The War: Journalists removed from Iraq bomb site

Iraqi police removed photographers from the site of bomb blasts that killed at least seven people in central Baghdad yesterday in the first use of a controversial new policy restricting media access.

The rest of the story by Ian Black, The Guardian's Middle East editor, is on today's edition of Guardian Unlimited.

Ridley sinks to Sharpton’s level

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

In his most recent HuffPo piece, John Ridley mocks Al Sharpton for claiming he “wasn’t really talking about [Mitt] Romney when he used the phrase ‘the one Mormon running for office’...[but] was actually contrasting himself with Christopher Hitchens.” According to news reports, however, Sharpton said no such thing. Ridley is apparently confusing Sharpton’s explanation that he was alluding to Hitchens’s atheism when he opined “those of us who believe in God” will not vote for Romney. So although Sharpton deserves much criticism for his aggressive opportunism and faux indignation, Ridley misses the mark here, and enables the loudmouth cleric to escape essentially unscathed.

No semantic argument about what constitutes censorship can conceal the effort Sharpton recently made to silence Don Imus, even though Imus hadn’t violated any rule. But instead of exposing this failure to distinguish between permissible and impermissible speech, Ridley callously gloats: “There are no tears shed in the Ridley household over the loss of Don Imus from waves of either radio or TV.”

As for why Ridley is ignoring the stench of arbitrary punishment for which Sharpton is largely responsible, it might be because Ridley is a smug beneficiary of Imus’s firing. About his appearance on MSNBC yesterday morning, Ridley writes it was “in Imus’s old slot, I sweetly say.”

Ridley’s career opportunity, however promising it is for the lucky guy himself, comes at the expense of a man’s livelihood, and the public’s option to tune in to a popular commentator. Sharpton led a pack of bullies who believe its great mental anguish should determine what the rest of us can hear and see. When he should be decrying this actual outrage, Ridley bemoans an imaginary one instead.

I invite Ridley to admit he erred, or produce a quote that corroborates his so far unsupported accusation. He might also explain exactly why he’s so pleased by the lynching of Imus. --Jeff Norman

Pasadena Site Outsources Local News Reporting to India

MediaBistro.com reports that James Macpherson, editor and publisher of Pasadena Now, has hired two reporters to cover the Pasadena city council. One lives in Mumbai (a dollar says you don't know where that is) and will be paid $12,000 a year. The other will work in Bangalore for $7,200. Despite the pay discrepancy, there appears to be little danger they'll unionize.

The council broadcasts its meetings online. From nearly 9,000 miles away, the outsourced journalists will watch, then write stories while their boss sleeps — India is 12.5 hours ahead of Pacific Standard Time. It's a little difficult to fathom how they'll develop sources, follow up on leads, or read between the lines of political double-talk or decipher the hidden meaning in bureaucrat-speak.

But by L.A. standards, they do come cheap.

The rest of the story: The Los Angeles Times

Waste and fraud in Iraq (video)

Here's a four minute excerpt from the movie ‘Iraq for Sale.’ The film's maker, Robert Greenwald, tried to screen the documentary as part of his testimony before Congress, but not surprisingly, since it reveals the unprecedented scale of the waste and theft perpetrated on their watch, Republican members prevented him from doing so. You would need to pour over the corporate media with a microscope to find coverage of what is the biggest government corruption scandal in our history. Coming soon to a coffee coffee klatch near you.

The clip is viewable on YouTube: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cJlJudDtVE>

Army attempts to shove blogging genie back in bottle

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages without clearing the content with a superior officer first. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops' online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.

Ironically, the complete text of the US Army's new operational security regulations was posted on the internet despite the phrase "For Official Use Only" splashed in bold across the cover. The revised regulations were first reported by Wired News blogger Noah Shachtman.

The rest of the story:
IraqSlogger.com: Blogosphere in a rage over new muzzle on military blogs
TruthDig: Military Bans Left-Leaning Blog
CNet News: Lip-zip sinks Army blogs?
MilBlogging: The World's Largest Index of Military Blogs
Andy Wibbels: Army Bans Blogging, Embraces YouTube
BlogWorldExpo: Pentagon Bans Army Milblogs!
CJR Daily: It looks like it's official: the United States Army thinks that American reporters are a threat to national security

News Corp. Plans Strategy to Woo Family, Journalists

mediabistro.com was kind enough to put together this collection of links on Rupert Murdoch's attempt to take over the Wall Street Journal. (WSJ): News Corp., launching a two-pronged offensive, is planning to take its case for buying Dow Jones & Co. to the media company's controlling shareholders, the Bancroft family, and directly to the newsroom of the Wall Street Journal. NYT: Murdoch insists he won't meddle in [Dow Jones'] journalism or slash-and-burn the staff. "We're not coming in with a bunch of cost-cutters," he said, but added: "I'm not saying it's going to be a holiday camp for everybody." BusinessWeek: "Rupert wakes up in the morning and thinks about how he can change the media world and where there are white spaces," says media consultant Peter Kreisky. "He had a plan that made [the Dow Jones] assets worth more than they would in just about anyone else's hands." LAT: Dow Jones staff urged to show support for family. Guardian: Financial Times owner Pearson could have cause for concern if Murdoch's bid for the Journal succeeds. Economist: Is Murdoch's bid for Dow Jones just about vanity?

Are reporters the same as foreign spies?

The U.S. Army apparently thinks so.

Wired's national security Danger Room report's on the Army's tough new security directives urging that reporters be handled like Al-Qaeda moles and treating the communication of unclassified, so-called "critical" and "sensitive" data as almost as serious a matter as leaking top secret information.

Army personnel should "consider handling attempts by unauthorized personnel to solicit critical information or sensitive information as a Subversion and Espionage Directed Against the U.S. Army (SAEDA) incident," the regulations say.

(1) DA personnel who have been involved in or have knowledge of a SAEDA incident will report all facts immediately to the nearest supporting counterintelligence (CI) office as required by AR 381–12.

(2) If these offices are not readily available, SAEDA incidents will be reported to the unit or organization security manager or commander.

(3) Security managers and commanders will ensure that, without exception, reports are relayed as securely and expeditiously as possible, but in all cases within 24 hours, to the nearest CI element.

(4) If counterintelligence support is not available, call the 1–800–CALL–SPY (1–800–225–5779) hotline, leave a message with your name and telephone number and no further details.

Secrecy News chief Steven Aftergood calls out this section -- which "encourages Army personnel to view inquisitive members of the press or the public as if they were enemies of the United States" -- as one of the worst in a "very rich and disturbing document."

He also notes that this policy -- and others like it -- seems "to be having an effect. I have noticed quite a few valuable Army web sites that used to be publicly available until this year and no longer are. One example: many hundreds of documents on the Army JAG site have recently been made password-protected."

Check out the presentation from the Army's 1st Information Operations Command, above. "And," as Danger Room puts it, "be ready to gag."