Archive for the ‘Media Control’ Category

Benetton, Gates Foundation Launch Birth Control Ads – MediaPost Communications

With public-health experts gathering in for the London Summit on Family Planning, the United Colors of Benetton and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are introducing new ad campaigns meant to raise awareness about global access to birth control.

Called Power Her Choices, one campaign, created by Fabrica, Benettons in-house communication center, centers on a light bulb shaped like a womb, as well as a light installation with lit bulbs spelling phrases, changing the words I am pregnant to I am not ready to be pregnant. GIFs from the video are also being distributed on social media.

The idea behind the campaign is raising awareness, Omar Gharzeddine, a media specialist with the United Nations Population Fund, tells Marketing Daily, especially about access to contraceptives in the developing world.

advertisement

advertisement

More than 214 million women dont have access to modern contraceptives, and he says that in 2016, about 770,000 girls, some as young as 10, had children, often with devastating effects on their health and future, the UNFPA reports. In sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, an estimated 25 percent of young women leave school due to an unintended pregnancy.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, a co-host of the summit, is also running a video on social media, featuring a young British woman denied birth-control billsand even condomsby her doctor, clinics and pharmacists. Imagine if it was this hard to get the contraceptive advice, support and access you need, the dystopian spot asks, adding thats its a reality for many women. Access to contraceptives enables women to make informed decisions about their health and future, unlocking a cycle of prosperity that benefits everyone, the foundation says about the ad. It's time to give every woman and girl the opportunity to plan for#HerFuture.

Its the second womens empowerment campaign from Benetton this year. Earlier this spring, it made a splash with its global United By Half ad, a gender-equality effort linked to International Womens Day.

Originally posted here:
Benetton, Gates Foundation Launch Birth Control Ads - MediaPost Communications

Brays Bayou Flood Control Project Moves Forward – Houston Public Media

A water diversion system along Willow Waterhole is part of a broader $480 million effort.

Harris County is making progress on a local flood control project. Crews are now working on the last part of a storm water retention basin located off South Post Oak Road, one of many efforts in the Houston area to keep streets and homes from flooding.

You probably already know that flooding is a major problem in the city, but you might not realize just how easily it can happen.

When you get these intense, localized downpours, the street drains arent designed for much more than about two inches an hour, says Gary Zika, Federal Projects Manager for the Harris County Flood Control District.

Zika says about 700,000 people live in the Brays Bayou watershed. A $480 million project aims to keep water out of homes in the area with a series of interconnected channels and retention ponds.

In about a year, the Willow Waterhole part of that system will be complete.

Its nature and gravity, Zika says. Water gets to a certain level, it overflows into the detention basin, and then when the water in the bayou goes down, the detention basins drain out.

According to Zika, these detention systems can keep water levels in the bayous two or three feet lower during heavy rains, but he says they cant control every storm.

Even when we have our project done, youre still going to have street flooding, he says. If you have a storm event that dumps four or five inches in an hour, not only will you have street flooding, but youll also have house flooding, because the water cant even get into the bayous that fast.

Still, the projects have had some success. Zika says the county found that during the deadly Memorial Day flooding of 2015, the Willow Waterhole system kept water out of about 5,000 homes.

Continue reading here:
Brays Bayou Flood Control Project Moves Forward - Houston Public Media

Calls Mount For More Control Over Social Media Postings – TOLOnews

This comes after two Afghan diplomats recently insulted government and made bold political statements on their Facebook pages.

Concerns have been raised over inappropriate social media posts by diplomats and officials who take to Facebook to lash out at government.

Two senior Afghan diplomats recently hit out at government and made bold political statements.

In one instance, Afghan Consul General in Vancouver, Canada, Mohammad Salem Wahdat slammed government for not executing terrorist backers and their sympathizers.

Wahdat also singled out the Ministry of Interior.

