Archive for the ‘Media Control’ Category

Which Country Today Is Most Like Orwell’s 1984 Authoritarian Nightmare? – Newsweek

This article first appeared on the American Enterprise Institute site.

Its been almost 70 years since English novelist Eric Arthur Blair, writing under the pseudonym George Orwell, penned 1984, his famous dystopian novel which depicted life in Oceania, a state in perpetual war with omnipresent government surveillance, strict state control of the media, and cynical government manipulation of the populace.

The state prosecutes thought crime and independent thinking. The Inner Party strictly controls policy, even as members of the Outer Party fill other bureaucratic slots in order to keep the state functioning. Historical revisionism is rife and alliances shift rapidly.

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

After years of war against Eurasia, Oceanias policy suddenly switches, hence the declarative statement, Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia, no matter the reality of previous years.

Orwell wrote his masterpiece in the wake of World War II and against the backdrop of the expansion of communism throughout Eastern Europe and its attempts to make inroads into Western Europe.

Photographs of Eric Blair, whose pen name was George Orwell, from his Metropolitan Police file, c.1940. The National Archives UK

The reason 1984 remains so relevant today, however, is that uncomfortable takes on fake news and government disdain for individual liberty remain too real in too many places. After President Donald Trumps inauguration, 1984 shot up the rankings on Amazon, leading the publisher to print an additional 70,000 copies.

Whatever disdain people might have for Trump and his unwillingness to confront even the reality of his past statements and positions, the United States is not Oceania and any suggestion otherwise is an exaggeration. The judiciary is independent and the media free. What countries then come closest to the Oceania of Orwells creation?

North Korea is, of course, the most totalitarian country on earth. Foreign media consumption is not allowed. Children are indoctrinated from birth, if not from North Korean schools then by their own families who fear the consequence of any question or remark, however innocent, that could contradict or somehow cross the Dear Leaders line.

Dissidence, real or suspected, will lead to punishment not only for the individual but for generations of his or her family. Heroes one day transform into despicable human scum.

Turkmenistan, at least under the late leader Turkmenbashi, came close. He named days and months after himself and his family, and constructed a gold statue that rotated with the sun.

But, while Turkmenbashi sought absolute obedience, his regime was more authoritarian than totalitarian. Eritrea, too, is authoritarian in the extreme especially with regard to press freedom and free expression but is not organized enough to be truly totalitarian.

If Orwell were alive today, the country which might best conform to 1984 might well be Turkey. The issue isnt simply President Recep Tayyip Erdogans corruption or authoritarianism. In that, he is really no different from Russian President Vladimir Putin or Venezuelan dictator Nicols Maduro.

Rather, it is how Erdogan has seized control of the media in order to impose narratives that change as rapidly as Oceanias wars against Eastasia and Eurasia. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was Erdogans best-friend, for example, until he wasnt.

But woe to any Turk that points out how Erdogan cultivated Assad and even vacationed with him. Turkeys relationship with Russia is enough to give any observer whiplash, moving from cautious trade partners to sanctions and military bluster to the tightest of allies over the course of a year.

The same has become especially apparent in the aftermath of the July 15, 2016 abortive coup, which Erdogan blames on friend-turned-rival Fethullah Glen, a US-based theologian.

After the Erdogan-Glen dispute about finances and corruption spilled into the open in 2013, the Erdogan-controlled Turkish press turned on a dime, ascribing ever-more outlandish conspiracies to a man with whom they were infatuated just months before.

Remember, just a few years earlier, Turkish police were seeking the author and all copies of an unpublished manuscript critical of Glen. While the book was unpublished and therefore no libel had occurred Erdogan and Turkeys police sought to prosecute the case because, at the time, to think negatively about Glen or his followers was intolerable.

But that was then and this is now. Erdogan and his press today ascribe a name the Fethullahist Terror Organization to his organization and hundreds of thousands of his followers and demand the Turkish press pick up the narrative.

The state propels the same accusations they once sought to suppress. In effect, Erdogan has always been at war with Eastasia. Likewise, even though Erdogans coup-night narrative is full of holes, Turkish journalists and academics are not allowed to ask questions about the inconsistencies.

The scariest part of Turkeys descent into Orwellianism is how many people outside Turkey have been willing to play along. Some American institutions seem to find little wrong in Erdogans theories, or they self-censor because they seek donations from firms Erdogan or his family members control.

