Posts Tagged ‘journalism’

by @anarchyroll
2/16/2014

Peace talks were held in Switzerland to try and bring an end to the conflict in Syria that has claimed the lives of 130,000 people and counting since March of 2011. The talks that took place in Geneva, reached an impasse when representatives of Bashar Al-Assad refused to entertain the idea, let alone negotiate, the concept of a transition to a new regime/government.

The victory was in the fact that peace talks took place at all. Even if they were a facade, with a body count like the one in Syria, anything that could possibly trigger a placebo effect to end the violence is welcomed at this point. With 6.5 million people turned into refugees by the conflict, any signs of light will do, even if it’s a cheap florescent.

I find the situation in Syria fascinating and disturbing. I have been following the story via The Guardian website since the body count three digits. The reason I care about the situation, read, and write about it is that it just amazes me that a conflict like this can exist in the world I live in. So many dead women, children, and civilians; executed by gunfire, bombs, and chemical weapon attacks. The first Gulf War was started for far less, not to mention the second one, and the US involvement in Libya.

I don’t think I’m better than people who don’t follow the Syria story. I don’t think people that don’t pay attention to Syria are bad people or ignorant. Syria is so far away. They don’t have nuclear weapons and we don’t trade with them, so why should we care? That’s not a sarcastic or rhetorical question. It’s something about the numbers of people.  Six figures dead, seven figures worth turned into refugees. That just…..grabs me…

So I’m going to keep reading about Syria and blogging about it. Because I care. Because I think other people should at least be aware of what is happening there. What does the fact that this is allowed to happen mean about we as humans? I don’t know, I’m not asking sarcastically like I have a superior answer or opinion. That is a question I keep coming back to. In the same world of hotel suites underwater, nightclubs carved out of ice, iPhones, and the Super Bowl a government has been killing hundreds of thousands of its civilians and turning millions more into refugees.

Something about Syria makes me stop and think. I hope it makes you think too.

eanda logoby @anarchyroll
2/9/2014

$100 million dollars is a lot of money. A big round number that looks especially good in a press release touting charitable contributions. When a company makes $4.6 billion each financial quarter however, that $100 million sounds a little less charitable. When the people receive the charity are saying they don’t need the money, they need better infrastructure and a cheaper bill, well, welcome to America.

In an excellent piece written for the  Washington Post, Brian Fung very politely writes why the nine figure monetary donation is bullshit. Again, he puts it much more politely than I. After all, what good are a bunch of iPads if the school either doesn’t have broadband or can’t afford it? Which is plenty of schools, not just the ones in the ghettos are facing.

Have you noticed your internet bill going down in the last decade? Exactly, imagine what a municipal internet bill is. No such thing as a free lunch. If we charge people to not die of cancer, what hope do kids who want to save their homework to the cloud have?

Good thing we have a socialist, liberal, communist, democratic president in office whose going to stick it to the billion dollar corporations to help the schools out right? Spoiler alert, Obama has is a moderate conservative. Nothing has been asked or demanded of the telcomm companies to provide free or even discounted rates on new infrastructure or service to schools in rural areas of America or in impoverished urban areas either (both of which still run on dial up in some cases).

$100 million is a lot of money, but when that is how much money is made in 8 out of 8,765 hours of operation, it’s a token gesture meant to distract and distort. Nothing more, nothing less. Not to mention we haven’t talked about the students who go to school starving for food, not for playing Candy Crush during home room.

by @anarchyroll
1/30/2014

The West Virginia chemical spill is the gift that keeps on giving, by gift, I mean knee in the proverbial testicles.  It turns out the effects of the chemical that spilled (MCHM) has NOT been tested in relation to its effects on humans.

Bad right? Ready for the good news? The effects aren’t even known to the company responsible for the spill. Not that they tested the chemical and suppressed the results, they never even did a study. The company that created the chemical (Eastman Chemical Company) did a study of the effects on rats, but hasn’t publicly disclosed the results before OR after the spill.

How is this possible? How is this legal? Because MCHM was “grandfathered” in when the Toxic Substances Control Act passed in 1976.  What is the point of regulation if there are 64 exemptions to it?

Lack of knowledge of the effects, no regulation, no labels or information provided to ordinary citizens…sounds like GMO foods to me. I guess Monsanto took their cues from DOW Chemical.

by @anarchyroll
August 25th, 2013

According to a variety of reports last week, 21st Century Fox bought 5% of VICE for $70 million.  21st Century FOX formerly known as News Corp, values the company at $1.4 billion. In the era of decaying and dissolving journalism, that is quite an accomplishment for an entertainment entity built on a foundation of gonzo journalism. Shane Smith, the co founder and CEO of VICE is very enthusiastic about the deal. His quote, which appeared in each source used for this article is, “We get to make all the content we want? With the best platforms in the world? Grow our brand exponentially? Become the next global media brand? And all the while own the vast majority of the company and vote 95% of the board? Where-do-we-fucking-sign?!”

 
VICE has certainly earned the benefit of the doubt that they will not change their style. They have held a virtual media stranglehold on the early adopter and hipster segments of the 18-34 year old demographic for the better part of a decade. I am a huge fan of VICE, and full discretion, hope to one day write and report for them in the spirit of what Tim Pool  has been doing over the past three years. However, as much as VICE has earned the benefit of the doubt that they won’t be manipulated by FOX, Rupert Murdoch has that much more earned the benefit of the doubt that he will try and succeed in manipulating them. One need only consult the documentary film Outfoxed to see the slow burn narrative Murdoch may use to influence the way VICE presents its content.

 
When a person signs a deal with the devil, it is always front loaded with benefits. $70 million upfront, barely a sliver of minority ownership given away, and a metaphoric key ring into the media markets of India, Italy, and Germany. VICE seems to have gotten one by “the man” and “the system” by being able to fund their anti establishment style of journalism and media content production. But there is no such thing as something for nothing, and if something seems too good to be true, it is. VICE now has a portfolio of minority owners, all of whom are or have corporate interests. A global talent agency (WME), a global marketing group (WPP), a bank (Raine), and now 21st Century FOX. VICE also habitually uses sponsorship money from Vitamin Water (Coca Cola), Toshiba, Intel, and General Electric. The terms rebel and anti have a permanent restraining order from corporate money and influence companies like that provide, yet VICE keeps getting deeper in with the biggest and most money thirsty.

 
I believe VICE has positive intentions and that they know what they are doing. I also know that they are the type of entity that welcomes devil’s advocate questions and scrutiny. They are yet to report this story on their own website. I have checked their website repeatedly each day since this story broke and one would only know about this deal because they check other news websites; why is that? 25% of VICE is now owned by international corporations that couldn’t give two fucks about journalism or fact based reporting; what is their specific influence on VICE’s content? Rupert Murdoch has bled his conservative (modern day US Republican party) agenda into all of his media enterprises; when does he try to do this with VICE? Has VICE considered Murdoch could use his influence on their other sponsors and minority owners to do this? Where does VICE selling itself a la carte to the highest bidder end? How is VICE the one media entity that doesn’t allow its content to be watered down and have its balls cut off by high level corporate cash synergy?

 
I am a fan and a friend of VICE. A bucket list goal of mine is to be a reporter for them. I’m not writing this article with my nose turned up, with a sarcastic tone, or a sense of moral superiority. I am passionate about truth and knowledge/information dissemination. The story of FOX buying into VICE is clouded in translucency rather than transparency. VICE has yet to report it. The only non entertainment, online news entity to report this story, was the original reporters at the Financial Times. Something stinks about this deal and the people and reporters my generation would turn to investigate it further, are the very people excepting $70 million from Rupert Murdoch.