He said: Our soldiers should be able to defend their rights . if their voice is suffocated in the ministry of interior when corruption is at its peak, large-scale corruption will increase. This was in relation to allegations having been made that food for soldiers was not reaching them and that the quality was extremely poor.

Another diplomat, cultural attach of Afghanistan to Washington DC, Majeed Qarar, also used Facebook to hit out at government and to make political statements.

Qarar has in the past referred to some individuals and certain circles as gangsters and recently posted: Freedom of speech, civil activities and other decorative terminology is used by warlords to justify their defiance.

In another post, he said: "Pakistan is looking for new customers but Putin rejected their invitation." Below that he used a photograph of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Russian President Vladimir Putin - which made it look like Sharif was saying to Putin: Why not: We are ready to commit adultery forRussia. Don't worry about this.

When contacted for comment, Qarar said his Facebook posts were his personal views while Wahdat said his posts were not considered an issue in Afghanistan.

Qarar meanwhile said: A civil servant can express his views even about his employer; there is no legal restriction in this respect.

President Ashraf Ghanis spokesman Shahussain Murtazawi said government expected its officials to use social media responsibly.

Our expectation is that social media users, use social media positively and spread the message of peace, solidarity and friendship instead of spreading hate, said Murtazawi.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) also responded and said it would draw up a social media policy for its staff. MoFA officials also made it clear that officials may not use government equipment for personal reasons.

But legal experts have said diplomats are official representatives of their governments and therefore social media postings should be handled responsibly. They also said a clear social media policy should be implemented.

The views expressed by a government official represents the views of his government, especially diplomats who are the authorized representatives of their country abroad, said legal expert Wahid Farzayee.

Journalists and media rights activists also raised concerns and said they have long called for such a policy to be implemented.

Head of NAI (Organization Supporting Open Media in Afghanistan), Mujib Khalwatgar, said an amendment to Afghanistans media law includes an article on social media usage.

We hope that lawmakers in the national assembly will address the matter once the draft [law] is referred to parliament, he said.

Read more:
Calls Mount For More Control Over Social Media Postings - TOLOnews

Why Myanmar’s Suu Kyi Has Failed on Media Freedom – The Diplomat

The current governments approach looks eerily familiar.

By Joshua Kurlantzick for The Diplomat

July 11, 2017

The National League for Democracy (NLD)-led government in Myanmar has now been in office for more than a year, with Aung San Suu Kyi as de facto head of government. Suu Kyi certainly wields sizable influence. In fact, Suu Kyi has often been criticized, by commentators and members of her own party, for keeping too tight-fisted control of actions by the government, so much so that NLD members of parliament seemingly have little to do.

To be sure, on some policy areas, Suu Kyi does not have the level of control that leaders of other, more established democracies enjoy. The military remains an extraordinarily powerful actor in Myanmar, and one apparently capable of operating, in outlying areas at least, without even clearing policy through the Cabinet. The military retains its percentage of seats in parliament, essential control over its budget, and its strong resistance to any constitutional change. Proponents of constitutional change that might reduce the formal powers of the armed forces, like former NLD lawyer U Ko Ni, have been murdered.

Nonetheless, there are areas of policy over which Suu Kyi should enjoy significant influence, and freedom of the press is one of them. Suu Kyi was a longtime opposition leader, at a time (mostly) when Myanmars media was tightly controlled, the security forces regularly detained reporters, and state media outlets used their pages to mock and condemn her. She could use her bully pulpit to promote independent media, greater freedoms for journalists working throughout Myanmar, and an end to media monopolies. She could step in strongly if journalists were detained, and call for greater transparency in government transparency that might actually work in her favor, since a more vibrant Myanmar press could well expose abuses by the armed forces and, indirectly, apply pressure for constitutional change.

