Jewish Media Control, USA
Information from http://www.incogman.net on Jews in the US media (dated 2012). 2014 video of captioned photos (with old film effects) and more black. Revised versio...
By: rerevisionist
Read this article:
Jewish Media Control, USA - Video
AURORA, Ill.
The head of the Federal Aviation Administration and lawmakers toured a sabotaged Chicago-area air traffic facility on Friday, saying they were shocked by the extent of damage and calling for a more sophisticated backup system in the event of future trouble.
FAA Administrator Michael Huerta and members of Illinois' congressional delegation spoke to reporters after observing the damage and the recovery efforts at the facility in Aurora. Authorities say a contract employee armed with knives cut through cables and used gasoline to set fire to a basement telecommunications room on Sept. 26, destroying equipment that forced the shutdown of Chicago's two airports and led to the cancellation of thousands of flights.
"It was an incredible act of sabotage," U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin said after the tour, which was closed to journalists. He said in one area of the telecommunications roof there was nothing left but "a charred mass of black cables."
The FAA has said it hopes to have the center's communications system operational by Oct. 13. More than 10 miles of cables need to be replaced. In the meantime, other air traffic facilities have taken over the center's responsibilities.
Responding to calls from lawmakers, the agency is carrying out a 30-day review of security procedures and "ways to more quickly restore service" in the event of future outages, Huerta said.
As an intermediate step, the security presence at critical facilities has been increased and patrols have been stepped up, he said.
Durbin, along with U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk and U.S. Rep. Bill Foster, said the FAA needs a better backup system to ensure planes can keep flying safely in the event of future trouble and more money from Congress to make sure it gets done.
"In the case of the private sector, you need continuous operations no matter what," Kirk said. "The government can sometimes go through a full cardiac arrest, like we had here."
The FAA is in the midst of transitioning from a 1950s-era radar-based system to one based on GPS. Known as NextGen, the FAA's more modern satellite-based program should enable more seamless operations. But it is years from being fully rolled out.
The huge protests in Hong Kong were planned long in advance, but their scale seems to have taken many by surprise: The city was in chaos over the weekend after thousands took to the streets, and there are many signs that the Occupy Central demonstrations may not be over yet.
For Chinese state media, the protests present a conundrum: how to cover a story that is now too large to ignore without challenging the official narrative. Their response, at times, seems awkward.
According to the China Media Projectat the University of Hong Kong, more than 20 mainland newspapers have run astory from China's state news agency, Xinhua, in response to the protests. That report is based largely on an official statement by theHong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council and contains little explanation for the protests, which it calls "unlawful occupation actions." A later report from Xinhua, featured on the English-language China Daily Web site, describes the disruption caused to Hong Kong daily life in neutral terms.
In op-eds, however, there's a more noticeable negative sentiment. State newspaper Global Times, known for taking a stronger, more controversial stance on issues, published oneeditorial that says people should feel"sorrow over the chaos" caused by "radical opposition forces."
That editorial has since been deleted from the paper's Chinese-language Web site but still appears online in English, perhaps an indication of its target audience. "U.S. media is linking the Occupy Central movement with the Tiananmen Incident in 1989," the editorial says. "By hyping such a groundless comparison, they attempt to mislead and stir up Hong Kong society."
In another, now-deletedop-ed published byGlobal Times,Wang Qiang,a professor at the Peoples Armed Police college, suggested that if Hong Kong's police could not control the protesters, mainland China's paramilitary group should be sent in. Events that "damage the fundamental interests of a sovereign country cannot be tolerated indefinitely," the article says, according to an archived version.
Meanwhile, the People's Daily published an op-ed Monday that expressly linked the protesters to "foreign anti-China forces" and alleged intervention by the United States and Britain. "No one is more concerned about the future and destiny of the Chinese people in Hong Kong" than the Chinese government, the op-ed states. It also accuses"some of the Western media" of creating "a big fuss," noting rolling live coverage of the protests.
That rolling coverage is certainly in marked contrast to how the story is being covered by Chinese broadcasters. The protests have been featured little, if at all, on China's largest state broadcaster, CCTV, and George Chen, a columnist at the independent South China Morning Post, points out that Shanghai's state television channel appears to be portraying the large crowds in Hong Kong as pro-state nationalists:
For mainland users looking online, the informationisn't much better, unfortunately.China's large Web portalsseem to be giving the protests little attention.
Social media is being restricted, too: The China Media Project's Weiboscope tool shows a remarkable spike in the number of posts censored on Chinese social networks, and, as my colleague William Wan notes, one of the few available Western social networks, Instagram, appeared to be blocked Monday.
More here:
WorldViews: Chinese state media points to foreign hand in Hong Kong protests
Are we allowed to have ideas and opinions? Or must they be state-endorsed to be valid?
