Top 25 Censored Stories of 2006

[katinmn]

Top 25 Censored Stories of 2006

Links to background and each published story are here: http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2006/index.htm

#1 Bush Administration Moves to Eliminate Open Government

#2 Media Coverage Fails on Iraq: Fallujah and the Civilian Death

#3 Another Year of Distorted Election Coverage

#4 Surveillance Society Quietly Moves In

#5 U.S. Uses Tsunami to Military Advantage in Southeast Asia

#6 The Real Oil for Food Scam

#7 Journalists Face Unprecedented Dangers to Life and Livelihood

#8 Iraqi Farmers Threatened By Bremer’s Mandates

#9 Iran’s New Oil Trade System Challenges U.S. Currency

#10 Mountaintop Removal Threatens Ecosystem and Economy

#11 Universal Mental Screening Program Usurps Parental Rights

#12 Military in Iraq Contracts Human Rights Violators

#13 Rich Countries Fail to Live up to Global Pledges

#14 Corporations Win Big on Tort Reform, Justice Suffers

#15 Conservative Plan to Override Academic Freedom in the Classroom

#16 U.S. Plans for Hemispheric Integration Include Canada

#17 U.S. Uses South American Military Bases to Expand Control of the Region

#18 Little Known Stock Fraud Could Weaken U.S. Economy

#19 Child Wards of the State Used in AIDS Experiments

#20 American Indians Sue for Resources; Compensation Provided to Others

#21 New Immigration Plan Favors Business Over People

#22 Nanotechnology Offers Exciting Possibilities But Health Effects Need Scrutiny

#23 Plight of Palestinian Child Detainees Highlights Global Problem

#24 Ethiopian Indigenous Victims of Corporate and Government Resource Aspirations

#25 Homeland Security Was Designed to Fail

Project Censored is a media research group out of Sonoma State University which tracks the news published in independent journals and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported or self-censored by the country's major national news media.

Between 700 and 1000 stories are submitted to Project Censored each year from journalists, scholars, librarians, and concerned citizens around the world. With the help of more than 200 Sonoma State University faculty, students, and community members, Project Censored reviews the story submissions for coverage, content, reliability of sources and national significance. The university community selects 25 stories to submit to the Project Censored panel of judges who then rank them in order of importance. Current or previous national judges include: Noam Chomsky, Susan Faludi, George Gerbner, Sut Jhally , Frances Moore Lappe, Norman Solomon, Michael Parenti, Herbert I. Schiller, Barbara Seaman, Erna Smith, Mike Wallace and Howard Zinn. All 25 stories are featured in the yearbook, Censored: The News That Didn't Make the News.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. American media is to "news" what marshmallows are to nutritrition.

[The Gunslinger]

2. And it's only May. nt

[sheelz]

3. Thanks, Bookmarked

[cascadiance]

4. Hmm... Where's Jeff Gannon/Guckert?

I guess that was censored from this list too! :)

[katinmn]

5. They get thousands of submissions

and narrow it down to 25.

I noticed this list has stories from 2004 and 2005 on it.

Project Censored may have the Gannon story on the website.

[slay]

6. K&R for Project Censored

n/t

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Thanks for posting this.

[katinmn]

8. Welcome! I like to check in on Project Censored now and then.

They do great work.

[mod mom]

9. Election coverage remains at # 3!

#3 Another Year of Distorted Election Coverage

Source:

In These Times, 02/15/05

Title: “A Corrupted Election”

Authors: Steve Freeman and Josh Mitteldorf

Seattle Post-Intelligencer, January 26, 2005

Title: “Jim Crow Returns To The Voting Booth”

Authors: Greg Palast, Rev. Jesse Jackson

www.freepress.org, Nov. 23, 2004

Title: “How a Republican Election Supervisor Manipulated the 2004 Central Ohio Vote”

Authors: Bob Fitrakis, Harvey Wasserman

Faculty Evaluator: Ann Neel, MA

Student Researcher: Mike Osipoff

Political analysts have long counted on exit polls to be a reliable predictor of actual vote counts. The unusual discrepancy between exit poll data and the actual vote count in the 2004 election challenges that reliability. However, despite evidence of technological vulnerabilities in the voting system and a higher incidence of irregularities in swing states, this discrepancy was not scrutinized in the mainstream media. They simply parroted the partisan declarations of “sour grapes” and “let’s move on” instead of providing any meaningful analysis of a highly controversial election.