But Suu Kyi has not taken this approach. Instead, over the past year, press freedom in Myanmar seems to have regressed. In some respects, press freedom in Myanmar now seems more restrictive than it was in the final years of the former Thein Sein government. The Suu Kyi government has not tried to change existing laws that are major barriers to a free press. The Committee to Protect JournalistsShawn Crispin notes:

Chief among those laws is section 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law, a broad provision that carries potential three-year prison terms for cases of defamation over communications networks. While the law was used only occasionally against journalists under military rule, politicians, military officials, and even Buddhist monks are increasingly using it now to stifle online and social media criticism.

The Myanmar chapter of the PEN press freedom group has estimated that over 55 cases have been filed, under this law, just in the year since Suu Kyis government came into office. Meanwhile, late last month three journalists were arrested in Shan State, under a different Unlawful Association law. These reporters included one fromThe Irrawaddy; they had been covering one of the countrys ethnic insurgencies as well as allegations of abuses by the state security forces. The return of a climate of fear is very disturbing,wroteThe Irrawaddys editor-in-chief, Aung Zaw, after the publications reporter was arrested.

As with the rising toll of defamation cases, Suu Kyi has said nothing about the arrests in Shan State. A spokesperson for her partytold the New York Times, For media personnel, press freedom is a key need For us, peace, national development and economic development are the priority, and then democracy and human rights, including press freedom.

Meanwhile, Suu Kyis government has enacted other restrictions on press access. It has made it nearly impossible for journalists to cover parts of Rakhine State in the west. The Suu Kyi government also recentlyrefused to provide visasto UN investigators tasked with analyzing the situation in Rakhine State and allegations of abuse by Myanmar security forces in Rakhine State. In some ways, the Suu Kyi government is looking more and more like its predecessors.

Joshua Kurlantzick is senior fellow for Southeast Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). This originally appeared over at CFRs Asia Unbound here and is republished here with kind permission.

See original here:
Why Myanmar's Suu Kyi Has Failed on Media Freedom - The Diplomat

OPINION: Why does the media still portray James Comey as a hero? – The Hill (blog)

In one of my favorite Westerns, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance,Jimmy Stewart reveals to a reporter that he was not the man who killed villain Liberty Valance a legend that transformed him from a perceived coward to an inspiration hero and resulted in his being elected U.S. senator and ambassador to Great Britain. The seasoned reporter listens to the whole story, but in the end says that he will not print it.

He states the rule simply as [w]hen the legend becomes factprint the legend. In many ways, James Comey is the Jimmy Stewart of the media production of The Man Who Shot Lying Trump. From the outset, reporters and Democrats (who had been calling for Comeys firing or questioning his judgment) declared him to be the man who fearlessly stood up to a president demanding loyalty pledges and discarding legal and ethical standards.

Yes, the memos were leaked.

As I previously wrote, various legal experts went on the air on CNN and other cable news programs to dismiss the allegation (that a few of us printed) that Comey leaked his now famous memos detailing meetings with the president. Experts declared that leaks by definition only involve classified information a facially ridiculous position that was widely stated with complete authority. Whether someone is prosecuted for a leak is a different question but a leak is the release of nonpublic information, not just classified information. University ofPennsylvania Law Professor Claire Finkelstein, CNN Legal Analyst Michael Zeldin, Fordham Law Professor Jed Shugerman, and others dismissed the notion that such memos could be deemed leaks.

Comey was a leaker, and he leaked for the oldest of motivations in Washington: to protect himself and hurt his opponents. Comey knew he would be called before the Congress and that these memos would be demanded by both his own former investigators as well as congressional investigators. That could have happened in a matter of days but Comey decided to use a friend to leak the content of the memos to the media (after giving the memos to his friend). In doing so, Comey took control of the media narrative and was lionized by the media.

Recently, the Senate Homeland Security Committee released a majority report that correctly referenced the Comey leaks. The report detailed a massive increase in leaks against the Trump administration but highlighted the leak by Comey. What makes that reference most troubling is that Comey was the person with the responsibility to find the leakers in the Trump administration. Yet, after the president expressly asked him to find leakers, Comey became a leaker himself. Moreover, as FBI director, Comey showed no particular sympathy to leakers and his department advanced the most extreme definitions of what constituted FBI information.