Individual analysts at best remain silent and at worst affirm Erdogans theories in the press because they maintain energy sector or consulting contracts and prefer not to antagonize the Turkish president, whatever their private thoughts might be. Turkish-born analysts equivocate because they worry that Erdogan might retaliate against their families.

Some Western journalists self-censor to maintain access, and even Freedom House appears at best to lack moral clarity and at worst side with access over censorship.

What has happened in Turkey is tragic. The issue is no longer simply freedom of speech but rather freedom of thought. As tens of thousands are jailed and more than 100,000 fired, even more have become non-persons, no longer entitled to jobs, school, legal representation, or government benefits all because of suspicions about what they think.

Meanwhile, those who want to get ahead or even merely survive must parrot Erdogans lines, no matter how contradictory they might have been to those the president muttered only weeks or months before. Time in Turkey is running backwards, and the country increasingly seems mired in 1984.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. A former Pentagon official, his major research areas are the Middle East, Turkey, Iran and diplomacy.

More here:
Which Country Today Is Most Like Orwell's 1984 Authoritarian Nightmare? - Newsweek

Commentary: The media’s mass hysteria over ‘collusion’ is out of control – Canton Repository

By Ed Rogers The Washington Post

Hysteria among the media and Trump opponents over the prospect of "collusion" between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin may have hit its crescendo this week. That's right: The wailing from the media and their allies about Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with some "Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer" (whatever that means) may be the last gasp of this faux scandal. Good riddance.

Predictably, The New York Times started the ball rolling with front-page coverage, going so far as to argue, "The accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help." As if this were some breakthrough moment. The Times followed up with a headline yesterday that the meeting request and subject matter discussed in the prior story were transmitted to Trump Jr. via an email. Holy cow. The Times is so desperate to move the story that the meeting's arrangement over email is being made into Page 1 news. You would have thought it had come through a dead drop under a bridge somewhere.

And, of course, CNN has been apoplectic in its breathless coverage, running one story after another about this "development" on the air and online. But Politico takes the prize for the most over-the-top, made-up news, claiming that Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting could amount to a crime.

As I have written before, there are always people hovering around campaigns trying to peddle information and traffic in supposed silver bullets. There should be nothing to report on when a private citizen who works at a campaign takes a meeting with a friend of a friend offering information about an opponent. And yet, the media wants to make it a smoking gun.

If taking meetings with such people is a crime, then I hope there is a statute of limitations - because I would have been a repeat offender.

Don't get me wrong. Trump Jr. should not have taken the meeting. These offers of information on the down-low are greeted with eye-rolling, and red flags are almost always clearly visible. No senior campaign official, much less a family member of the candidate, should take such a meeting.

Having the meeting was a rookie, amateur mistake. Between human curiosity and a campaign professional's duty to get the dirt when you can, Trump Jr. likely felt that the person had to be heard. However, the meeting should have been handed off to a lackey. Said lackey would have then reported the scoop or lack thereof and awaited further instruction.

Anyway, Trump Jr. took the one-off meeting, and nothing happened. Is that not proof of non-collusion in and of itself? If you choose to believe otherwise, your disdain for President Donald Trump is getting the best of you and you need help.

Regarding the delusion that a crime actually occurred in any of this, my favorite allegation is that by having this meeting and listening to what was said, Donald Trump Jr. somehow could have violated the law. According to Politico, Trump Jr.'s "statements put him potentially in legal cross hairs for violating federal criminal statutes prohibiting solicitation or acceptance of anything of value from a foreign national, as well as a conspiracy to defraud the United States."

I'm just barely a lawyer, but I know over-lawyering when I see it. I mean, by that standard, what if someone walked into a campaign and suggested an idea that led to that candidate's victory? Would it have been a crime to accept "a thing of value" in the form of an idea? Of course not.

This whole thing is getting weird.

For many in the media and elsewhere, the collective grievances that they have against Trump personally, the White House as a whole and Trump's policies somehow justify their zealous promotion of the "collusion scandal." But not because the story is valid. Rather, the media know that they are not getting to Trump with anything else. Today, much of the "news coverage" of Trump and Co. is about payback. The media thinks they aren't getting the truth and so they don't have to deliver it either. It is a bad cycle that is not working for the White House or the media.