COMMENT
The rise of social media has been uneasy in more ways than one. From privacy concerns to ethics, there are many shades of gray that need to be explored before we truly come to understand and integrate it in our daily lives. One such complication is very prominent here in Malaysia freedom of speech in a semi-democratic society.
Autocratic regimes such as China have long been wary of social media, a useful tool for organising and disseminating information, but one that could spread news of a governments missteps within seconds of their happening.
China has implemented a set of tools to curb free speech as much as possible while still being able to dubiously claim democracy, such as having proprietary social media platforms more readily available than Facebook or Twitter. But wily Internet users have devised their own workarounds to deliver news to each other on government misdeeds. However, if discovered, they can be arbitrarily taken from their homes and locked up, beaten and abused by secret police, and more. Sounds like a familiar story, really.
Indeed, Chinas efforts have not escaped the sight of our esteemed ruling government of the day. Facebook and Twitter have been bugbears for our politicians, as the slightest gaffe is magnified under the spotlight of social media, and free speech runs rampant in forums, without a way for the government to hold it in check. This is mostly due to guarantees made by Mahathir Mohamad when he was the Prime Minister, that is that the Internet would be unrestricted in Malaysia.
Observe these delicate, probing remarks to elicit a response on the idea of banning Facebook:
The greatest threat so far, however, has been the use of the colonial-era law, the Sedition Act, to silence dissent under the guise of national security. The charges against Adam Adli, Safwan Anang, N. Surendran, Tian Chua, David Orok, Azmi Sharom, Susan Loone and more were called a fear-instilling tactic by Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch. No one is safe from the long arm of the Sedition Act.
A score of people have been charged under the act since August, leading even the United Nations to make a statement. We are concerned about the recent increase in the use of the Sedition Act 1948 to arrest and prosecute people for their peaceful expression of opinion in Malaysia, said the spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rupert Colville. We call on the government to quickly initiate a promised review of the act and to repeal or amend it in line with its international human rights obligations.
But what, dear reader, does all this mean for you and I?
Read the original:
Social media and the age of sedition
Social media is more than just amassing likes. Companies are using advanced social techniques to rehabilitate corporate reputations.
In a battle against Southwest Airlines this year for control of two gates at Dallas Love Field airport, Virgin America launched a social media blitz using Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, plus an Internet petition to local government officials. The conflict started when the Department of Justice told American Airlines it had to give up its positions at Love Field before it could acquire US Airways. Southwest already controlled 16 of the airport's 20 gates, and Virgin wanted in.
The airline pleaded its case to the DoJ, which would weigh in as it sorted out the competitive landscape. But the final decision was up to Dallas city leaders and it was tough to fight Southwest, a hometown player. So Virgin took its case to the public.
Virgin's "Free Love Field" campaign asked customers on Facebook and Twitter to make supportive posts and to sign and share an online petition. Virgin emailed its top frequent flyers directly to do the same. The airline also publicized its pledge to donate $20 to a local school group for every ticket it booked out of Love Field on a designated day. And Virgin enlisted its founder, Richard Branson, to put out a YouTube video of the celebrity executive writing a cheeky love letter to the airport. "No one should have a monopoly on your love," he said. "My virile young planes yearn for your runways." In one week, more than 20,000 people signed a petition on Change.org urging Dallas to let Virgin fly at Love Field.
In May, the city gave Virgin what it wanted. The $1.4 billion airline now runs 26 flights in and out of Love Field, with another six to be added next year.
"Social technology allows people to publish their thoughts in a way the audience can't avoid," says Luanne Calvert, CMO at Virgin America. "There's no other way we could have been more effective."
If you think social media means simply amassing "likes" and followers and offering ad hoc customer service, you've already lost. Companies are using advanced social techniques to rehabilitate corporate reputations, uncover ideas for breakthrough products, and figure out what competitors are up to. And as Virgin America knows, aggressive, targeted use of social media can influence high-stakes political and business decisions in your favor.
At particularly adept companies, the whole C-suite sees the value of social media. Patrick Doyle, CEO of Domino's Pizza, doesn't go a day without thinking about social media, which he says is inseparable from his business strategy. Being smart on social networks "doesn't start from, 'Let's have a new advertising campaign and put a social media extension on it,'" he says. "A critical part of our strategy is understanding [online] conversation."
Most companies don't reap the full benefits from social media because they're stuck in old thinking, don't know how to properly use digital, or are pushing out one-way messages like they do on TV or in print, says Mark Fidelman, CEO of Raynforest, a sports marketing network, and author of Socialized! How the Most Successful Businesses Harness the Power of Social. "There's a difference between having a presence on social media and using social media well," Fidelman says.
Skillful companies take chances and perhaps make mistakes. But for those that use social media as more than a popularity contest--such as Domino's, Ford, Wells Fargo and Virgin America--the rewards can be dramatic.
Originally posted here:
How Social Media Can Influence High-Stakes Business Decisions