It’s the Wrong Time to Cut Support for Public Media

 

By Richard A. Lee

When Josh Silver, one of the founders of the media reform organization Free Press, spoke at Rutgers University in March, he suggested that the key to re-invigorating American journalism is to increase investment in non-commercial media.

Silver noted that support for public media in the U.S. pales in comparison to the funding that other nations provide. In fact, a Free Press study he co-authored found:

“At around $420 million in federal funds per year, the United States has one of the lowest-funded public media systems in the developed world. The federal government allocates a paltry $1.43 per person each year to maintain the system, compared to more than 70 times that amount in Finland and nearly 80 times that amount in Denmark. If the United States spent as much on public media as those countries, it would total $30 billion annually.”

I found Silver’s idea intriguing, but wondered about its feasibility in the current fiscal climate. At the time of his lecture, Republicans in Congress were threatening to cut off funding for NPR, and in New Jersey, the future of NJN, the state’s public television network, was in jeopardy.

This week, the ax started to fall on NJN. Governor Christie announced plans to transfer operation of the New Jersey network to public broadcasting station WNET in New York, which will partner with Steve Adubato Jr.’s Caucus Educational Corporation to produce New Jersey programming. The proposal, however, can be blocked by the State Legislature, so what happens between now and the end of June will determine the future of NJN.

At an annual cost of about $11 million, NJN does not account for a significant portion of the state’s $30 billion budget. Still, it is a matter of priorities. Governor Christie has made it clear he does not believe the state should be in the business of operating a television network. As Governor, that is his prerogative, but there are plenty of reasons why funding NJN should be a priority.

For starters, quality journalism is an essential component of a strong democracy. Over the past decade, it has become increasingly difficult to provide quality journalism, largely due to economic factors that have caused massive layoffs and cutbacks throughout the industry. We need more, not less, support for journalism – especially in New Jersey. Not only have our state’s media outlets experienced the same cutbacks and layoffs as other states; we have no major television station of our own – and TV remains the most popular source for news, even with the phenomenal growth of the internet.

As for questions about the somewhat unusual situation of having a station that is staffed by state employees cover state government, I believe those concerns are overstated. From a personal standpoint, I have observed the NJN news staff for more than 25 years – as a fellow reporter, as a staffer for the legislature and two governors, and as an analyst for the Hall Institute – and I cannot recall any instances in which the station cut state government a break.

Similarly, the Free Press study acknowledged the possibility of government influence and interference in publicly funded media systems, but found little indication of such occurrences, In fact, the results were quite to the contrary:

“The evidence clearly demonstrates that where democratic countries have invested considerably in an independent public media system, the results are not censorship and propaganda, but greater civic participation and democratic engagement. Many of the nations that enjoy the highest rates of voter participation, civic literacy and civil liberties maintain large public subsidies for journalism.”

The truth is the perception of a conflict can exist regardless of what entity funds a news organization. Most news outlets are parts of massive corporations that own wide varieties of businesses, so they also are subject to the perception of conflicts. But that does not make the perception true. For that matter, is the perception that NJN is unduly influenced by state government any more troubling than the perception that would occur if the Governor’s proposal goes through and the state’s new public television network is operated by a corporation whose principal is the son of Steve Adubato Sr., one the state’s most influential political powerbrokers?

Lastly, by transferring operation of the state’s television network to an entity based in New York, the Governor’s plan furthers strengthens the false perception that New Jersey is less important than our neighbors to the north, as well as those to the south. This is not a new problem. As far back as 1776, Benjamin Franklin described New Jersey as “a beer barrel, tapped at both ends, with all the live beer running into Philadelphia and New York.”

For more than two centuries, we’ve let too much of that beer flow to Philly and NYC. It’s time to keep more of it in the Garden State.

# # #

Listen to a related podcast.

Richard A. Lee is Communications Director of the Hall Institute. A former State House reporter and Deputy Communications Director for the Governor, he also teaches courses in media, politics and government at Rutgers University, where he is completing work on a Ph.D. in media studies. Read more of Rich’s columns at richleeonline and follow him on Twitter.

Harvard & Vanderbilt Endowments Criticized for Buying African Farmland

Keeping an eye on this. Via The Chronicle of Philanthropy:

Several major U.S. university endowments are investing heavily in African land, anticipating high returns in deals some critics say displace rural farmers and refugees, according to The Guardian.

Harvard and Vanderbilt are among the universities buying African farmland through European speculators and hedge funds such as London-based Emergent, the British daily writes, citing a new report by the Oakland Institute, an advocacy group.

Researchers at the group say Emergent’s American clients may have put as much as $500-million in some of the most fertile land in seven African countries.

An Emergent spokesman acknowledged university endowment funds are among its “long-term investors” but said its African land fund invests in “agriculture and setting up businesses and employing people. We are doing it in a responsible way.”