-----

Rogers is a political consultant and veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses.

More:
Commentary: The media's mass hysteria over 'collusion' is out of control - Canton Repository

Ed Rogers: Media’s mass hysteria over ‘collusion’ out of control – LubbockOnline.com

Hysteria among the media and Trump opponents over the prospect of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin may have hit its crescendo this week. Thats right: The wailing from the media and their allies about Donald Trump Jr.s meeting with some Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer (whatever that means) may be the last gasp of this faux scandal. Good riddance.

Predictably, the New York Times started the ball rolling with front-page coverage, going as far as to argue, The accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help. As if this were some breakthrough moment. The Times followed up with a headline that the meeting request and subject matter discussed in the prior story were transmitted to Trump Jr. via an email. Holy cow. The Times is so desperate to move the story that the meetings arrangement over email is being made into Page 1 news. You would have thought it had come through a dead drop under a bridge somewhere.

And, of course, CNN has been apoplectic in its breathless coverage, running one story after another about this development on the air and online. But Politico takes the prize for the most over-the-top, made-up news, claiming that Trump Jr.s meeting could amount to a crime.

There are always people hovering around campaigns trying to peddle information and traffic in supposed silver bullets. There should be nothing to report on when a private citizen who works at a campaign takes a meeting with a friend of a friend offering information about an opponent. And yet, the media wants to make it a smoking gun.

If taking meetings with such people is a crime, then I hope there is a statute of limitations because I would have been a repeat offender.

Dont get me wrong. Trump Jr. should not have taken the meeting. These offers of information on the down-low are greeted with eye-rolling, and red flags are almost always clearly visible. No senior campaign official, much less a family member of the candidate, should take such a meeting.

Having the meeting was a rookie, amateur mistake. Between human curiosity and a campaign professionals duty to get the dirt when you can, Trump Jr. likely felt that the person had to be heard.

After seeing Tuesdays email exchange dump from Trump Jr., I double down on the idea that this meeting was a rookie, amateur mistake. Even a lackey should not have taken this meeting. It was bad judgment, but not collaboration with the Russians.

Just imagine: Trump Jr. is sitting there when he gets an email from a music promoter screaming with red flags and some comical language (does Russia even have a Crown prosecutor?) and he takes the bait. Wince! Anybody should have known better.

Anyway, Trump Jr. took the one-off meeting, and nothing happened. Is that not proof of non-collusion in and of itself? If you choose to believe otherwise, your disdain for President Donald Trump is getting the best of you and you need help.

Regarding the delusion that a crime actually occurred in any of this, my favorite allegation is that by having this meeting and listening to what was said, Trump Jr. somehow could have violated the law. According to Politico, Trump Jr.s statements put him potentially in legal cross hairs for violating federal criminal statutes prohibiting solicitation or acceptance of anything of value from a foreign national, as well as a conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Im just barely a lawyer, but I know over-lawyering when I see it. I mean, by that standard, what if someone walked into a campaign and suggested an idea that led to that candidates victory? Would it have been a crime to accept a thing of value in the form of an idea? Of course not.

This whole thing is getting weird.

For many in the media and elsewhere, the collective grievances they have against Trump personally, the White House as a whole and Trumps policies somehow justify their zealous promotion of the collusion scandal. But not because the story is valid. Rather, the media know they are not getting to Trump with anything else. Today, much of the news coverage of Trump and Co. is about payback. The media thinks they arent getting the truth and so they dont have to deliver it either. It is a bad cycle that is not working for the White House or the media. With this much intensity, it is hard to see how this ends well.

Ed Rogers is a contributor to the PostPartisan blog, a political consultant and a veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses and several national campaigns. He is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group.

Follow this link:
Ed Rogers: Media's mass hysteria over 'collusion' out of control - LubbockOnline.com

Traditional Media Grabs for the ESports Control | Variety – Variety

Eleven years ago, Ted Owen had a dream: to persuade the Olympic planning committee in Beijing that video games belonged in the 2008 Games. The skepticism was overwhelming. And despite the best efforts of the founder of the Global Gaming League, the Olympics came and went without a game controller in sight.

