So
where is the
big business
media, for
example
Reuters, on
this?
Now
we can say:
Reuters is
advertising
itself. In a
session dominated
by Sir Harold
Evans,
reference was
made to
Reuters
"great"
reporters,
piped in by video.
Sir Harry
prefaced one
question by
saying the crisis
is nearly over
in Liberia; he
said "we" have
strained
relations with
Cuba. Sir?
US Ambassador
Samantha Power
spoke in
detail, but
seemed to
ignore China's
announcement
commitment to
Liberia while
thanking all
the way down
to Air Maroc.
In fairness, at
the end she
mentioned an
old Chinese
plane -- being
unloaded by
American
soldiers.
The moderator
Stephen J.
Adler, who
previously
refused to
provide any
Reuters policy
on crediting
other media's
exclusives and
ignored
Reuters
attempts to
get the
investigative
Press thrown
out of the UN,
took a few
questions,
including one
about why the
US doesn't
have a Surgeon
General.
Planted?
Then Adler
called on Tina
Brown -- Sir
Harry's
significant
other -- then
Reuters UN
censor, who
has scammed Google
into blocking
from its
Search his own
complaint to
the UN to try
to get the
investigative
Press thrown
out of the UN,
here. filing,
under oath, to
Google is here.
Both forms of
censorship are
opposed, at
the UN, by the
new Free
UN Coalition
for Access.
When
US Ambassador
Samantha Power
went to West
Africa, she
took Reuters
along to
document each
stage. (Here
is some alternative
coverage, here,
here
and here.)
Upon her
return, on
October 31
Power will
speak at
Reuters in
Times Square.
That event
will web-cast,
but throughout
the week
Reuters has
been selling
its clients
first access
to quotes from
business
leaders.
But
there is
another side
to Reuters.
Even when it celebrated
itself for
getting a
leaked copy of
the most
recent Somalia
Eritrea
sanctions
report, it neglected
to report in
any way that
one of the
report's
authors was
forced to
resign after
writing a “regime change”
plea on UN
letterhead.
(Inner City
Press coverage
here, then
here and ehere.)
Reuters
reminded
silent on this
development,
clearly
relevant to
the sanctions
story and
report, even
as it was
discussed on
camera by the
UN spokesman
and UK
Ambassador
Mark Lyall
Grant.
Relevant
to
this silence
by Reuters,
and making it
more
problematic,
is that the
sanctions
monitor who
was forced to
resign, Dinesh
Mahtani, used
to be in the
employ of
Reuters.
This is how it
works.
While
trumpeting its
(compensated)
“exclusive”
publication of
leaked
documents,
Reuters has
petitioned
Google to
block from its
Search an
anti-Press
complaint it
filed with the
UN, calling it
a personal
communication
and even
copyrighted,
under the US
Digital
Millennium
Copyright Act.
Its
filing, under
oath, to
Google is here.
Both forms of
censorship are
opposed, at
the UN, by the
new Free
UN Coalition
for Access.
The attempt to
get leaked
documents
blocked from
Google's
Search as
"copyrighted"
is a strange
logic for a
company that
itself
publishes
unauthorized
leaks. But who
ever said
Reuters is
consistent?
Here's
the notice
for Power's
presentation:
, 