Yes, the memos were government property.

When some of us noted that these memos clearly fell within the definition of FBI information and thus they were ostensibly government (not private) property, there was again a chorus of experts dismissing such allegations against Comey. Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent assured CNN that these constitute merely personal recollections and would not fall into the definition of government material. Others joined in on the theme that these were like a personal diary and thus entirely his private property. Obviously, removing FBI material would not be a reaffirming moment for the Beltways lone, lanky hero. But that is what he did.

All FBI agents sign a statement affirming that all information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have accessremain the property of the United States of America and that an agent will not reveal, by any means, any information or material from or related to FBI files or any other information acquired by virtue of my official employment to any unauthorized recipient without prior official written authorization by the FBI.

These were memos prepared on an FBI computer about a meeting on an FBI investigation with the president of the United States in the Oval Office and other locations. The contents were important enough that Comey immediately shared them with his highest management team and consulted on how to deal with the information.

The FBI has now reportedly confirmed that the memos were indeed government property. The Hill, quoting officials familiar with the documents, has reported that the FBI has told the Congress that these memos are indeed government documents.

Yes, the memos were classified.

If Comey did leak government property, a third issue was whether the information was considered classified. Once again, the classified status does not determine if this was a leak (it was) or if it was government information (it was). However, many experts insisted that the material was clearly unclassified.

Comeys representation of the unclassified status struck me as highly questionable at the time. I noted that the information would have likely been classified on some level, including confidential under governing standards. Moreover, FBI employees are not given free license (or sole authority) to write things in an unclassified fashion. That is why there are classification reviews. Information coming out of meetings with the president are routinely classified, let alone information deemed material to pending investigations.

As I noted earlier, the standards that Comey enforced as director belied his own account. The FBI restricts material generated in relation to investigations as FBI information. FBI rules cover any documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated. Under the Freedom of Information Act, the FBI routinely claims this type of information as either classified or privileged or both.

Comey however repeatedly assured the Senate that there was nothing classified or privileged in the memos. In an exchange with Sen. Mark WarnerMark WarnerDem fumes over Team Trump's 'pattern of convenient forgetfulness' OPINION: Why does the media still portray James Comey as a hero? Schumer rips Tillerson remarks as 'disgraceful' MORE (D-Va.), Comey said, Well, I remember thinking, this is a very disturbing development, really important to our work. I need to document it and preserve it in a way and and this committee gets this, but sometimes when things are classified, it tangles them up. Its hard Then Warner interrupted to say, Amen.

However, the issue was not the writing of the memos but their removal from the FBI and their leaking to the media. There is a reason why sometimes when things are classified, it tangles them up. It is called classification review. That does not give you license to transfer the information into a separate document and declare it a Dear Diary entry. That is a loose interpretation that Comey as FBI director never afforded to his subordinates and it would effectively gut the rules governing privileged and classified information.

Not surprisingly, The Hill reported that indeed the memos have been declared classified by the FBI. The newspaper maintains that four of the memos had markings indicating they contained classified material at the secret or confidential level.

None of this takes away from the seriousness of Comeys allegation or the need to investigate possible obstruction of justice. However, it does raise serious questions about own Comeys judgment and the legality of his actions. Yet, the coverage on these findings has largely been crickets.

It is much like that final scene in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance? After Jimmy Stewart unburdened himself that he was a fraudulent hero, he boarded the train back to Washington and thanked the conductor for his kindness. The conductor simply responded, Nothings too good for the man who shot Liberty Valance!

It seems that in both Westerns and politics, you print the legend.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He was cited in the Senate Homeland Security Committee report on medialeaks during the Trumpadministration.

The views expressed by contributors are their own ad are not the views of The Hill.

Excerpt from:
OPINION: Why does the media still portray James Comey as a hero? - The Hill (blog)