Mediaboss Marketing

Former spokesman for the Egyptian armed forces and now director general at Al-Aseema Television Network, Brig. Gen. Mohamed Samir. Posted Aug. 14, 2015.(photo byTwitter/@alwasatengnews)

Author:Khalid Hassan Posted February 12, 2017

CAIRO Brig. Gen. Mohamed Samir, a former spokesman for the Egyptian armed forces, assumed the position of director general at Al-Aseema Television Network Jan. 15, which sparked much controversy in the Egyptian street, raising questions as to the future of Egyptian media. Does this step mean that the executive branch will now have full control of the media?

TranslatorSahar Ghoussoub

The TVchannels programs and broadcasting were suspended due to the change of management. The channel has yet to reopen with new programs.

Sherry Media Advertising Company issued a statement Jan. 15, saying that it has been officially handed the management of Al-Aseema TVand appointed Samir as its director general. The company stressed that it is keen on providing professional media content, contributing to raising awareness in the community on various issues.

Sherry Media Advertising Company, which was established by businessman Ihab Talaat on Dec. 2, 2016, specializes in advertising.

Talaat is seen as a media expert. He is also accused of trying to monopolizethe media in Egypt. Before starting his own company, he sponsored a large number of TV stationsand newspapers through Pro-Media Company, including the Tahrir Channel, ONTV, al-Shorouk newspaperand Al-Masriy Al-Youm daily.

Talaat was chosen as the chairman of the board of directors of Hayat Media Services Co. on Feb. 6, which is the exclusive advertising agent for all Hayat TVnetwork channels, Egypts biggest network.

Egyptians opposing the appointment of Samir believe it is a miserable attempt by authorities to nationalize the media, unify its message and block any opposing voices against the government.

Others believe that owning and running media outlets should not be limited to certain parties, whethermilitary men or politicians, and that it is the right of any individual to run media institutions as long as this is done according to professional rules and standards. They argue that Samir left the army and is now an ordinarycivilian like any other Egyptian citizen.

On the Facebook page of the spokesman for the armed forces, a statement was posted on Dec. 31, 2016, that said, As part of the military bulletin for promotion and reassignments of armed forces officers, scheduled in the months of January and July of every year, Gen. Sedki Subhi, the general commander of the armed forces and minister of defense, approved the appointment of Chief of Staff OfficerCol. Tamer Mohamed Mahmoud al-Rifaias the official spokesman for the armed forces, effective as of Jan. 1, in succession to Brig. Gen. Mohamed Samir, whose services will end on Jan. 1, 2017.

This Facebook post came at the same time as the announcement that Talaat would be managing Al-Aseema channels 1 and 2, after a final agreement with member of parliament Saeid Hasaseen, the owner of both TVchannels. The decision was effective on Dec. 28, 2016.

Samir graduated from the Egyptian Military Academy on July 1, 1988, and joined the infantry. He received several military training programs and obtained a bachelor's degree in business from Ain Shams University.

During his tenure as spokesman for the armed forces, Samir built good relations with people in charge of newspapers and media outlets in addition to his close relations with the countrys businessmen.

Journalist Magdi Shanadi, the editor-in-chief of al-Mashhad newspaper, told Al-Monitor, Appointing Samir as head of Al-Aseema TVchannel means that the regime is no longer running media outlets through its close circles or affiliated persons, but it has now direct control over them.

Shanadi added, The regime thinks of the media as a dangerous tool and that it is necessary to highlight some issues in the media, while hiding others, without any regard to journalistic and media standards and professionalism. This is no secret to anyone. President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi had previously expressed his dissatisfaction with the media outlets performance, saying that he would like to have the same media support as Gamal Abdel Nasser."

In his speech during the new Suez Canal inauguration ceremony on Aug. 5, 2014, Sisi said, Gamal Abdel Nasser was lucky as he had the support of the media. The Egyptian media has a great responsibility and has to side with the people.

