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, government agencies, activists and nongovernmental organizations. Unlike some other wikis, SourceWatch has a policy of strict referencing, and is overseen by a paid editor. SourceWatch has 41,202 articles.

• Pharma See, Pharma Sue: The Canadian Association of University Teachers has strongly condemned a new lawsuit by the Apotex pharmaceutical company against Dr. Nancy Olivieri. As a liver specialist at the University of Toronto, Olivieri first came under attack from Apotex in 1996 when she notified her patients that she had detected toxic side effects while conducting an Apotex-sponsored study of the company's drug, deferiphone. Apotex sued Olivieri and, after years of lawsuits, Apotex and Olivieri reached a legal settlement in 2004 in which the company agreed to pay $800,000 to Olivieri, while both sides were to refrain from further public "disparagement" of each other. Now Apotex is suing again, claiming that Olivieri has disparaged the company simply by participating at conferences on the relationship between universities and the pharmaceutical industry (even if she doesn't mention Apotex by name). Its legal filing also claims that she has engaged in disparagement when other people have written about her in newspaper stories and on Wikipedia.

• No Shame at NBC: The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) has issued a statement strongly criticizing the National Broadcasting Corporation for its continued use of retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey as an on-air military analyst, while failing to disclose McCaffrey's multiple conflicts of interest that were recently detailed in the New York Times. "When the retired general offers his insight on the air for NBC, CNBC and MSNBC, viewers are left with the impression he is an 'objective' observer, a former military man speaking from the depths of his experience," it states. "What the networks have failed to tell viewers is that McCaffrey has a financial interest in the war." According to Andy Schotz, the chairman of SPJ's Ethics Committee, "these networks — which are owned by General Electric, a leading defense contractor — are giving the public powerful reasons to be skeptical about their neutrality and credibility. ... These are raging conflicts of interest embedded into reporting on crucial news."

• More Pentagon Problems with PR and Propaganda: The Pentagon's Inspector General has concluded that the "Defense Department's public affairs office may have 'inappropriately' merged public affairs and propaganda operations in 2007 and 2008 when it contracted out $1 million in work for a strategic communications plan for use by the military in collaboration with the State Department," writes Walter Pincus. The Inspector General's report (pdf) states that to avoid "appear[ing] to merge inappropriately the public affairs," or PR, "and information operation functions," Pentagon public affairs staff should focus on PR, while Pentagon policy staff assume "strategic communications responsibilities for information operations," the use of information to gain advantage over the enemy.

• Corporations Bottle Up Their Water Conference: The "Corporate Water Footprinting" conference in San Francisco December 2 and 3 had a small public component: "a presentation by Nestle on assessing water-related risks in communities, Coca-Cola's aggressive environmental water-neutrality goal, and MillerCoors' plan to use less water to make more beer," reports Amanda Witherell. "But what these giant corporations, which are seeking to control more of the world's water, really discussed the public will never know. Only four media representatives were permitted to attend -- all from obscure trade journals." Witherell's San Francisco Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Chronicle "were denied media passes."

• Gingrich Bites the Hand that Fed Him: In September 2008, as the U.S. Congress "was debating the first financial bailout, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich went on Fox News to decry how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had so 'many politicians beholden to them' that no one would step up to protect the American taxpayers," notes Muckety.com. But, as it turns out, Freddie Mac paid Gingrich $300,000 in 2006, "to push back against tough, new regulations of the mortgage company at a time the Bush administration was concerned about how big the two government-backed mortgage giants had become." After taking the money, Gingrich "talked and wrote about what he saw as the benefits of the Freddie Mac business model," reported the Associated Press. The Gingrich hire was part of an effort to woo conservatives.

• Croakwashing?: Consumer Reports WebWatch's Beau Brendler is questioning SaveTheFrog.com, a new Web site by the Discovery Channel's Animal Planet and the Clorox bleach company. The site purports to educate people about environmental concerns related to the planetwide disappearance of frogs. As Brendler points out, however, "What the Web site doesn't detail is the Clorox company's environmental record over the last couple of decades. It has been less than stellar." Brendler also points out that the domain for SaveTheFrog.com is registered to Fleishman-Hillard, one of the world's largest PR firms.

• 
  Weekly Radio Spin: Dogged Marketing During the Meltdown: 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 China's online censors, Wyeth's busy ghosts and how to sell during an economic meltdown. In "Six Degrees of Spin and Fakin'," the Bush administration and Goldman Sachs. 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!

• Sheldon Rampton reviews the confusion over hoaxer 'Martin Eisenstadt' and his claim that he was the source that told Fox News reporter Carl Cameron that Sarah Palin was so ignorant she didn't know Africa was a continent. See The Eisenstadt Hoax:A Real-life Example of a "Fake Fake" (November 14);

• Sheldon Rampton reflects on the the use of malicious emails spread as part of propaganda campaigns. See "Hollywood Goes to War" (November 13);

• Conor Kenny reports on the conviction of Alaskan Republican Senator Ted Stevens. See Stevens Convicted on All Counts in Corruption Trial (October 27);

• Sheldon Rampton reviews the media coverage of "Joe the Plumber". See Spin, Hype, and a Hoax Involving "Joe the Plumber" (October 16);

• John Stauber reviews the progress of the Iraq Veterans Against the War in opposing the war in Iraq during the election campaign and the the the Winter Soldier hearings held outside Washington DC. See Winter Soldier: Eyewitness Accounts of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (September 23).

• Diane Farsetta explains why the Center for Media and Democracy submitted a comment to the Federal Communications Commission on why sponsorship identification rules should apply to product placement, product integration and other types of "embedded advertising" relayed over television or radio stations.See Stealth Marketers Gone Wild: Will the FCC Act? (September 23).

In June 2008 blogger William K. Wolfrum concluded that M. Thomas Eisenstadt was a hoax. 'Eisenstadt' claimed that he was a Senior Fellow at a think tank called the Harding Institute for Freedom and Democracy. After days of the Eisenstadt hoax being written about on the Internet, the New York Times has reported that "a pair of obscure filmmakers" have admitted they created "Martin Eisenstadt to help them pitch a TV show based on the character."

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!

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.

The 2008 Falsies Awards: In Memory of the First Casualty: There's nothing quite like a hotly contested election. The candidates have their devoted supporters and angry detractors. Then there are vigorous debates over the issues, while some people question the integrity of the entire process.

We speak, of course, of the Falsies Awards.

Falsies recipients can collect their prizes -- a pair of Groucho Marx glasses, our two cents and a chance to atone for their spinning ways by making a detailed public apology -- by visiting CMD's office in Madison, Wisconsin. This year's Gold and Silver Falsies go to masters of war deception, while the Bronze Falsie recognizes a massive greenwash campaign. The first-ever Lifetime Achievement Falsie goes to a serial corporate front man, while a determined (if at times laughable) attempt at nation re-branding wins dishonorable mention. Then there are the Readers' Choice Falsies and Win Against Spin Awards, nominated by our survey participants.

That's a lot to cover, so without further ado, the winners of the 2008 Falsies Awards are ...

"The folks at the Center for Media and Democracy have done incredible work documenting fake grassroots ("astroturf") groups. Here, they're helping protects the rights of all Americans to exercise their right to vote. They are completely non-partisan. These guys are the real deal." Craig Newmark, Craig's List

"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 41,202 articles. In the last twelve months SourceWatch has served over 113 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.