see if consumers would like this, and they did, says Strauss Zelnick, CEO at Take-Two. Millions of matches were played and hundreds of thousands of teams were created but in terms of the revenue created if there was revenue created, and were not sure there was it came about through brand-building. So far, all weve done in eSports is in service to building the brand and delighting consumers, it has not, so far, been in service of creating revenue.

Take-Two hopes to change that with its recently announced partnership with the NBA to form an eSports organization. Based around the companys NBA2K franchise, teams in the league will be operated by NBA franchises and will follow a tournament format similar to that of the NBA a regular season, a bracketed playoff, then a championship match. Seventeen teams have signed up so far, which will formally tip off in 2018.

A media partner has not yet been announced, but is forthcoming, says Zelnick.

Networks are a little better off than publishers when it comes to monetizing eSports. Barry says the companys eLeague has brought 10 million new viewers to the TBS network and over 25% of the viewing audience for eLeague events has been in the coveted 18-34 demographic. Across digital platforms, the companys competitive gaming league formed in conjunction with WME has racked up viewership totals of more than 3 billion minutes.

Its a native digital platform and were not trying to convert people, so to speak, says Barry. What were doing is we are executing on the digital platform to be authentic to the games and then the TBS or broadcast extension is a portal to create awareness for a casual fan or someone who is interested in eSports but doesnt know how to deep dive on the digital platform.

While watching an eSports event might be initially confusing for some viewers, network sports executives are hoping the stories that emerge in these televised tournaments prove as compelling as those that do so in offline sports or the Olympics. If people can rally around curling, goes the thinking, they can certainly become engaged in watching players battle it out in Quake, even if those viewers arent gamers.

At NBC, the companys sports group has teamed with online competitive gaming platform FaceIt and developer Psyonix to launch a tournament centered around Rocket League this summer. It will feature more than 40 hours of coverage across the groups live-streaming, VOD and linear platforms.

The finals, to be held Aug. 26-27, will be televised live on NBCSN in the U.S. and on Syfy in parts of Europe.

Were hoping well uncover some diamonds in the rough, says Simmelkjaer. Maybe there will be someone playing in one of the [smaller] regional tournaments that could end up playing at the professional level. That would make a great narrative for the end of the tournament.

But some console manufacturers are still standing on the virtual sidelines.

Nintendo games such as Super Smash Bros. and Splatoon have been used in some tournaments, including 2015s Nintendo World Championship, which was broadcast on Disney XD. But the companys holding back on professional eSports for now.

Leagues, big paydays for winners, pro players thats where I think things get a bit complicated, says Reggie Fils-Aime, president of Nintendo of America. From a Nintendo perspective, those are elements that are bit less interesting to us.

The storys not much different at Sony.

We are, at this point, working hard to answer [the] question: What is the best way in which a hardware-based platform can contribute to the eSports ecosystem and profit from it?, says Andrew House, global chief executive of Sony Interactive Entertainment. I do tend to think its a category that will possibly not generate a huge amount of profit in the near term, but over time I do think it has potential and were watching it very carefully.

Despite that occasional reticence from different sectors in the gaming community, video-game tournaments are certainly ready to make a lasting impact in the sporting world.

I had so many people tell me I was crazy, Owen says. I see [this] as a complete and utter vindication that Global Gaming League, myself and a few others at the forefront were absolutely right.

Read more:
Traditional Media Grabs for the ESports Control | Variety - Variety