SourceWatch

Welcome to SourceWatch—your guide to the names behind the news. SourceWatch is a collaborative project of the Center for Media and Democracy to produce a directory of the people, organizations and issues shaping the public agenda. A primary purpose of SourceWatch is documenting the PR and propaganda activities of public relations firms and public relations professionals engaged in managing and manipulating public perception, opinion and policy. SourceWatch also includes profiles on think tanks, industry-funded organizations and industry-friendly experts that work to influence public opinion and public policy on behalf of corporations, governments and special interests. Over time, SourceWatch has broadened to include others involved in public debates including media outlets, journalists and government agencies. Unlike some other wikis, SourceWatch has a policy of strict referencing, and is overseen by a paid editor. SourceWatch has 35,490 articles.

• Nestling into the British Government: The Independent "has uncovered strong ties between Nestle, the world's largest baby milk manufacturer, and the Department of Health. Rosie Cooper, a parliamentary private secretary to the Health minister Ben Bradshaw, is undergoing a year-long Industry and Parliament Trust fellowship with Nestle, and in February went for a week to South Africa as a guest of the group to oversee its corporate social responsibility activities." Three other Labor Party members of Parliament accompanied her at Nestle's expense. Critics are alarmed that the corporation has made such inroads into the government.

• Shinawatra's Own Goal: Former Prime Minister of Thailand, Thaksin Shinawatra, has called in the founder of of the U.K-based PR firm, Bell Pottinger, Tim Bell, to help rebuild his image. Shinawatra, who bought the Manchester City soccer club last year, has infuriated supporters, players and board members by signaling his intent to dump the popular club manager, Sven-Goran Eriksson. Players recently canvassed the possibility of boycotting a promotional tour of Thailand.

• Chart(er)ing a New Course for Invasion of Privacy: Charter Communications, one of the largest Internet Service Providers (ISP) in the U.S., recently sent letters to some of its 2.7 million customers with details of a new initiative. "Charter is billing its new web tracking program as an 'enhancement' for customers' web surfing experience. ... The pilot program is set to begin next month. 'Browsing the web can become more like flipping through your favorite magazine, where you see ads that are appealing to you and enhance your enjoyment and the utility of the experience,' the company's letters read."Charter's plan is similar to one developed in the U.K. by Phorm, "a London company with alleged spyware roots." But consumer outrage in Britain has prevented any ISPs from putting it in place.

• And the Losers Are ... Kids: On June 6, limos will be lined up, the red carpet will be rolled out, and decked out attendees will have their photos snapped by swarming paparazzi. But this isn't your usual Hollywood awards ceremony. Instead, it is the 4th annual Fame & Shame Awards, sponsored by the New Mexico Media Literacy Project and New Mexico Voices for Children in collaboration with the Smoke Free Movies Campaign. The "fame" part of the ceremony will recognize New Mexico teens that are working to encourage their peers to not start smoking, or to quit if they have. The "shame" segment targets the entertainment industry.

• Bigger Isn't Always Better: Colorado Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Bob Schaffer proclaims his devotion to the state in his latest television ad, saying "Colorado is my life ... I proposed to Maureen on top of Pike's Peak ... " Problem was, the mountain featured in the ad was Mount McKinley in Alaska, not the famous Pikes Peak in Colorado.

• No Rush to Protect the Public: Some U.S. Congresspeople want to limit direct to consumer marketing of drugs. Rep. Bart Stupak is head of the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce investigative panel. At a hearing to discuss specific ads by Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Schering-Plough, Stupak said that "It appears that we need to enforce significant restrictions on DTC (direct–to–consumer) ads to protect American consumers from manipulative commercials designed to mislead and deceive for the profit of pharmaceutical companies."

• Philip Morris in the Driver's Seat on FDA Tobacco Bill: The proposed Food and Drug Administration tobacco bill currently under consideration would ban artificial flavors like cinnamon and cherry from cigarettes, but strangely gives special protection to menthol. Public health advocates wonder why menthol has been exempted from the bill, especially when it masks the harsh taste of cigarettes for beginners. Legislators believe that menthol cannot be eliminated as a cigarette flavoring under the bill because menthol is crucial to the $70 billion cigarette market. It is of particular importance to Philip Morris, which has been planning for, and driving FDA regulation of cigarettes since 1999. The watered-down terms resulted from legislators' belief that the bill won't pass without PM's buy-in.

