Archive for the ‘Media Control’ Category

Media industry a major force for Philippine progress Jimenez

The Philippine media industry is now at the forefront of advancing the countrys progress through the information it disseminates, a modern-day reality underscored by Tourism Secretary Ramon Jimenez, Jr. yesterday in his keynote speech during the opening of the Confluence Media Congress 2015 in Pasay City.

The event gathered some 1,700 delegates comprised of media suppliers, advertisers, marketers at the Newport Performing Arts Theater at Resorts World Manila.

The meeting of the strategic objectives and the publics feelings happen every day, Jimenez said. [The] media provide the avenues, the public provides the message.

The advent of technology, social media in particular, according to Jimenez, has played a big role in the success of the Department of Tourisms Its More Fun in the Philippines campaign.

Organized by the Media Specialists Association of the Philippines (MSAP), the biennial confab urges todays media practitioners that rethinking and reshaping the future of media today is an indispensable part of engaging the general public. The first congress was held in 2013.

The focus is on media and development, MSAP Media Congress 2015 Chairman Nic Gabunada Jr. told Manila Bulletin (MB). At the turn of the century, we can see that the media have become more like above the line.

The game is now all about content and how the media engage the consumer via content, according to Gabunada, who delivered the welcome remarks and introduced Jimenez.

Its no longer just the straightforward use of your advertisement by being on television, radio, or print. Now, you have to consider that there are digital, online, [and] mobile platforms. We call this new distribution, he said.

The consumer has changed because he has more control over content now, he said.

Asked to further elaborate on Confluence in the confabs theme, Gabunada said that its a portmanteau of convergence and influence.

Read more from the original source:
Media industry a major force for Philippine progress Jimenez

Media Censorship in China – Council on Foreign Relations

Author: Beina Xu Updated: April 7, 2015

The Chinese government has long kept tight reins on both traditional and new media to avoid potential subversion of its authority. Its tactics often entail strict media controls using monitoring systems and firewalls, shuttering publications or websites, and jailing dissident journalists, bloggers, and activists. Google's battle with the Chinese government over Internet censorship, and the Norwegian Nobel Committee's awarding of the 2010 Peace Prize to jailed Chinese activist Liu Xiaobo, have also increased international attention to censorship issues. At the same time, the country's burgeoning economy relies on the web for growth, and experts say the growing need for Internet freedom is testing the regime's control.

China's constitution affords its citizens freedom of speech and press, but the opacity of Chinese media regulations allows authorities to crack down on news stories by claiming that they expose state secrets and endanger the country. The definition of state secrets in China remains vague, facilitating censorship of any information that authorities deem harmful (PDF) to their political or economic interests. CFR Senior Fellow Elizabeth C. Economy says the Chinese government is in a state of schizophrenia about media policy as it goes back and forth, testing the line, knowing they need press freedom and the information it provides, but worried about opening the door to the type of freedoms that could lead to the regime's downfall.

In May 2010, the government issued its first white paper on the Internet that emphasized the concept of Internet sovereignty, requiring all Internet users in China, including foreign organizations and individuals, to abide by Chinese laws and regulations. Chinese Internet companies are now required to sign the Public Pledge on Self-Regulation and Professional Ethics for China Internet Industry, which entails even stricter rules than those in the white paper, according to Jason Q. Ng, a specialist on Chinese media censorship and author of Blocked on Weibo.

The France-based watchdog group Reporters Without Borders ranked China 175 out of 180 countries in its 2014 worldwideindex of press freedom (PDF). Former CFR Edward R. Murrow Press Fellow Matt Pottinger says Chinese media outlets usually employ their own monitors to ensure political acceptability of their content. Censorship guidelines are circulated weekly from the Communist Party propaganda department and the government Bureau of Internet Affairs to prominent editors and media providers.

Certain websites that the government deems potentially dangerouslike Wikipediaare blocked during periods of controversy, such as the June 4 anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. Specific material considered a threat to political stability is also banned, including controversial photos and search terms. The government is particularly keen on blocking reports of issues that could incite social unrest, like official corruption and ethnic strife. The websites of Bloomberg news service and theNew York Times were blacked out in 2012 after each ran reports on the private wealth of then Party Secretary Xi Jinping and Premier Wen Jiabao. Restrictions were also placed on micro-blogging services in April 2012 in response to rumors of a coup attempt in Beijing involving the disgraced former Chongqing party chief Bo Xilai. Censors were also swift to block any mention of an October 2013 attack on Tiananmen Square by individuals from Xinjiang province, home to the mostly Muslim Uighur minority group.

