SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (29555)10/4/2003 10:20:07 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 89467
 
"Those Bush supporters, on the other hand, who say the watch the news "somewhat closely" or "not closely at all" held fewer misperceptions". Since Shrub barely looks at the headlines, how could he have gotten it so wrong? Duh

Rat



To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (29555)10/4/2003 11:56:49 AM
From: lurqer  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 89467
 
Thanks for the article correlating News viewing habits with misconceptions. Without knowing more about their methodology (e.g. the exact phrasing of the questions), it is hard to critique the article. But I would like to comment on an obvious selection effect. While the article implied there might be a causal relationship between the type and slant of the news being presented, and the found misconceptions, I believe the selection effect could be at least as important. Even if I wanted to watch Faux News, I can't except for the briefest of times. A strong gagging response, and a dangerous rise in blood pressure, preclude the possibility. A similar effect (although milder) may lie behind much of these findings - i.e. people, in their TV viewing habits, will tend to migrate to a channel where they are "comfortable". If you already have a memeset that gives complete allegiance to the Bush Admin, you will be uncomfortable viewing news stories that challenge your denial mechanisms. Hence, rather than causing the observed misconceptions, the viewing habits may be more reinforcing them.

Also, I found the comments on the network news programs interesting. As I frequently do, I watched all three last night. My observation is that they fluctuate in their quality. While there is certainly more "in depth" coverage now than there was a few months ago, sometimes that's like comparing the comatose with the dead. It varies from day to day, but last night CBS was by far the better show. Their Bush coverage was "hard hitting", but factual (these days, given events, that amounts to the same thing). I even liked their brief "tidbit" coverage of such things as the proposal to have TVs on domestic airline flight so "Homeland Security" could be constantly viewing passengers and flight crew (I suppose the bathroom cameras would be surreptitious).

news.xinhuanet.com

NBC was much better last night than they had been the previous night, when they failed to give the motivation behind the riots in Iraq. But as I said, I find that all of the network news programs fluctuate in quality. ABC was a flop last night. Not only was their depth of coverage anemic, they spent an unbelievable huge amount of time on a "puff piece" about Laura Bush. Maybe they are trying to avoid the threatened legal suit from "Homeland Security".

JMO

lurqer



To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (29555)10/4/2003 3:07:18 PM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 89467
 
White House Is Told to Hand Over Records

October 4, 2003
By ERIC LICHTBLAU



WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 - The Justice Department is demanding
that the White House turn over "all documents that relate
in any way" to the unauthorized disclosure of a C.I.A.
officer's identity, and the White House on Friday gave its
employees until next Tuesday to comply.

The demand signals that the F.B.I.'s investigation into the
question of who leaked the identity of the C.I.A. officer
is focusing squarely on the White House and is moving into
a critical early phase, as investigators seek a paper trail
of all relevant documents.

The Justice Department has also directed the C.I.A., the
State Department and the Pentagon to retain all records
that might be relevant to the investigation. But only the
White House is known to have been directed to turn over
records.

Investigators want access to all electronic records, phone
logs, documents, diaries or other items related to former
Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, his trip to Niger in 2002
in a search for Iraqi nuclear intelligence, his wife's
relationship with the C.I.A., or any contact with the
syndicated columnist Robert Novak and two other reporters
who wrote about the Wilson case. The Justice Department
notified the White House about the demand in a letter on
Thursday night, which the White House publicized on Friday.

The keen interest in Mr. Wilson's trip to Africa in
February 2002, taken at the request of the C.I.A., which
dispatched him to try to verify accusations linking Saddam
Hussein to a quest for nuclear weapons, has surprised
current and former law enforcement officials. The wide
scope of the records request suggested that the Justice
Department wanted to establish not only whether any
administration officials had disclosed classified
information, but also whether White House records could
link the motivation for that leak to information related to
Mr. Wilson's African mission.

In a memorandum sent to all White House employees on Friday
morning, Alberto R. Gonzales, counsel to the president,
said the Justice Department had "requested that we provide
these documents" to aid in its investigation.

But he also noted that prosecutors had imposed deadlines
for compliance, and a former prosecutor with experience in
leak investigations said the Justice Department's directive
was a request in name only.

"Anyone who does not immediately produce relevant documents
is risking an obstruction of justice charge," the former
prosecutor said.

Mr. Gonzalez told employees they had until 5 p.m. on
Tuesday to turn over to his office any documents relevant
to the investigation, and they must sign a letter
certifying that they had complied. A White House official
who spoke on condition of anonymity said that the Justice
Department had established a list of prioritized items that
it wanted to see first and that the White House expected to
turn over all relevant documents to the Justice Department
within the next two weeks.

With only three days for White House employees to turn over
records to Mr. Gonzales, the directive is likely to set off
a time-consuming scrub of White House records just as the
Bush administration is turning its attentions to the 2004
election campaign.

"These things are a major headache," said a former Clinton
administration official who worked at the White House at a
time when it was hit with numerous document requests as
part of investigations into Whitewater and other matters.
"If the things they're looking for aren't in your active
files, it's in a box somewhere and you have to go find it.
It's very time-consuming."

Mr. Novak reported in a syndicated July column that Mr.
Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, worked for the C.I.A.. Mr.
Wilson has suggested that the unauthorized disclosure was
designed by the White House to intimidate him after he had
challenged the credibility of its Iraqi intelligence. In an
Op-Ed article days earlier in The New York Times, the
former ambassador said his 2002 trip to Niger found nothing
to substantiate the accusation that Saddam Hussein had
bought uranium ore yellowcake in Niger and that the Bush
administration had exaggerated the intelligence as it
ramped up for war with Iraq.

George Terwilliger III, who served as deputy attorney
general in the first Bush administration, said he was
surprised that officials were seeking 18-month-old
information on Mr. Wilson's Niger trip. "One would hope
that this investigation would be quite focused and
expedited, and it's not immediately apparent to me how this
advances the investigation," Mr. Terwilliger said.

Mr. Wilson and others have suggested that they believe Karl
Rove, the president's chief political adviser, was behind
the leak, but the White House said earlier this week that
any accusations linking Mr. Rove to the episode were
"ridiculous."

Justice Department officials on Friday refused to discuss
the demand for documents or any other legal tactics in the
case.

"All I can say is this investigation will go wherever the
evidence takes us," said Mark Corallo, a department
spokesman.

As the leak investigation has dominated the White House
this week, Democrats have pushed for Attorney General John
Ashcroft to appoint a special counsel because they maintain
that the attorney general's close political ties to the
White House could compromise the investigation.

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, stepped
up the attack on Friday in a letter to Mr. Ashcroft
questioning whether the investigation "is being mishandled
to the point where authorities will be unable to prosecute
those who committed this felonious breach of national
security."

The senator accused the Justice Department of being slow to
order the White House, the Defense Department and the State
Department to preserve records relevant to the
investigation. The delay, he said, "gave potential targets
of the investigation time to destroy evidence."

But Justice Department officials said they were moving
quickly to ensure a fair and complete investigation, and
the agencies they have contacted pledged their cooperation.

"The president has directed everyone to cooperate fully
with the Department of Justice," Scott McClellan, the White
House spokesman, told reporters aboard Air Force One on
Friday. "We want to get to the bottom of this, the sooner
the better."

nytimes.com

CC