But Oakland Institute director Anuradha Mittal said the group’s analysis shows “that many of the deals will provide few jobs and will force many thousands of people off the land.”
The newspaper did not include any responses from the American universities named in the report.

via Harvard and Vanderbilt Endowments Criticized for Buying African Farmland – Philanthropy Today – The Chronicle of Philanthropy- Connecting the nonprofit world with news, jobs, and ideas.

Harvard & Vanderbilt Endowments Criticized for Buying African Farmland

Keeping an eye on this. Via The Chronicle of Philanthropy:

Several major U.S. university endowments are investing heavily in African land, anticipating high returns in deals some critics say displace rural farmers and refugees, according to The Guardian.

Harvard and Vanderbilt are among the universities buying African farmland through European speculators and hedge funds such as London-based Emergent, the British daily writes, citing a new report by the Oakland Institute, an advocacy group.

Researchers at the group say Emergent’s American clients may have put as much as $500-million in some of the most fertile land in seven African countries.

An Emergent spokesman acknowledged university endowment funds are among its “long-term investors” but said its African land fund invests in “agriculture and setting up businesses and employing people. We are doing it in a responsible way.”

But Oakland Institute director Anuradha Mittal said the group’s analysis shows “that many of the deals will provide few jobs and will force many thousands of people off the land.”
The newspaper did not include any responses from the American universities named in the report.

via Harvard and Vanderbilt Endowments Criticized for Buying African Farmland – Philanthropy Today – The Chronicle of Philanthropy- Connecting the nonprofit world with news, jobs, and ideas.

Pakistan Forces Accused of Killing Unarmed Man

Television reports showing a young man shot in cold blood by the Rangers in Karachi are disturbing to watch (I feel physically sick after watching it). An unidentified cameraman filmed the episode and made the footage available to TV channels – it’s online if anyone has the heart to watch it but better to read this report about the incident by AFP reporter Hasan Mansoor: Five soldiers arrested after Pakistan park killing.

 News Hundreds of people attended the funeral in Karachi on Thursday of a young man whose killing by Pakistani paramilitary forces was recorded and aired on local television.

Sarfaraz Shah was killed Wednesday in a park in the southern Pakistani port city.

A video of his death, which was posted on the video website YouTube, shows him pleading for his life before being shot in the hand and leg, at close range, by soldiers. It then shows Shah falling to the ground and begging for help, before bleeding to death.

Paramilitary officials say Shah was armed and was attempting to rob people at the park where his killing took place.

Shah's brother, a local crime reporter, says he was not a criminal and was wrongly accused.

Authorities are investigating the incident, which was condemned by human rights activists and members of Pakistan's parliament. Reports say at least two soldiers have been detained in connection with the shooting.

Last month, security forces shot and killed of five unarmed Chechens, including a pregnant woman, at a checkpoint near Quetta, the capital of the southwestern province of Baluchistan. Officials initially said they were suicide bombers.

Last week, Amnesty International urged Pakistan's government to take urgent steps to end killings and abductions in Baluchistan after a professor, Saba Dashtiyari, was shot and killed by gunmen in Quetta.

While no one has claimed responsibility for Dashtiyari's death, Amnesty said groups in Baluchistan have accused Pakistani security forces of carrying out the killing. The rights group says more than 150 political activists, journalists, lawyers and student have been killed in Baluchistan in the past year.

Posted by MsMarti

Chicago Man Acquitted In Mumbai plot

Jurors found Chicago businessman Tahawwur Hussain Rana guilty on two counts of aiding a terrorist organization, but acquitted him on a charge connecting him to the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in India.

Rana was convicted on one count of conspiracy to provide material support in a planned attack against a newspaper in Denmark. He also was found guilty of providing material support to the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Tayyiba.

He faces a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison on the two counts combined, and remains in federal custody without bond, according to the Justice Department. U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber ordered the defense to file post-trial motions by August 15. No sentencing date was set.


David Coleman Headley, the government’s star witness against Rana, pleaded guilty last year to terrorism charges related to the Mumbai attacks and was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Headley testified that Rana, 50, knew about the scouting trips to India to plan the Mumbai attacks, which were carried out in November 2008 and left more than 160 people dead. In acquitting him on the charge involving Mumbai, the jurors signaled that Headley’s testimony hadn’t swayed them.

Headley also said he and Rana were involved in planning another plot to bomb the offices of Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that had published irreverent cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in 2005. The cartoons prompted angry demonstrations and violence in much of the Muslim world.


The jury found Rana guilty of helping to plot that attack, which was never carried out.

Rana and Headley were among a total of eight co-defendants who have been indicted in the case since late 2009, according to the Department of Justice. The other six are all believed to be in Pakistan.

“Today’s verdict demonstrates our commitment to hold accountable not only terrorist operatives, but also those who facilitate their activities,” said Todd Hinnen, acting assistant attorney general for national security. “As established at trial, Tahawwur Rana provided valuable cover and support to David Headley, knowing that Headley and others were plotting terror attacks overseas.

“We will not rest in our efforts to identify and bring to justice those who provide support to terrorists.”
During the eight-day trial, the defense argued that Rana had no idea what Headley was up to, and that Headley was lying to avoid the death penalty.