More than a dozen government bodies review and enforce laws related to information flow within, into, and out from China. The most powerful monitoring body is the Communist Party's Central Propaganda Department (CPD), which coordinates with General Administration of Press and Publication and State Administration of Radio, Film, and Television to ensure content promotes party doctrine. Ng says that the various ministries once functioned as smaller fiefdoms of control, but have recently been more consolidated under the State Council Information Office, which has taken the lead on Internet monitoring.

Some estimates say that the government employs roughly 100,000 people, hired both by the state and private companies, to constantly monitor China's Internet. Additionally, the CPD gives media outlets editorial guidelines as well as directives restricting coverage of politically sensitive topics. In one high-profile incident involving the liberal Guangdong magazine Southern Weekly, government censors rewrote the paper's New Year's message from a call for reform to a tribute to the Communist Party. The move triggered mass demonstrations by the staff and general public, who demanded the resignation of the local propaganda bureau chief. While staff and censors reached a compromise that would theoretically relax some controls, much of the censorship remained in place.

The Chinese government deploys myriad ways of censoring the Internet. The Golden Shield Project, colloquially known as the Great Firewall, is the center of the government's online censorship and surveillance effort. Its methods include bandwidth throttling, keyword filtering, and blocking access to certain websites. According to Reporters Without Borders, the firewall makes large-scale use of Deep Packet Inspection technology to block access based on keyword detection. As Ng points out, the government also employs a diverse range of methods to induce journalists to censor themselves, including dismissals and demotions, libel lawsuits, fines, arrests, and forced televised confessions.

As of December, 2014, forty-four journalists wereimprisoned in China, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, a U.S.-based watchdog on press freedom issues. In 2009, Chinese rights activist Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to eleven years in prison for advocating democratic reforms and freedom of speech in Charter 08, a 2008 statement signed by more than two thousand prominent Chinese citizens that called for political and human rights reforms and an end to one-party rule. When Liu won the Nobel Peace Prize, censors blocked the news in China. A year later, journalist Tan Zuoren was sentenced to five years in prison for drawing attention to government corruption and poor construction of school buildings that collapsed and killed thousands of children during the 2008 earthquake in Sichuan province. Early 2014 saw the government detain Gao Yu, a columnist who was jailed on accusations of leaking a Party communiqu titled Document 9.

Continue reading here:
Media Censorship in China - Council on Foreign Relations

JOSEPH CURL: Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign strategy is to control media

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

In early 2007, the mainstream political pundits were already falling in line, predicting that Hillary Rodham Clinton would be her partys presidential nominee for an election still nearly two years hence.

Hillary was The Chosen One. The pundits said she was unstoppable: She had the Clinton Machine behind her the ruthless team of operatives and dirt-diggers who twice put her husband into office as well as tens of millions of email addresses and, of course, access to hundreds of millions of dollars at the snap of her fingers.

She lost. Badly. But she didnt just lose. While selling herself as the mature candidate whom Americans could trust to handle properly that emergency 3 a.m. phone call, she got her hat handed to her by a 47-year-old with more experience as a community organizer than a U.S. senator, a job hed held only since 2004.

Americans didnt love Barack Obama. And most probably didnt fall for his tripe about hope and change and a post-partisan presidency. They simply didnt like and didnt trust Hillary.

More, though, the media decided it was time for a change. Instead of a professional politician an old and tired face the mainstream media put its muscle behind the up and comer. When reports emerged in March 2008 that Mrs. Clinton had lied about taking hostile fire from snipers during a March 1996 visit to U.S. troops at Tuzla Air Base in Bosnia, the press pummeled her.

There was a new Chosen One. And while she stayed on for two more months, Mrs. Clinton was done. The media had decided they bailed on her to support the man whose victory would be the historic election of the first black president. On June 7, she quit the race.

Now, shes back with a whole new bag of lies. But this time she has a plan: Shell control the media and shes already putting her plan into action.