• Big Push for Big Oil: Faced with a national outcry over the high price of gasoline and soaring profits for energy companies, the American Petroleum Institute has launched a multimillion-dollar PR and advertising campaign to convince the public that "rising energy prices are not the producers' fault and that government efforts to punish the industry, especially with higher taxes, would only make pricing problems worse," reports Jeffrey H. Birnbaum. Consumer groups such as the Consumer Federation of America are complaining that the industry "is using its outlandish profits to make even more money, and that its advertisements use statistics selectively."

• 
  Weekly Radio Spin: Smokin' the Competition: Listen to this week's edition of the "Weekly Radio Spin," the Center for Media and Democracy's audio report on the stories behind the news. This week, we look at why we should pity the oil industry, how invasion of privacy is sold as a good thing, and kids fighting back. In "Six Degrees of Spin and Fakin'," we look at Philip Morris's ability to see into the future. Podcasters can subscribe to XML feed on http://www.prwatch.org/audio or via iTunes. If you air the Weekly Radio Spin on your radio station, please email us at editor@prwatch.org to let us know. Thanks!

• Diane Farsetta reports from the Nuclear Energy Institute's annual conference recently held in in Chicago. See "When Recycling Isn't: Lessons from a Nuclear Industry Conference" (May 9);

• John Stauber notes that the latest article by the New York Times military reporter Michael Gordon, which relies on anonymous sources to claim that Iran is training the Iraqi resistance, is eerily similar to his pre-invasion reporting which claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. See Deja Vu: NYT, US Propaganda and War with Iran (May 5);

• Diane Farsetta investigates the lobbying interests of some of those identified as participants in the Pentagon military analyst program. SeeWhat the Pentagon Pundits Were Selling on the Side: Propaganda Meets Corporate Lobbying, May 2;

• Diane Farsetta and Sheldon Rampton explain why the Pentagon's military analyst program was illegal under existing U.S. law. See Pentagon Pundit Scandal Broke the Law] (April 28);

• John Stauber reflects on David Barstow's expose in the New York Times on the Pentagon's pro-war propaganda machine. See Embedding Military Propagandists into the News Media (April 22);

• Congresspedia's assistant managing editor, Avelino Maestas, outlines why Hillary Clinton's win in Pennsylvania will do little to cut Barack Obama's lead in the number of delegates who will vote for him at the Democratic National Convention. See Election Math: How are Pennsylvania's delegates allocated? (April 22).

• 

  

  The Pentagon program's Ken Allard on MSNBC
  Pentagon Propaganda: The news outlets that featured former military personnel that were part of the Pentagon military analyst program are hoping the story will just go away. Since the New York Times exposed the program almost two weeks ago, only NPR has provided an explanation while NBC's Brian Williams defended using the analysts in his blog. New York Times reporter David Barstow has revealed that Clarke oversaw a Pentagon propaganda scheme that signed up more than 75 retired military officers, who appeared on television and radio news shows as military analysts, and/or penned newspaper op/ed columns.

• Portal:Superdelegate Transparency Project: The Superdelegate Transparency Project (STP) is a project of LiteraryOutpost.com, OpenLeft, DemConWatch, HuffPost's OfftheBus project and the Congresspedia community on SourceWatch. It is the central gathering place for compiling information on the 2008 Democratic Convention superdelegates, their endorsements and the delegate voting process, including for comparison to the district-by-district allocation of pledged delegates. It is based on fully sourced research generated largely by citizen journalists, bloggers and activists who have the common purpose of bringing public transparency to the role of superdelegates in the Democratic nomination process. More...

• 
  Who Are the Pentagon's Pundits?: On Sunday, the New York Times outed the Pentagon's "military analyst program," an extensive effort to cultivate retired military officers as "message force multipliers" or "surrogates" spouting Bush administration talking points on Iraq and other hot-button issues. We've compiled a list of known participants, and started SourceWatch profiles on each. Can you help us uncover more about the Pentagon's pundits? What did they say, on what news programs? Do they also lobby on behalf of defense contractors? More information on the program is here. The list of participants is also repeated here, with tips on how to investigate each. If this is your first time editing on SourceWatch, you can register here, and learn more about adding information to the site here, here and here. Thanks for your help!

• Outing Front Groups: Often readers and citizen journalists will come across a name of a group that seems a little at odds with the policy message they are promoting. Some of these names were added to the SourceWatch page on front groups with the intention of returning to create an article on that at a later date. Others were emailed to us by citizens, journalists or activists wanting to know if we knew anything about them. So if you would like to help investigate some of the groups that have been flagged as warranting further investigation, here's your chance. All the names are here on this page with some basic tips on how to investigate a group and create a SourceWatch page on them. If you like, you can also add names to the list. If this is your first time editing on SourceWatch, you can register here, and learn more about adding information to the site here, here and here. Hold onto your hat, have fun, and thanks for your help!