For his part, Dandarawi al-Hawari, the executive editor of Youm7 newspaper, told Al-Monitor, Samir has left the army of his own free will and retired. Now he is a civilian, enjoying full civil and political rights like any other Egyptian citizen and has the right to assume any civil position.

He said, Businessman Talaat, owner of the TVstation, appointed Samir in his position. Talaat is known for his interest and investment in the media and has a long history in the media domain. Therefore, any talk about Samir being appointed by pulling strings by the army is unfounded."

Commenting on whether Samir has adequate experience in running a media outlet, Hawari said, As a military man, Samir did not have any civil expertise. However, he has been dealing with different media outlets and newspapers for 2years, servingas a spokesman for the armed forces. This allowedhim to gain experience in this domain, not to mention that he built good relations with people running newspapers and TVchannels.

Huwaida Mustafa, the dean of the Higher International Institute for Media at El Shorouk Academy, told Al-Monitor, The media plays a pivotal and influential role in public opinion. That is why businessmen and institutions are keen on owning shares in media outlets, which is normal and there is nothing wrong in it. However, media institutions have to be clear and open about their political inclinations. This is the case of all media institutions around the world.

Commenting on talks about the states attempt to control the media, Mustafa said, We have tens of TVchannels and radio stations affiliated with the state, but they have little influence on the ground. It is only normal for the state to try to relay its messages to the public opinion. This does not mean that Brig. Gen. Samir is a tool in the hands of the state, and there is no proof of this anyway. He is now a civilian and has the right according to the constitution to take up a senior civil position in the state, whether by owning or running media outlets.

Read More: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/02/egypt-army-state-control-media.html

Read more here:
How far is Egypt willing to go to have strong grip on media? - Al-Monitor

BEIJING Authorities in China's third-largest city warned that about 30 percent of its live poultry markets were contaminated with the H7N9 avian flu virus, as an eastern province ordered markets to shut, state media reported on Saturday.

East China's Zhejiang province has ordered all markets across the province to halt live poultry trade on Saturday over bird flu concerns, state media Xinhua reported citing the province's Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

In January, Zhejiang reported 35 infections of the H7N9 strain of bird flu, according to the provincial Health and Family Planning Commission.

Earlier on Saturday, China Daily said the disease control authority in Guangzhou, capital of the southern Chinese province of Guangdong, urged residents to avoid contact with live poultry after tests in the past week.

Guangzhou, a major port and transportation hub, last month said it would suspend the trade of live and slaughtered poultry for three-day periods through March to prevent the spread of avian flu to humans.

The latest warning will reinforce concerns about the spread of the virus as the death toll in China this winter hit 30 last week and neighbouring South Korea and Japan battle major outbreaks.

Chinese disease control experts have warned the public to stay alert for H7N9 avian flu, with more than 100 cases of human infections reported over the last 2-1/2 months.

In December alone, China had 106 cases of human infections, according to the National Health and Family Planning Commission.

The virus usually strikes in winter and spring, and farmers have in recent years ramped up measures such as cleaning regimes to prevent the disease.

China has confirmed five bird flu outbreaks among poultry this winter, which has led to the culling of more than 175,000 birds.

Many major cities in the world's third-largest producer of broiler chickens and the second-biggest consumer of poultry have also closed some live poultry markets after people and chickens were infected by avian flu strains.

Widespread infection can lead to severe health risks and big financial losses. The last major outbreak in China was in 2013, killing 36 people and causing more than $6 billion in losses for the agricultural sector.

(Reporting by Josephine Mason and Meng Meng; Editing by Richard Borsuk and Clelia Oziel)

PARIAGUAN, Venezuela Eliannys Vivas, 9, started to get a sore throat on a Friday last month in this languid Venezuelan town where papaya trees shade poor cinder-block homes.

LA PAZ Bolivia's government on Friday said a Danish tourist had tested positive for yellow fever, its first case in a decade, after he visited a jungle area in the far west of the landlocked Andean country.

ZURICH A European Medicines Agency drug safety panel recommended on Friday that Actelion's Uptravi drug may continue to be used in line with current prescription information amid a probe into five deaths in France among those using the pulmonary arterial hypertension medicine.

See the original post:
Bird flu hits poultry markets in major Chinese city: media - Reuters

Legal eye

Here is one version of how private media emerged in Pakistan under Musharraf. After Kargil, private TV channels in India (which started around 1995) spoke with one voice claiming that Pakistan was a terrorist state with a finger on the nuclear button. To respond all Pakistan had was PTV. So the state rationally concluded that state-owned media couldnt effectively counter Indian propaganda.

To be credible, we needed our own privately owned TV channels countering, in times of hostility, the propaganda of Indian channels. The model works. Amidst a crisis, we see anchors blaring, frothing and fighting it out on TV screens in both countries.

In most countries there exists a conformist consensus on matters of national security without much dissent and India is no different. In Pakistan, while there is general consensus around India trying to hurt Pakistan when it can, there are more voices critical of national security policies in comparison to India.

Unlike India, Pakistans military is the most powerful state institution. And it isnt just responsible for external security but now is also the frontline internal security agency. Consequently its actions and policies affect lives and rights of citizens more. It is in the context of civil-military imbalance and its effects on democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights that those who seek the emergence of a welfare state critique policies that project Pakistan to be a national security state.

The emergence of private electronic media also provided some space to critical voices. Controlling print media was a lot easier than controlling diversely owned electronic media. The emergence of social media that critiques and informs narratives being shaped on electronic media has made state control even more challenging. And yet within the states mindset there exists the unshaken belief that in todays age of fourth and fifth generation warfare, the ability to shape and control narratives is a national security imperative.

But the tool to shape narratives is coercion not persuasion. The focus is on dissuading dissent and encouraging self-censorship. We may never find out what the crime was of the now infamous returned bloggers. But it was a warning shot for all social media activists to practise self-censorship. The strategy to deal with electronic media has also been evolving. The state seems to have concluded that traditional control measures advertising revenue, disruption through cable operators, secret funds, threats of physical harm etc arent enough. Two flawed conclusions seem to have been drawn in the wake of the Hamid Mir affair. One, that the state can acquire greater control over shaping narratives and punishing critical voices if it introduces a few of its own agents within theAugean stables dressed up as free media outlets attacking rivals. And two, use populist rhetoric laced with patriotism and bigotry as the attack tool to threaten and silence critics and condemn them to live with the risk of violence by state and vigilantes alike.

There are at least three problems with this approach. One, by introducing its own dog in the fight, the state weakens its ability to influence rival players it castigates as treacherous. When President Trump leashes out at CNN or New York Times, does it enhance the credibility of Fox or Breitbart News or Trump in the eyes of rational folks? Two, by cultivating an alliance between jingoism dressed as nationalism and religious hate, the state cedes space to vigilantes space that is hard to recapture, as we have seen in our fight against terror.

And three, a state that treats policy criticism by its own citizens as a security threat reflects its own sense of acute insecurity. Do thinking minds running the state really believe that our bigoted brigades (DCPs etc) and their menagerie of haters (now on mainstream media too) defending the state and its policies or labelling critics as traitors or blasphemers or heretics make the state look good? Can anything be worse than allowing irresponsible use of the charge of blasphemy (in a 96 percent Muslim country) to threaten and silence critics?

Why should the state be so thin-skinned that critical debate over whether allotment of state land to generals is good policy or not threatens it? Isnt it a matter of public importance whether limited state resources are to be committed to building bombs, shiny infrastructure projects, perks of public servants or the health and education of citizens? If we have a national consensus over the need to extinguish terror and terror infrastructure in Pakistan, why shouldnt there be a debate that dissects the strength of competing ideas on how best to do so?

In 1644, Milton sought the liberty to know, to utter and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. The logic and concept of marketplace of ideas is especially sound in this age of technology and social media: in a marketplace with limited barriers to entry, let all ideas be expressed and debated and let superior ideas drown out inferior ones. But the powerful seldom bear criticism willingly. Consequently the history of free speech has been more a history of censorship of speech.