Before her Sunday announcement, Team Hillary held private dinners with media bigs. Off the record, of course. Attending were ABCs Diane Sawyer, David Muir and George Stephanopoulos, who was Bill Clintons White House communications director (and also the guy who created the war on women narrative the press used against Republican Mitt Romney in 2012). Also wining and dining were CBSs Norah ODonnell and NBCs Savannah Guthrie, who recently attacked Sen. Rand Paul and repeatedly talked over him during a contentious interview (which, as you can predict, led to MSM charges that Mr. Paul hates women).

MSNBCs Joe Scarborough (once a Republican lawmaker) was there, as were several reporters from CNN, and, as always, Mike Allen of the liberal Politico website.

Excerpt from:
JOSEPH CURL: Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign strategy is to control media

Media executives' pay packages are still in stratosphere

Among captains of industry, entertainment executives continue to reap some of the biggest rewards when it comes to compensation.

The biggest pay day so far went to Discovery Communications Chief Executive David Zaslav, who received a $156.1-million compensation package in 2014 even though he manages one of the smaller media companies. That's a stratospheric level even by Wall Street standards. Consider that JPMorgan Chase & Co., the nation's largest bank, reported in January that CEO Jamie Dimon raked in a pay package of $20 million.

The lucrative compensation packages come at an increasingly troubled time in the media industry. Media companies are struggling to adapt to changes brought on by digital competitors such as Netflix, which is attracting consumers who once spent the bulk of their free time watching traditional TV channels.

Zaslav is not the only media executive with handsome rewards. CBS Corp. Chief Executive Leslie Moonves last year received a pay package valued at $57 million, according to a CBS proxy filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission late Friday.

Moonves' compensation, which included a $25-million bonus, represented a nearly 15% decline from 2013. Moonves' pay package had been shooting up along with the value of CBS stock but the company's shares lost ground last year as Wall Street fretted about the industry trends of audience fragmentation and the proliferation of online streaming services.

CBS shares closed up 40 cents Friday at $61.60. The stock has declined 8% during the last year. Discovery's stock is down much more: 23% during the last 12 months. Discovery shares closed down 17 cents at $33.04 on Friday.

Charles Elson, director of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, said that sky-high executive compensation packages for media executives is just a symptom of a larger problem. Many of the companies have two classes of stock voting and nonvoting shares which reduces ordinary shareholders to bystanders with no influence.

"Investors in media companies really don't have a voice like they do in other companies," Elson said Friday. "That's why you see all of these high salaries in media. The whole thing is a toxic cocktail for investors."

CBS, Comcast Corp., Viacom Inc., Discovery Communications and Rupert Murdoch's 21st Century Fox all have dual classes of stock. Key figures in those companies control the voting shares, which gives them a disproportionate influence in their company's affairs. For example, Murdoch controls 39% of the voting shares at Fox and his second company, News Corp., and less than 15% of the economic interest.

Murdoch's fiscal 2014 compensation was $29.2 million.

Read more here:
Media executives' pay packages are still in stratosphere

Journalism/Works: Putin: Power, Persuasion and Propaganda

When:

April 2, 2015 @ 2:00 pm 3:00 pm

2015-04-02T14:00:00-04:00

2015-04-02T15:00:00-04:00

Where:

Knight TV Studio 555 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest Washington, DC 20001 USA

Cost:

Free with Newseum admission. Seating is on a space-available basis.

Anti-American sentiment and a nationalist fervor in Russia are rated higher today than at Cold War peaks and at the heart of those twin developments is a master of propaganda, media control and mass audience appeal: Russian president Vladimir Putin. This year is the 30th anniversary of the launch of perestroika and glasnost under Mikhail Gorbachev and the 15th anniversary of Putin becoming president.

Join a panel of experts for a provocative program examining how this high-profile, yet enigmatic leader has shaped his own public image, taken control of the Russian news media and marshaled public support to put Russia on a collision course with the West. How do and can Europe and the United States counter the production and promotion of a hybrid truth in Russia and news produced in formats that mimic Western news media, but in reality generated by state entities with no political oversight or control?

View original post here:
Journalism/Works: Putin: Power, Persuasion and Propaganda