And if you would like to work on something else, take a look at some of our earlier citizen journalism projects here. Have fun, and thanks for your help!

• Join the Discussion: New Forums for Communication on SourceWatch: The SourceWatch staff has recently created two new forums for citizen journalists on SourceWatch to communicate with each other about what's going on in the site: a Yahoo group and a Community Portal. The Community Portal is a place where you can find announcements by staff and citizen editors, links to important policies and help pages and categories of outstanding tasks and projects identified by readers and editors, such as articles that need updating, expanding or fixing. The Yahoo group is meant primarily for sysops and other editors who are most concerned with the administration of the site and facilitating the contributions of the users, but both the group and the community portal are open to everyone to view and post. SourceWatch is only as strong as its community of editors, so please dive in and let us know what you think.

With the U.S. election primary season dominating news headlines, it is no surprise that pages on the 2008 Presidential election campaign are amongst the most popular pages over the last week. Heading the list are those on Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, the main campaign issues, Congresspedia's Superdelegate Transparency Project and the Economic Stimulus Bill of 2008.

Other popular pages include those on the Heartland Institute, a corporate-funded think tank which this week convened a meeting of global warming skeptics in New York; the article on Corporate Social Responsibility and the profile on the military contractor, Blackwater USA.

"A truly impressive project based on cutting edge web technology." David Korten, author of When Corporations Rule the World and The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community.

"The troublemakers at the Center for Media and Democracy, for example, point to dozens of examples of "greenwashing," which they defined as the "unjustified appropriation of environmental virtue by a company, an industry, a government or even a non-government organization to sell a product, a policy" or rehabilitate an image. In the center's view, many enterprises labeled green don't deserve the name.—Jack Shafer, "Green Is the New Yellow: On the excesses of 'green' journalism", Slate, July 6, 2007.

"As a journalist frequently on the receiving end of various PR campaigns, some of them based on disinformation, others front groups for undisclosed interests, [CMD's SourceWatch] is an invaluable resource."—Michael Pollan author of The Botany of Desire

"Thanks for all your help. There's no way I could have done my piece on big PR and global warming without the CMD [Center for Media and Democracy] and your fabulous websites."—Zoe Cormier, journalist, Canada

"The dearth of information on the [U.S.] government [lobbying] disclosure forms about the other business-backed coalitions comes in stark contrast to the data about them culled from media reports, websites, press releases and Internal Revenue Service documents and posted by SourceWatch, a website that tracks advocacy groups." Jeanne Cummings, 'New disclosure reports lack clarity", Politico, April 29, 2008.

Looking for somewhere to start?

To learn how you can edit any article right now, visit SourceWatch:About, SourceWatch:Welcome, newcomers, our Help page, Frequently Asked Questions, or experiment in the sandbox.

If you are unsure where to start, you could expand some of the recently created but currently very brief articles. (If you look at the recent changes page you will see some noted as being 'stubs' - articles that may just be a line or two and needing to be fleshed out). So if you would like to add to some of those you would be most welcome. Or if you would like some other suggestions closer to your interests you could drop SourceWatch editor, Bob Burton an email. His address is bob AT sourcewatch.org

SourceWatch content

SourceWatch also includes specific case studies of deceptive PR campaigns, the activities of front groups, industry-funded organizations and industry-friendly experts. We are also building profiles on public relations associations, specific criticisms of PR, common propaganda techniques, war propaganda and much, much more.

Research and Writing Tips

• Article guidelines
• How to research front groups
• Resources for studying propaganda
• Research using the web

SourceWatch began as the "Disinfopedia" in February 2003. In January 2005, the name was changed to SourceWatch. Contributors are now working on 35,490 articles. In the last twelve months SourceWatch has served over 103 million pages to users.

Disclaimer: SourceWatch is an encyclopedia of people, issues and groups shaping the public agenda. It is a project of the Center for Media & Democracy—email bob AT sourcewatch.org.

Antispam note: To avoid attracting spam email robots, email addresses on SourceWatch are written with AT in place of the usual symbol, and we have removed "mail to" links. Replace AT with the correct symbol to get a valid address. We regret the inconvenience this entails. Lobby your government for more effective antispam regulations.