The right to free speech is not without restraints. Mill defined the scope of restraint using the harm principle: the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. As we dont exist in isolation, our fundamental rights compete with those of others. The freedom to speak freely is a fundamental right. But it cant be used such that it breaches the fundamental right of another to dignity, privacy, life or liberty.

John Finch explained it best when he said, your freedom to swing your fist ends just where my nose begins. Hence the consensus that some speech is so harmful or offensive that it is to be prohibited. In the US courts employ the clear and present danger and imminent lawless action tests that speech that creates a clear and present danger for others (like falsely yelling fire in a crowded theatre) or incite violence doesnt enjoy protection.

A subset of the prohibited speech category is hate speech. During the hearing of Hamid Mir vs Federation, upon prodding of our Supreme Court, the government and PBA agreed upon the Electronic Media Code of Conduct, 2015. This was formally promulgated as a subsidiary legislative instrument under the Pemra Act. Clause 23 defines hate speech as any expression that may incite violence, hatred or discrimination on the basis of religion, ethnicity, color, race, gender, origin, caste, mental or physical disability.

Sub-clauses (2) and (3) of Clause 23 state that, the licensee shall not relay allegations that fall within the spectrum of hate speech, including calling someone anti-Pakistan, traitor or anti-Islam, and where hate speech is resorted to by any guest, the channel and its representative must stop the participant and remind him and the audience that no one has the authority to declare any other citizen as a Kafir or enemy of Pakistan, Islam or any other religion. This is the law of our country and makes abundant sense. Why is it being violated with impunity?

What the right to free speech doesnt grant is entitlement to make false allegations, impute vile motives and incite hatred against someone. We fail to protect the dignity and reputation of citizens because our defamation law is ineffectual. It is this law that must be brought to life and given a bite to inject responsibility and accountability into the media, penalise libel and slander while protecting speech merely critical of power elites and bad policies.

Instead of employing contempt laws or manufactured threats to national security to censor speech judges and generals find unpleasant, or slapping labels of treason and blasphemy to incite hatred against dissenters, can we please use the defamation law to strike the right balance between protected and prohibited speech as is done around the civilised world?

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.

Email: sattar@post.harvard.edu

Mind control gone foul? was posted in Opinion of TheNews International - https://www.thenews.com.pk on February 11, 2017 and was last updated on February 11, 2017. This news story is related to Print/185435-Mind-control-gone-foul/ - breaking news, latest news, pakistan ne. Permanent link to the news story "Mind control gone foul?" is https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/185435-Mind-control-gone-foul.

Read the original:
Mind control gone foul? | Opinion | thenews.com.pk - The News International

Compact pushbutton modules in the Cardinal DVM series are among the latest developments from Sommer Cable. The new pushbutton modules are said to make media control easy, especially in situations where operation directly on the device is either too complicated or not possible at all.

The modules are designed for fast set-up and wiring, and to be easy to operate: no programming skills are required. Customisable label fields with white LED illumination mean that users benefit from clear guidance, the company says.

The pushbutton modules are designed to allow seamless integration into furniture, conference rooms and public interiors, and are also said to be suitable for almost all switchframe systems currently available.

Also on show on the Sommer Cable stand is its new SC-Aqua Marinex LED Control, which is said to offer outstanding weather durability in its target application as a professional RGBW LED control cable.

Our new Aqua cable is cold flexible down to -40C, temperature resistant up to +80C, sand repellent and even salt water resistant, said Pascal Miguet, product and sales manager at Sommer Cable. Its UV resistant outer jacket means that it is also protected against intense solar radiation.

Our customers can therefore carry out demanding wiring jobs with a clear conscience, even down to a water depth of 10m.

Stand: 1-N117

See original here:
Push buttons for easy media control - Installation International

The Pointer

Take Control of Your Media The Pointer No news source is completely unbiased, nor will they ever truly be. It is up to the reader to think critically about what they see. The media has been criticized harshly by the Trump administration, being called dishonest on a regular basis. It is ...

Originally posted here:
Take Control of Your Media - The Pointer