Today, that dream doesnt seem so far-fetched. Several major networks, including ESPN, NBC and TBS, regularly air eSports programming. And the organizers of the Asian Games, a pan-continental multi-sport event held every four years, have confirmed eSports as a demonstration event in 2018. At the 2022 Games in Hangzhou, China, it will have full medal status.

The explosive rise of eSports in the past decade has caught many off-guard, perhaps none more than the traditional or offline sports world. Game Five of the 2017 NBA Finals the most-watched Game Five since 1998 was watched by 24.5 million people. But the 2015 world finals of online game League of Legends nabbed 36 million unique viewers, according to Riot Games.

Meanwhile, overall NFL ratings were down 9% in the 2016 regular season and fell 6% during the playoffs, according to MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson.

Thats leading networks to escalate their involvement in competitive gaming.

Its impossible to ignore the impressive growth eSports has had, both in the U.S. and globally, says Rob Simmelkjaer, senior VP of NBC Sports Ventures. We always want to be tapping into what people love and how theyre spending their time and what theyre choosing for their entertainment. For any sports media company, this is becoming an essential component of your strategy.

Ironically, while both the broadcast and gaming worlds are quick to talk about the growth of eSports, theyre still figuring out how best to capitalize on them. ESports is in its infancy and everybodys still figuring out how to crack the code, not only producing or distributing it, but creating the best value for ad sales, creating the best viewer experience, says Craig Barry, executive vice president and chief content officer for Turner Sports. This is part of the evolutionary process of setting up something brand new.

Theres certainly big money for players. The International (a tournament for the game Dota 2) has given out more than $55 million in prize money since its launch in 2011. League of Legends has awarded more than $36 million, says Ben Schachter, an analyst with Macquarie Capital.

But on the game-publishing side, its still mostly a marketing play. While publishers Activision and Electronic Arts have launched eSports divisions, neither has made a significant contribution to earnings so far. Take-Two Interactive Software has held two eSports tournaments, with little financial return.

The tournaments we did were test cases to see if consumers would like this, and they did, says Strauss Zelnick, CEO at Take-Two. Millions of matches were played and hundreds of thousands of teams were created but in terms of the revenue created if there was revenue created, and were not sure there was it came about through brand-building. So far, all weve done in eSports is in service to building the brand and delighting consumers, it has not, so far, been in service of creating revenue.

Take-Two hopes to change that with its recently announced partnership with the NBA to form an eSports organization. Based around the companys NBA2K franchise, teams in the league will be operated by NBA franchises and will follow a tournament format similar to that of the NBA a regular season, a bracketed playoff, then a championship match. Seventeen teams have signed up so far, which will formally tip off in 2018.

A media partner has not yet been announced, but is forthcoming, says Zelnick.

Networks are a little better off than publishers when it comes to monetizing eSports. Barry says the companys eLeague has brought 10 million new viewers to the TBS network and over 25% of the viewing audience for eLeague events has been in the coveted 18-34 demographic. Across digital platforms, the companys competitive gaming league formed in conjunction with WME has racked up viewership totals of more than 3 billion minutes.

Its a native digital platform and were not trying to convert people, so to speak, says Barry. What were doing is we are executing on the digital platform to be authentic to the games and then the TBS or broadcast extension is a portal to create awareness for a casual fan or someone who is interested in eSports but doesnt know how to deep dive on the digital platform.

While watching an eSports event might be initially confusing for some viewers, network sports executives are hoping the stories that emerge in these televised tournaments prove as compelling as those that do so in offline sports or the Olympics. If people can rally around curling, goes the thinking, they can certainly become engaged in watching players battle it out in Quake, even if those viewers arent gamers.

At NBC, the companys sports group has teamed with online competitive gaming platform FaceIt and developer Psyonix to launch a tournament centered around Rocket League this summer. It will feature more than 40 hours of coverage across the groups live-streaming, VOD and linear platforms.

The finals, to be held Aug. 26-27, will be televised live on NBCSN in the U.S. and on Syfy in parts of Europe.

Were hoping well uncover some diamonds in the rough, says Simmelkjaer. Maybe there will be someone playing in one of the [smaller] regional tournaments that could end up playing at the professional level. That would make a great narrative for the end of the tournament.

But some console manufacturers are still standing on the virtual sidelines.

Nintendo games such as Super Smash Bros. and Splatoon have been used in some tournaments, including 2015s Nintendo World Championship, which was broadcast on Disney XD. But the companys holding back on professional eSports for now.