Rana, who has been in custody since his arrest on 2009, sat motionless as the verdict was read. Afterward, defense attorney Patrick Blegen said he was “extremely disappointed” that Rana was convicted on any counts.

“We don’t get to be back there for the (jury) deliberations so we don’t know how they came to their decision,” Blegen said. “We believe Mr. Rana and we believe he was not guilty. The jury came to another decision, we respect their decision but we think they got it wrong.”

(Source: CNN)

Hillary Clinton eager to become head of World Bank

Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State, has been in discussions with the White House about stepping down from her foreign policy job next year to becoming head of the World Bank, it has been reported.
Telegraph | Jun 9, 2011

By Toby Harnden, Washington

Mrs Clinton, the former First Lady, Senator for New York and rival to Mr Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary race, is said to be eager to become the first female president of the World Bank should the post become vacant next year.

“Hillary Clinton wants the job,” a source close to Mrs Clinton told Reuters, which broke the news of the possible move.

Robert Zoellick, a former Bush administration official, is believed to be ready to step down as president at the end of his term in the middle of next year.

Poll: Weiner constituents say stay

Poll: Weiner constituents say stay 10 Jun 2011 Even as colleagues and commentators continue to call on Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) to resign, a majority of voters in his district want him to stay put, although support for his re-election was weak, according to a new poll. A NY1-Marist poll conducted Wednesday in Weiner's district, representing parts of Brooklyn and Queens, found 56 percent of registered voters there saying that the embattled congressman should not quit. Weiner has cited support shown in earlier polls of all New York City residents as a reason why he won't step down.

Alabama Passes Toughest Illegal Immigration Law

Written By : William Teach

Obviously, this is causing certain people to freak out and use their typical language. The BBC goes with the substance of it being raaaaacist. Let’s see what the LA Times has to say

Alabama set a new national standard for get-tough immigration policy Thursday with Gov. Robert J. Bentley’s signing of a law that surpasses Arizona’s SB 1070, with provisions affecting law enforcement, transportation, apartment rentals, employment and education.
The new law, combined with legislation passed in May by neighboring Georgia, has arguably made this swath of the Deep South the nation’s hottest immigration battleground, with the region’s troubled racial history fueling the fire.

Oops. Raaaaacism. Funny how liberals always go back to that same well, instead of discussing law and order.

The American Civil Liberties Union declared its intention Thursday to file a lawsuit opposing HB 56, arguing that it would invite racial profiling and require police to “demand ‘papers’ from people they stop whom they suspect are not authorized to be in the U.S.”

“This draconian initiative signed into law this morning by Gov. Robert Bentley is so oppressive that even Bull Connor himself would be impressed,” said Wade Henderson, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, referring to Birmingham’s notorious segregationist public safety commissioner from the civil rights era. “HB 56 is designed to do nothing more than terrorize the state’s Latino community.”

Well, Democrats would know about racism, since they were the primary drivers behind those policies, while Republicans worked to stop racist policies, even deciding to go to war over it.

In an echo of the Arizona law, the Alabama legislation requires that police, in the course of any lawful “stop, detention or arrest,” make a reasonable attempt to determine a person’s citizenship and immigration status, given a “reasonable suspicion” that the person is an immigrant, unless doing so would hinder an investigation.

It outlaws illegal immigrants from receiving any state or local public benefits, bars them from enrolling in or attending public colleges, and prohibits them from applying for or soliciting work.
It forbids the harboring and transport of illegal immigrants, and outlaws renting them property or “knowingly” employing them for any work within the state. It also makes it a “discriminatory practice” to fire, or decline to hire, a legal resident when an illegal one is on the payroll.
The law criminalizes “dealing in false identification documents” and, beginning April 1, will require every business in the state to verify employees’ immigration status using the federal E-Verify system.

Kudos to Alabama for taking a tough stance. Expect the Obama administration to take the state to court shortly.

For opponents, one of the most disturbing provisions is a requirement that officials in K-12 public schools determine whether students are illegal immigrants. It will not ban the students from schools, but rather require every school district to submit an annual report on the number of presumed illegal immigrants to the state education board.

But Ali Noorani, head of the National Immigration Forum, fears that simply asking parents about their children’s immigration status will cause them to pull their kids from school.

Good. They shouldn’t be there, Mr. Noorani. Apparently, Los Parents will have to show their snowflakes’ birth certificates or proper proof of citizenship. Personally, I remember having to provide (or parents having to) documents such as my certificate of live birth for grade school, boarding school, and college. I had to provide said COLB to get my NJ and NC drivers licenses.

Anyhow, this law is a good mixture of measures, including law enforcement and making it difficult and expensive to employ illegals, all designed to drive them from Alabama.

One problem I see with this is that a person can receive up to a year in jail for transporting a known illegal, but a business would only lose their license for 10 days. They need to make the penalties on business, and the specific people who hire illegals, stricter and tougher.