Ken Tomlinson, Karl Rove and the BBG-CPB Scandals

It isn’t surprising that the White House still backs the second term nomination of Kenneth Tomlinson as head of the Broadcast Board of Governors. Tomlinson is a pal of high-level GOP officials, including Karl Rove. The new report [registration may be required] by State Department investigators detailing improprieties by Tomlinson underscores why we still need to know about any communications he had with the White House (as he ran CPB). Several months ago, my group—along with Common Cause and Free Press—filed a Freedom of Information request with the BBG [see below]. BBG denied our request. But the public deserves to know whether anyone in the White House urged Mr. Tomlinson to appoint Patricia Harrison, a high-level GOP official, to the CPB presidency? Was Tomlinson given encouragement to pressure PBS on its news and public affairs programming?

Here’s the initial letter sent to the BBG.

November 22, 2005

Martha Diaz Ortiz, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer
Broadcasting Board of Governors
330 Independence Avenue SW
Washington DC 20237

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear Ms. Diaz:

The undersigned organization representatives request unredacted copies of the following documents under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 USC 552:

Any and all reports, records (paper or electronic), including electronic mail, phone logs and appointment calendars of Broadcasting Board of Governors Chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson with any reference to his role or work as chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) to include but not be limited to any and all communications on this topic with White House personnel, the Executive Office of the President, current and former CPB staff or contract personnel, and any other individual or organization that communicated with Tomlinson regarding his work associated with CPB in the past 36 months.

We are employees of nonprofit organizations who work to increase understanding of the workings of U.S.-funded public broadcasting organizations. As such, we ask that all fees for this request be waived. Disclosure of the information requested above is in the public interest because it will significantly contribute to public understanding of the operations of the Broadcasting Board of Governors. This information will specifically show the degree to which the BBG is accountable and responsive to the American public it is charged to serve.

We request that you inform us immediately of your receipt of this letter; we also request that you immediately notify us when the documents we have requested are available for retrieval, as they become available. If you must deny access, please notify us immediately of your determination as well as the reasons for making that determination.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Chellie Pingree, Jeffrey Chester, Josh Silver
Common Cause, Center for Digital Democracy, Free Press

PBS will revise website to provide more Ad disclosure. But more needed

Communications Daily [Aug. 29, 2006. subscription required] reports that PBS plans to “revise its website as early as today (Tues.) to explain “sponsored links.” The Daily quotes PBS VP Lea Sloan saying that “we agree there could be more precision in describing what happens to users when they leave the PBS site and are looking into how best to articulate that.”

In a letter I wrote last week to the PBS ombudsman Michael Getler on behalf of the Center for Digital Democracy, we asked for an investigation into how users of the site are having data collected about them from third parties (including the placement of cookies). The letter said that such undisclosed data-collection via the PBS site was a ‘deceptive” practice. We have not yet heard from Mr. Getler.

But while we are gratified that PBS is listening (after a series of stories in newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times and complaints from advocates), we are not satisfied. PBS should not be engaged in any interactive advertising—on its website, via its digital broadcast airwaves, or by any method (such as wireless). PBS must not be allowed to become an digital ad-addicted junkie. It should offer the public a totally commercial-free environment as it enters the broadband communications era. We hope that Congress will consider legislation restricting PBS, NPR and other federally supported public broadcasting entities from running any ads at all—including interactive outlets.

We believe that PBS’s future more fruitfully lies in building up a site that users will financially support–grateful that it will be one of the few places on the planet where they aren’t the target of personalized interactive marketing.

camel toe moviesporn length full movieface hardcore fucking moviesnude lopez movies jennifermovie silviasex amatuer moviesmovies beastalitymovies bignaturals Map

galleries adult free pornadult porn screensaver freevideo free porn adultadult trailers porn freefurry adult pornporn girl free adultporn hardcore magazines adulthunt site adult porn Map

PBS Commercialization: The Comcast, Kidvid and Sprout connection

Next month, PBS’s Sprout is celebrating its one-year launch with a self-proclaimed birthday bash. Sprout is a channel aimed at pre-schoolers. It has advertising and is a commercial venture. PBS was lured into the deal in part by Comcast, which was seeking cheap-to-buy and already in the can “family-friendly” content for its cable TV systems (including its video on demand service). By agreeing to this deal, PBS ultimately embraced a more commercialized, monopoly-media dependent model for its future. Instead of protecting children from an advertising culture, PBS helped to enhance it. (PBS wasn’t alone in wanting such a deal. Some of its children’s TV producers, who actually control the rights to programming, wanted an outlet beyond the limits of PBS broadcasting. )

The September Sprout “anniversary” (as they are touting it) should be accompanied by some serious reflection at PBS headquarters, its stations, and producers like Sesame Workshop. They are helping lead PBS further down the wrong path during this critical time of transition in the digital video era.

PBS to Run Commercials Online, including at PBS Kids site. Doesn’t it know there soon won’t be a real difference between the Web and TV?

PBS intends to run online advertising this fall at its PBS.org website. The so-called non-commercial network says it seeks to benefit from the “explosive growth and rising demand” of interactive advertising. In an example of how out of touch PBS executives are with its non-commercial mandate, a PBS VP explained that the move is a response to the demand of the market. He said that such ads would generate “positive financial results” for the network, helping it fulfill its “mission-based activities.” They claim there will be “guidelines” helping determine what ads can run. But an ad’s an ad. Incredibly, PBS will also seeks advertising for its kids website homepages—PBSkids.org and PBSkids Go!

PBS should not be seeking commercial opportunities in the broadband market. Instead, it should be pioneering new forms of non-commercial content readily available throughout our ubiquitous digital system. PBS must recognize by now that online and TV (as well as mobile) are merging. The distinction about whether content is delivered via any specific platform no longer matters. Whether received via TV, cellphone, or PC, public broadcasting content should be fully non-commercial. PBS, and its stations, (and NPR) should not attempt to replicate what commercial media companies are doing online and with mobile networks. It will be a U.S. media universe saturated with advertising. If PBS is to remain distinctive at all—it has to strictly adhere to non-commercial formats in all forms of distribution. Certainly, new PBS president Paula Kerger can do better than this. PBS officials think they have a loophole because they aren’t prohibited from running ads online (they are restricted in terms of commercials and their TV licenses). Congress must step in to bar PBS from running any ads—in any medium.

[source: “PBS to resume Online Ads to Exploit Market Demand.” Dinesh Kumar. Communications Daily. Aug. 24, 2006. Subscription only].

PS: In response to those who say that PBS needs money, so hence it must run online ads. In my view, only by creating meaningful interactive non-commercial formats can PBS hope to raise money from viewers/users. Its future is with the audience increasingly using social media web sites. It has to provide those users with distinctive content. A fully non-commercial service is likely to be appreciated with viewer support. Foundations might like it too.

PPS: Read the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childrhood’s alert on PBS ads here.

And Commercial Alert’s here.

PPPS!: See a good overview article on PBS’s deal with Google’s Adsense service. The piece includes an interview with PBS’s VP for Interactive and Education. It’s at paidcontent.org and called “PBS.org Starts Accepting Contextual Ads From Google; More Coming.” See another piece about the PBS station in Cincinnati that has “re-launched its web presence as an ad-supported on-demand video site.”