Leagues, big paydays for winners, pro players thats where I think things get a bit complicated, says Reggie Fils-Aime, president of Nintendo of America. From a Nintendo perspective, those are elements that are bit less interesting to us.

The storys not much different at Sony.

We are, at this point, working hard to answer [the] question: What is the best way in which a hardware-based platform can contribute to the eSports ecosystem and profit from it?, says Andrew House, global chief executive of Sony Interactive Entertainment. I do tend to think its a category that will possibly not generate a huge amount of profit in the near term, but over time I do think it has potential and were watching it very carefully.

Despite that occasional reticence from different sectors in the gaming community, video-game tournaments are certainly ready to make a lasting impact in the sporting world.

I had so many people tell me I was crazy, Owen says. I see [this] as a complete and utter vindication that Global Gaming League, myself and a few others at the forefront were absolutely right.

Read more:
Traditional Media Grabs for the ESports Control | Variety - Variety

China Reducing Massive Influence of Social Media Celebrities – Voice of America

BEIJING

China is trying to contain the awesome influence of social media celebrities, some of whom have tens of millions of followers that dwarf more Western media icons like Oprah Winfrey. For example, the top 10 Chinese celebrities on Internet have between 67 million and 90 million online followers.

Recent weeks have seen the closure of social media accounts of several celebrities while the Beijing Cyber Administration (BCA) shut down the accounts of 60 celebrity gossip magazines. It also asked Internet portals hosting these accounts to adopt effective measures to keep in check the problems of the embellishment of private sex scandals of celebrities, the hyping of ostentatious celebrity spending and entertainment, and catering to the poor taste of the public.

Analysts said the Chinese Communist Party (CPP) has reason to worry about the massive influence of celebrities, according to Bill Bishop, who runs the widely read The Sinocism China Newsletter.

Money and values

"The Party is really pushing hard on Socialist Core Values and very few of the popular Internet celebrities are paragons of those values," he said. "Individual media creators are much harder to control, and one of the core pillars of the CCP is propaganda and ideological control," he said.

Celebrities are an important tool for marketing and advertising, and thousands of companies depend on them to disseminate product messages. The size of Internet marketing by Chinese celebrities was estimated at $58 billion in 2016 and is expected to reach $100 billion in 2018, according to Beijing-based research agency Analysus.

Many of the social media celebrities come from the world of cinema, television, and sports. But there have been a large number of upstarts who have emerged from nowhere.

Their claim to fame is their ability to raise sensitive social issues, such as the neglect suffered by some so-called "leftover women" who have not found husbands. One such celebrity is Teacher Xu, a popular internet celebrity, who runs a hugely popular account on the WeChat platform.

Almost all celebrities make sure they do not cross the government's policy line in their posts in texts and videos, said Mark Tanner, Managing Director of China Skinny, an internet based marketing company.

"Everyone in China knows that if you want to be a successful and effective voice in China, you need to toe the party line. So right to Pappi Chang to the little guys on the road, they know what to say and what not to say," he said.

Analysts say the immense popularity of these high profile individuals is itself seen as a challenge to the authorities even if they do not take up political issues. A lot of what they talk about is indirectly connected to governance issues like the environment, and this is what bothers top officials.

Censor troubles

"Celebrities happen to hold a powerful microphone to speak to society, and in CCP leaders' eyes, that alone is threatening no matter how non-political most of them may be, said Christopher Cairns, a Cornell scholar.

The government also has things to worry at the technological level, where the popularity and content production of celebrities seem to be running far ahead of the government's technical ability to control them.

"A lot of it has to do with lack of control. It is really hard for them to censure real time video. the software hardware for voice and video is just not there yet, said Jacob Cooke, CEO of Web Presence in China. And still, a lot of the system depends upon real-time monitoring. So, there are a lot of vague rules in terms of censorship including harming feelings of the Chinese people.

The censors are using other reasons to crack down on celebrities they don't like.The BCA reportedly told executives of Internet companies the new cybersecurity law required websites to not harm the reputation or privacy of individuals.

The government has said the new law is necessary for security reasons, but many analysts fear it can be used to surpress freedom of speech on the Internet.

Go here to read the rest:
China Reducing Massive Influence of Social Media Celebrities - Voice of America