The official vote count for the 2004 election showed that George W. Bush won by three million votes. But exit polls projected a victory margin of five million votes for John Kerry. This eight-million-vote discrepancy is much greater than the error margin. The overall margin of error should statistically have been under one percent. But the official result deviated from the poll projections by more than five percent—a statistical impossibility.

Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, the two companies hired to do the polling for the Nation Election Pool (a consortium of the nation’s five major broadcasters and the Associated Press), did not immediately provide an explanation for how this could have occurred. They waited until January 19, the eve of the inauguration.

Edison and Mitofsky’s “inaugural” report, “Evaluation of Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004,” stated that the discrepancy was “most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters.” The media widely reported that this report proved the accuracy of the official count and a Bush victory. The body of the report, however, offers no data to substantiate this position. In fact, the report shows that Bush voters were more likely to complete the survey than Kerry voters. The report also states that the difference between exit polls and official tallies was far too great to be explained by sampling error, and that a systematic bias is implicated.

<snip>

http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2006/index.htm

[lonestarnot]

10. Morning Kat!

Thanks for more reading! :hi:

[katinmn]

11. Howdy lonnie! Were you at the AZ progressives meeting this week?

The people that took a stand for impeachment deserve praise. :applause:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=139&topic_id=4110&mesg_id=4110

[autorank]

12. Katinmn, you are rokken. This is a great source of information.

I really admire the whole approach and it's juried by some heavy weights.

Thanks!!! RECOMMENDED

[katinmn]

14. Thanks, autorank. Project C gives thoughtful analysis

It's a good resource. Don't forget to check in with them now and then. :)

[autorank]

16. Hey, DU has a major impact on Project Censored (TIA) in 2005. Look...

From:


No Paper Trail Left Behind: the Theft of the 2004 Presidential Election*
By Dennis Loo, Ph.D.
Cal Poly Pomona
http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/voter_fraud.html

TruthIsAll' on the DemocraticUnderground.com offered a list that is similar in format to my highly improbables and utterly impossibles list of the 2004 election results and I have drawn directly from their list for items #7 and 8. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x22581 retrieved June 4, 2005."

TruthIsAll Thu Nov-04-04 11:07 PM
Original message
To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe...

To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe:

1- That the exit polls were WRONG...

2- That Zogby's 5pm election day calls for Kerry winning OH, FL were WRONG. He was exactly RIGHT in his 2000 final poll.

3- That Harris last minute polling for Kerry was WRONG. He was exactly RIGHT in his 2000 final poll.

4- The Incumbent Rule I (that undecideds break for the challenger)was WRONG.

5- The 50% Rule was WRONG (that an incumbent doesn't do better than his final polling)

6- The Approval Rating Rule was WRONG (that an incumbent with less than 50% approval will most likely lose the election)

7- That Greg Palast was WRONG when he said that even before the election, 1 million votes were stolen from Kerry. He was the ONLY reporter to break the fact that 90,000 Florida blacks were disnfranchised in 2000.

8- That it was just a COINCIDENCE that the exit polls were CORRECT where there WAS a PAPER TRAIL and INCORRECT (+5% for Bush) where there was NO PAPER TRAIL.

9- That the surge in new young voters had NO positive effect for Kerry.

10- That Bush BEAT 99-1 mathematical odds in winning the election.

11- That Kerry did WORSE than Gore agains an opponent who LOST the support of SCORES of Republican newspapers who were for Bush in 2000.

12- That Bush did better than an 18 national poll average which showed him tied with Kerry at 47. In other words, Bush got 80% of the undecided vote to end up with a 51-48 majority - when ALL professional pollsters agree that the undecided vote ALWAYS goes to the challenger.

13- That Voting machines made by Republicans with no paper trail and with no software publication, which have been proven by thousands of computer scientists to be vulnerable in scores of ways, were NOT tampered with in this election

[katinmn]

17. He wrote that on November 4!

I remember he was Johnny-on-the-spot. Went right to work (when many of us were still in extreme shock and in mourning) and never let up. I think I was nearly bedridden for a few days.

We should have taken TIA's info and headed out into the streets then and there.

[autorank]

18. You are so right. Mind blowing isn't it. Nov. 4th. Love that guy!!!

[Quantess]

13. Thank you for posting this!

:bounce:
Guess I have a lot of reading to do!

[katinmn]

15. Welcome!

It's a good site to bookmark.:hi: