July 22, 2006

Learn how to take back the media

We know that the right-wing has dominated the media for decades. It didn't happen overnight and it didn't happen by accident. Now, if we learn the tools, our nationwide grassroots network has a chance to take back our media.

Throughout the summer, DFA Night School will offer three online sessions that will help build your media skills. The sessions combine an online presentation with a live conference call and group discussion with our trainers to show you how to get a progressive message into the media. You can join any or all of the DFA Night School sessions from the comfort of your home or office today. Click here to sign up:

July 25: Working the Mainstream Media
August 1: Leveraging Blogs and Online Media
August 8: Sustaining your Media Presence

The events are free of charge and you don't need any prior experience working with the media. Media coverage is one of the best tools we have for spreading our progressive values—and holding this administration and Congress accountable for their failures. Click here to find out more and reserve your spot:

www.democracyforamerica.com/nightschool

We can change our country, but it's going to take a strong ground game and savvy media outreach. You have the power, now get the skills. Thanks for everything you do.

Sincerely,

Arshad Hasan
Training Coordinator
Democracy for America

P.S. If you missed the spring semester of DFA Night School on Campaign Tactics 101, you can purchase it on DVD at: democracyforamerica.com/nightschool_dvd

Posted by Lyn Wall at 01:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 25, 2006

David Broder dredges for a Hot Tip on Clinton

Forget the news! David Broder wants a Hot Tip on Clinton!

In reading David Broder's latest column ("The Shadow of a Marriage" currently up at the WaPo) it struck me how much Mr Broder has come to represent the mere shadow of an independent press that we have in Washington. Sent out to cover Senator Hillary Clinton's speech on how to fight global warming Tuesday morning at the National Press Club, this "Dean of the Washington Press Corps" could only manage to sniff up a story about... wait for it... whether her marriage to Bill Clinton was solid following his affair nine years ago.

Nevermind it was a major policy speech by a US senator. Nevermind that senator is a leading contender for the presidency. Nevermind that she reversed her position on alternative fuels, laid out several policy specifics, including return to the 55mph speed limit, and even got heckled by an antiwar demonstrator. His conclusion from a night surrounded by the substance of how governmental policy affects all our lives is this: because no one was talking about the Clintons' marriage, the Clintons' marriage is a taboo subject we all need to talk about.

Huh? Here's what "Dean" Broder wrote (emphasis added):

For the better part of an hour, the senator from New York held forth in a disquisition on energy policy that was as overwhelming in its detail as it was ambitious in its reach.

But the buzz in the room was not about her speech -- or her striking appearance in a lemon-yellow pantsuit -- but about the lengthy analysis of the state of her marriage to Bill Clinton that was on the front page of that morning's New York Times.

The article, by Patrick Healy, was anything but unsympathetic. It touched only lightly on the former president's friendship with Canadian politician Belinda Stronach. It documented that despite their busy separate schedules, the Clintons had managed to spend two-thirds of their weekends together during the past 18 months.

There's nothing there about the topic of Sen. Clinton's speech at all. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) writes more about the substance of her health care plan from 12 years ago than he does about her global warming proposals. His only mention of the substance of her speech is to state, as an aside, that her "wonkish text" described "the 'geologic sequestration' potential for reducing global warming and making better use of coal."

But even that is written just to underscore how boring all this science stuff is. Then Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) goes back to obsessing about the Clintons' marriage. There's a palpable disappointment in Broder's writing, as if he's upset he didn't find any dirt on their marriage while attending a public policy address. He writes, "The Clintons, according to the [New York] Times, urged friends not to answer questions about the relationship and declined to be interviewed -- except for a joint statement that 'they do everything they can to be together'.") What? The speech contained not a word about her husband's depressing lack of infidelity of late? Note to the Washington Post: Wonkette does this sort of thing better and for a whole lot less money.

Maybe David Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) didn't understood the topic he was sent to cover. There's nothing wrong with being too dense to understand global warming. Unless you've seen Al Gore's new movie, it's pretty complicated stuff.

But if that was the case, shouldn't he just tell his assignment editor, "I'm sorry, I just don't understand these scientific things about how cutting back on pollution can slow down environmental degradation that could permanently alter how liveable our planet is. I only understand how extramarital fellatio can cause people to gossip about you. For years. Maybe you should send a reporter along who can write about the speech instead of the nine year old giggle story."

That would be a refreshingly mature thing for Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) to do, instead of going to an event and, when no one talks about the one thing he understands, conclude that the marriage question is "the elephant in the room." The sleeziest part of it, of course, is when he drags the name of Belinda Stronach into his article. It's clear that Broder has nothing, nada, on any possible relationship between Mr Clinton and Ms Stronach. Throwing the name out there is his wink-nudge way of asking the world "Hey, does anyone have any dirt on Clinton? Please give the tip to me instead of the National Inquirer."

I'm sorry, Dave. But the Inquirer pays good money for the trash it digs up. You can't compete.

But if he's really looking for a hot tip on the Clintons and can't find one perhaps you can help. I know I've done my part. Just this afternoon I emailed Mr Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) and gave him the following inside scoop:

Mr Broder,

I'm writing to let you know something about Mrs Clinton that you apparently do not know. She's not just a candidate for president with an embarrassing problem in her family's past. She's also an informed and hard working politician who's addressing one of the biggest concerns of the day in public policy--global warming.

It would behoove you and your readers if you could follow up on the substance of this story. She apparently made some major policy proposals at the speech you attended. I do not know what those proposals are because your article did not mention them. As a voter who may have to face the option of voting for or against Mrs Clinton if she runs for president, I would like to know what she thinks we should do about global warming. It's a pretty big deal.

I think you, as a journalist covering the beat of presidential politics ought to look into this. It's a big story and, career-wise, a Washington journalist covering issues that voters care about would put you way ahead of the curve.

Instead, unfortunately, you chose to write about her marriage. I'm no journalist myself, but I think the Clintons' marriage falls into the category of "dog bites man." You might have picked up on that from the NY Times story yesterday that you cited in your latest column--the story that discovered that the Clintons are a very busy couple who still manage to make time to be around each other.

Your tawdry (and unsubstantiated) innuendo about Ms Belinda Stronach aside, there really isn't much of a news story from the way you covered her speech. I would suggest that you look into this global warming thing, as it is certain to be something voters care about.

As a citizen living far away from New York and Washington, I depend on journalists to provide me with information about what people in government can do and what they are planning to do about the big concerns of the day. That is precisely why your profession as a newspaperman is a protected and vital part of our republic.

I wish you would do your job, Mr Broder, and keep your tawdry innuendo out of the stuff I read. If you find dirt on Mr Clinton, of course I think you should publish it. The fact that you have nothing to report on but unspecified "buzz" suggests to me that you have nothing to report period. Meanwhile you're missing a lot of important news stories as you wait around for Bubba to slip up. And when journalists miss stories, then the public misses stories--and that would describe a real failure on the part of your profession.

I suppose you could tell me to read other journalists' work if I'm interested in actual news instead of the non-gossip you peddled in your latest column. But let me suggest that that would only be a clever, yet lazy, way of you avoiding your responsibilities as a leading journalist. Please cover the news, Mr Broder, and not the buzz over the lack of news.


Bucky Rea
Houston, TX

Now, he hasn't had the courtesy to write me back. Yet. But perhaps that's a time zone difference. I live in the flyover-country-that's-affected-by-government-policy time zone and Broder lives, apparently, in 1998.

Posted by Bucky at 05:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 22, 2006

Did the RNC just buy the New York Times?

Democrats Try to Use Katrina as G.O.P. Used 9/11, by Adam Nagourney

I could spend my entire weekend enumerating all of the reasons which make this analogy fail, but here is a big one: Bush used 9-11 to smother any discussion about any national issue. Disagree with Bush and you are a traitor.

Posted by Jon Boyd at 07:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 01, 2006

Texas Progressive Alliance launches

The Texas Progressive Alliance features seventeen of the the best blogs in the Lone Star State, and its mission is to advance the cause of progressive issues and candidates. It also features an advertising network for those who wish to deliver their message to over a quarter of a million Texas progressives weekly -- the readers of the following blogs:

Texads logo.jpg

The Agonist
Annatopia
Brains & Eggs
Burnt Orange Report
Common Sense
Capitol Annex
District Sixer
Eye on Williamson County
In The Pink Texas
Just Another Blog
The Jeffersonian
Mind Fyre
The People's Republic of Seabrook
Pink Dome
The Red State
Rhetoric & Rhythym
Truth Serum Blog
Wyld Card

Posted by Perry Dorrell at 03:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

October 03, 2005

Great Resource for Contacting the Media and Researching Issues

Murvin Auzenne chair of the HCDP Communications and Message Committie, has compiled this excellent list of media contacts and resources. Download the Word document here.

Thanks Murvin!

Posted by Lyn Wall at 12:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 20, 2005

A Day of Support (TODAY) for Progressive News Programming

Join a peaceful positive protest outside of the KPFT studios this Saturday (11am to 4 pm) to mark the start of the 7 day KPFT mini-fund drive. This 'action' will not call for a financial boycott of the station but will be staged in opposition to Duane Bradley's (KPFT Manager) recent program changes which either cancelled or displaced most of the following vitally important news and public affairs programs from the weekday prime commuter drive times of (6:30 - 9:00 am and 4:00 - 6:30 pm).

Here's what Duane decided to do without consultation with the KPFT Local Station Board, The KPFT Program Council or the listeners themselves (the last 2 Town Hall Meetings said keep DN at 7am).

1. DEMOCRACY NOW - was moved from 7am to 6pm, weekdays.

2. FREE SPEECH RADIO NEWS - moved from 5pm to 3pm, weekdays.

3. COUNTERSPIN - moved from 6pm Tuesdays to 4am Sunday. SAME AS CANCELLED. This excellent program is produced by F.A.I.R.

4. MAKING CONTACT - CANCELLED.

5. ALTERNATIVE RADIO (w/David Barsarmian) - CANCELLED.

6. TUC RADIO - CANCELLED.

7. WOMEN'S INT'L NEWS GATHERING SERVICE (WINGS) - moved from Mondays at 6pm to 11 am on Monday

8. FLASHPOINTS - moved from 7pm weekdays to 11 pm Mon-Thurs.

9. THE HAITI SHOW moved to 5am on Sundays. This is the same as canceling

Just as Cindy Sheehan in Crawford, Texas can say she loves the US but opposes the war I believe we can do the same for KPFT. We plan to have speakers, music and poets. Bring refreshments, blankets and chairs. We plan to support donations to the station but intend to hand out flyers to educate listeners about the recent program changes.

If these sudden regressive programming changes at KPFT alarm you then I suggest you contact the station (713-526-4000) or email both the station manager (Duane Bradley: dbradley@kpft.org ), the interim Program Director (Ernesto Aguilar: ernesto@kpft.org) or the Local Station Board ( lsb@kpft.org ).

FYI: Before these were changes KPFT had 2.5 HOURS of truly progressive news programs on during the weekday prime (5 HOUR) commuter drive times of (6:30 - 9:00 am and 4:00 - 6:30 pm) - these were the abovementioned shows 1 through 7. As of May 1, 2005 we now have a total of 1 HOUR consisting of KPFT local news (not national or int'l.) and the 1st 1/2 hour of the 6pm Democracy Now broadcast. We went from having excellent progressive news programs during 50% of the prime 5 hours of each weekday (morning plus evening) to now having a total of 1 hour during the critical 5 commuter hours.

Please contact rgg-629@sbcglobal.net if you wish to be kept informed about this issue.

Posted by Guest Blogger PDiddie at 07:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

August 01, 2005

Current TV Debuts on Time Warner Channel 231 Today

Al Gore's Current TV launched to day and Time Warner Cable is carrying it on channel 231. Current TV's web page - http://www.current.tv/ tells you exactly which segments are on and in the queue.

Check it out. The current segment is about the Books not Bars campaign in California.

From their about page:

Its reach and influence are unparalleled. It makes or breaks products and politicians alike, paints our picture of the world, and glues our culture together. And yet, who controls it?

Now, you do.

This is our outpost in a locked-down television landscape. Here, the channel goes two ways. Here, you are viewer and producer. Welcome to Current.

Current is a new, independent cable and satellite TV network, available in 20 million homes around the United States -- and growing.

Current is about what's going on.

We follow the global pulse via Google Current, a real-time view of what the world's searching for, presented every half-hour around the clock.

We slice the rest of the schedule into short pods -- each just a few minutes long -- that range far and wide, from international dispatches to profiles of cool people to intelligence on new trends. This is not a traditional TV network; watching Current, you'll see more, on more topics, from more points of view.

And much of it comes straight from you.

We call it viewer-created content, or VC2, and it's created in the Current Studio, an online extension of our real studios in San Francisco and LA. Anybody can join in to produce VC2 (and get paid for it) or watch and vote for what goes on TV.

See those four squares in our logo? We call it the cursor, and like an old-school command prompt, it means we're awaiting input.
From you.

Posted by Lyn Wall at 04:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 12, 2005

David Berg Does Not Speak For This Democrat

This from first-time guest blogger Martha Cottingham. Welcome to the team Martha!

David Berg's lengthy editorial bashing Howard Dean in the Houston Chronicle on 6/12/05 reminded me that there are democrats and then there are DEMOCRATS.


The half-page spread (above the fold) in Sunday's Outlook section says a lot. Obviously, Mr. Berg is not happy with Howard Dean. It also tells us that Mr. Berg has connections.

If you combined every item that mentions the Harris County Democratic Party that has appeared in the Chronicle this year it wouldn't be as long as Mr. Berg's comments.

Therein lies the problem. Anyone who reads the Chronicle could easily assume that Mr. Berg speaks for the party.

I don't know David Berg. I presume that he is a high powered attorney who sends big bucks to Democratic causes.

I do know that he is not an elected official, member of the Harris County Executive Committee, or a state party executive committee member.


Mr. Berg's opinions are his own. He does not speak for the Democratic Party in Harris County.

Posted by Lyn Wall at 02:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack

June 05, 2005

"SCLM, call holding, line 2"

"If there's another Deep Throat out there, give us a call, won't you. We're waiting for your call."

-- Tim Russert and Tom Brokaw, at the end of their discussion of "Deep Throat", aka W. Mark Felt, earlier this week.

Well fellas, (s)he got tired of waiting for you to pick up the phone, and hung up.

I think it was Richard Clarke, but it may have been Sibel Edmonds. It could have been Karen Kwiatkowski, or Coleen Rowley. Or Paul O'Neill or even Joe Wilson. It might have been Gen. Eric Shinseki; I guess it could have even been John DiIulio, but if it was him, he sounded like he was already changing his mind even as I was putting him on hold.

Pick up your pages a little quicker in the future, guys.

Posted by Guest Blogger PDiddie at 10:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 20, 2005

Dean to Appear on Meet the Press Sunday

This Sunday (May 22), DNC Chair Howard Dean will sit for a full hour with Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press.

It should be interesting to see what he has to say about all the goings on at the moment. There are certainly plenty of them. It's good to know that he will be getting a little more visibility than he has lately.

I discovered that Republican Whip Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania had the following to say about Democrats yesterday:

... the audacity of some members to stand up and say, how dare you break this rule. It's the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942 saying, 'I'm in Paris. How dare you invade me. How dare you bomb my city? It's mine.'

Bush's popularity:

According to the American Research Group poll Bush's job approval has sunk to 43%, 51% disapprove. When it comes to how he has handled the economy, he receives even lower marks, 37% approve, 57% disapprove.

Posted by at 01:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

May 16, 2005

Bill Moyers Speaks to the National Conference on Media Reform

If you're not familiar with the issues of media consolidation and government control of media, Bill Moyer's speech will bring you up to speed. Even if you are familiar with the issues, there is no better spokesman for the concerns many of us have.

C-Span is running the speech right now, and if you miss it, will be available later at C-Span.org. You can hear the speech on Democracy Now, which is currently airing on KPFT or listen to after the broadcast at democracynow.org

Update: Excerpts from the speech are now available at Common Dreams. The text of the speech is available at http://www.freepress.net/news/8120

Posted by Lyn Wall at 09:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack

May 02, 2005

To Drill or Not to Drill in ANWR

I have transcribed the interview in which I participated for anyone who is interested, but missed the airing of City View this weekend. The topic of the interview was whether or not we should open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. I have included the basis of my claims at the end of the interview. Hopefully, this will spur some discussion about the pros and cons of drilling.

"City View: The Community as a Whole": Discussion of ANWR

Art Rascon: Good morning everyone. Welcome to City View this morning. Today our focus is both timely and extremely controversial. We're talking about oil and more specifically domestic production of it. This past week President George Bush called on Congress to pass his energy plan, which calls for more domestic production, like in Alaska, California, the Gulf of Mexico, other areas as well. Environmentalists don't like it. We'll explore this issue and talk about how all of this affects gas prices as well.

We start with the battle over Arctic oil, however. There is a bitter fight over this Alaskan crude. It is mana from heaven for Houston oil companies, but a curse to many native Alaskan Indians. I traveled to the Arctic region to take a closer look at the issue.

"The Battle over Arctic Oil"

Charlie Sweeney - Arctic Village Hunter: When you are hunting wolves or caribou, they are in the timber or in the bush.

Rascon: Charlie Sweeney is a native Gwichin Indian and has lived off this land all his life.

Sweeney: I wouldn't have it any other way. This is normal, normal living.

Rascon narrates: It may be a bitter cold morning but there is plenty of work to do.

[Sweeney slings gun across his shoulder.]

Sweeney: This winter we haven't seen that many caribou, 'cause uh... I think it's mainly because uh, all this noise, there's a lot more snow than usual here.

[Sweeney prepares snowmobiles, fastens gear.]

Rascon: Do you have everything?

Sweeney: Yup.

Rascon: Are you set to go?

Sweeney: Yup, I'm ready.

Rascon narrates: In these remote Indian villages, if you don't hunt, you don't eat.

[Sweeney starts the snowmobile.]

Rascon narrates: Charlie lives in the small, sleepy town of Arctic Village on the southern edge of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better know as ANWR.

Timothy Sam - Arctic Village Elder: When you're here, it's just like my backyard, and they want to destroy it.

[Sam and Rascon walking through the village.]

Rascon narrates: Timothy Sam is one of the elders in Arctic Village. He's lived here for sixty years.

Rascon: Born and raised in this India area weren't you?

Sam: Yes.

Rascon narrates: If oil companies are allowed to explore and drill, Timothy believes life here will be changed forever.

Rascon: How important is this entire land to you?

Sam: Nature should give me everything I want, and uh, fur, timber... wild animals--you know, moose, coyote, caribou, fish--everything.

Rascon narrates: ANWR is made up of nearly 20 million acres. The proposal now is to open the 1.5 million acre coastal plain to oil exploration.

[Viewer sees a map of Alaska and ANWR that fades to a man carrying a bundle of pipe in front of an oil well.]

Sam: We will destroy this land once and for all.

[Sam and Rascon walking in village, transition to an aerial flyover of an oil rig.]

Rascon narrates: The fear among these Gwichin Indians is that exploring and drilling will disturb the wildlife, and more importantly the migration of the caribou.

[Viewer sees birds flying, caribou running across a wide plain as the camera pans across wooded hills of bare trees (winter time).]

Rascon: It has long been considered one of the world's great migrations. Tens of thousands of caribou migrating from the Yukon in northwestern Canada to Alaska above the Arctic Circle.

[Rascon is standing in the middle of a snow-covered village street.]

Rascon: And there was even a time that the caribou made their way right through the middle of these Indian villages.

[Snowmobiles shoot past camera, continuing down the street.]

Sweeney: Sixty-five to seventy percent of their diet is off the land, and if, if they go out, there is no more moose, there's no more caribou, there's going to be at a loss.

Rascon: Hunting for caribou or moose isn't easy in this rough country.

[Camera shows Rascon and Sweeney standing next to a frozen lake, then it focuses on Sweeney as he gestures towards the valley.]

Sweeney: Moose mainly stay in the, in the valley here... Uh, whereas the caribou like it on the hillsides.

[End of footage. Return to KTRK newsroom.]

Rascon: What is, what are the pros and cons of this issue? A controversial one indeed, and we're going to be discussin those in just a minute.

Joining us right is Charlie Richards. He is the past president of the Offshore Technology Conference. It is a massive conference here in Houston. Now, this is a big issue, domestic production, of course for the OTC as well.

Richards: Indeed. Good morning, Art. Uh, the production we're currently having now in the US comes primarily from the Gulf of Mexico, and while we are in shallow water and deeper water, the Offshore Technology Conference encompasses the technology necessary for us to produce oil in very difficult areas.

This brings us back to ANWR, and earlier when you were talking about wildife, Txas has been drilling oil in South Texas where there's an abundant wildlife. The environmentalists' concern with the fact that uh, drilling in ANWR will interrupt the wildlife, this is nonsense. It is not going to do that. There's a long history of very close regulated, and the oil companies are very environmentally responsible, and they're certainly not going to take uh, a chance of having any major disruption.

Rascon: And speaking of those issues as well, we're going to be watching a couple of reports that deal with what the oil companies are doing, and as well, we're going to be talking with an environmentalist.

Charlie, we're going to get back with you in just a minute to talk a little more about this issue. And when we come back, we'll take you back to Alaska for a closer look at how oil companies, as I said, are laying the groundwork for oil production in that region in the hopes that it will be someday approved. We'll be back.

[End of first segment.]

===============================
[Return from commercial break.]

Rascon: Welcome back to City View this morning. We're going to take you back to Alaska to the Arctic Village school house where young natives there are taught the caribou dance.

[Viewer sees a circle of children dancing, singing, and rythmically stomping the floor to the drum beat.]

Rascon narrates: Children here are taught at a very early age to respect the land and the caribou.

[Viewer sees caribou trotting over a green field, then a close up of a caribou's head.]

Rascon: Why are the caribou so important to you?

[Group of caribou crossing a rocky riverbed coming towards camera.]

Young boy: We use the whole body for our stuff.

Rascon: Tell me what the caribou is used for.

Young boy: Um, canvas boots, our traditional clothes, clothes, and all this.

[Viewer again see villagers dancing in circles in the schoolhouse.]

Rascon narrates: They have also been taught something else.

[Camera shows a classroom of kids.]

Rascon: If the oil companies come and drill in ANWR and explore in that area, what happens to the caribou?

Girl: Dies.

Boy: They go into Canada, and they probably won't even come over to Alaska any more.

Rascon narrates: But is it true or propaganda? It's all lies say oil company executives.

[Rascon is standing with Sullivan on vehicle tracks in snow near an oil rig.]

Bill Sullivan - Vice-President, Anadarko Petroleum: You understand, we can develop, we can produce oil fields, even during the summer. Uh, the caribou frankly seem to ignore all that activity.

Rascon narrates: Bill Sullivan is Vice-President of Houston-based Anadarko Petroleum.

[Camera shows a view of village buildings, then the inside of a plane, and then the plane taking off down an ice runway.]

Rascon narrates: We caught up with him in northern Alaska, as he made his way to the village of Kratowic, sizing up oil exploration possibilities.

[Camera shows an aerial panorama of a city and grid of streets covered in snow.]

Sullivan: It can be potentially significant to Anadarko from a future growth standpoint.

[Viewer sees a map of Alaska and ANWR showing the location of Kratowic.]

Rascon narrates: Kratowic is a tiny village on the most northern tip of ANWR and the closest community to where oil companies most desperately want to drill.

[Van approaches along a snow road lined with telephone polls and houses in the background.]

Sullivan: We're optimistic. In our business, you have to be optimistic, uh. We're hoping for the best. We would expect totake an aggressive approach to exploration and uh, and keep our fingers crossed that we'll have some great results.

[Viewer sees Rascon and Sullivan disembarking from plane and then driving by village houses.]

Rascon narrates: And, like those in Arctic Village, many here live off the land.

[Viewer sees caribou running through a rocky river in the summer.]

Penton Rexford - President, Native Corporation: We're stewards of the land, we wouldn't want to see the caribous driven away, the tundra damaged.

[Rexford is standing with Rascon in a snow field.]

Rascon narrates: Penton Rexford is an Eskimo elder in Kratowic.

[See house in drifts of snow.]

Rascon narrates: There is a big difference in attitude towards drilling here.

[See two kids getting onto school bus.]

Rascon narrates: These natives actually like the oil companies.

Rexford: We'll watch it. We'll be the stewards, we'll monitor, and if they're going to make mistakes, we'll let them know.

[Viewer sees an oil rig in the gloom of winter, then a closeup of machinery on the rig.]

Rascon narrates: Years ago, after oil was discovered in Prudhoe Bay, the native Eskimos formed corporations with several villages along the northslope to work closely with oil companies.

[Viewer sees caribou with their thick winter coats, then the OAREII Community Center as the mayor and Rascon descend the stairs.]

Mans Insala - Mayor of Kratowic: We're hoping there will be very little impact, if it's done correctly.

Rascon narrates: Mans Insala is the mayor of Kratowic.

Rascon: Are you concerned about the environmental impact at all?

[Viewer sees a herd of caribou trotting over a grassy field, then a close up of caribou grazing.

Insala: Well, we're environmentalists too, and of course we are. We don't want to see any harm come to the caribou or the land, and, uh, we think that if it's done right, it can be done uh, without any harm coming to either one.

[View of Insala and Rascon standing in front of the community center.]

Rascon narrates: There is a financial benefit as well.

[Viewer sees a large tractor raising an insulated roofing section onto a new house, then a series of views showing builders working on houses.]

Rascon narrates: Native villages belonging to the corporations profit from oil revenues. There are new schools, new homes, nice community centers.

[Snowmobile drives past the homes.]

Rascon narrates: Quite a contrast from the rundown villages of the Gwichin Indians.

[See a man chopping wood with an ax.]

Rascon narrates: Senior Elder Gideon James of Arctic Village is not happy about it.

[Viewer sees a panoramic of the village with James chopping wood in the middle ground at dusk.]

James: In the last thirty years that uh, that uh, they've been pumping oil from the northslope uh, we haven't seen the essential services they were supposed to provide like they did our school.

Rascon narrates: Although the Gwichins refused to join the corporations, Gideon believes they are still entitled to at least some of the oil profits.

Rascon: But you want better schools.

James: Ya.

Rascon narrates: Better community centers.

James: Yes.

Rascon narrates: You want those?

James: Yes.

Rascon narrates: If the oil companies came in and said, "Ok," we'll give you a better school...

James: No! No! I don't think, I don't think that's my point. You know, they already did thirty years of uh, you know, of that kind of uh, production up there. We haven't seen anything, and now they're going to come up and send some of that to me. I'm not stupid you know?

[End of footage. Return to KTRK newsroom.]

Rascon: Lots of views here, for and against, and in Houston this week, 50,000 people belonging to various oil companies are in town to take part in the OTC.

What's the significance of this four-day conference really Charlie?

Richards: Art, I tell you, this is the thirty-fifth year, thirty-six years the OTC has been in Houston. The, the number of people that attend this week will probably be in excess of 50,000 people.

The financial gains that just the City of Houston will realize, several millions of dollars. We have close to 10,000 foreign visitors coming in. And the conference itself is not only just a technical conference. There is also an exhibit that will exhibit the various new products and techniques that are being currently used in the oil patch.

Rascon: You know with all the foreigners coming in as well, is ther some debate about the, the, the, the dependency that America has on foreign oil?

Richards: Yes.

Rascon: Is there too much dependency there?

Richards: Well this is true and you'll find uh, companies uh, are exhibitors there from like Nigeria, uh Venezuela, um major oil companies--Shell, Exxon. As a matter of fact, you'll see a couple of announcements made uh, maybe I'm jumping the gun a little bit, but Exxon will be making an announcement that's rather unique, and uh... The conference is such a unique conference, uh that bringing in the foreign visitors, which gives us a, an opportunity to show them how the US has been developing their oil fields. Saudi Arabia, uh Qatar, uh a number, um... You'll find that comp... of the French companies will be in attend... the Norwegians...

Rascon: And all of those companies with American companies debating as well over the dependency American oil, foreign oil, and all of that.

We're going to get into some of that in just a minute Charlie because that is extremely important, especially when we're talking about more domestic production.

When we come back, more from Alaska. There is precious wildlife there, so what are oil companies promising to do to protect it. The answer in a moment. We'll be back.

[End of segment two.]

===============================
[Return from commercial break.]

Rascon: Welcome back to City View this morning. There is precious wildlife in Alaska. That's not disputed, but during the dead of winter there is really nothing but ice, and that's when oil companies get to work.

[Near Prudhoe Bay, Northern Alaska.]

Rascon narrates: There is an ominous, eery feeling when you're caught in the middle of this.

[View of Rascon trudging through snow towards the camera in a blizzard.]

Rascon narrates: The wind cuts right through you. But it is these awful conditions that allow oil companies to do their work.

[An 18-wheeler drives slowly over ice road past the camera.]

Rascon narrates: They are not allowed to explore for oil or travel unless the ground is frozen and covered with snow.

[Rascon is standing in a blizzard surrounded by whiteness.]

Rascon: These Arctic winters can be brutal, the wind chill factor alone, even now, is nearly fifty degrees below zero.

[Rascon walks towards camera along the ice road.]

Rascon: The cold temperatures however, allow the oil companies to build ice roads. These ice roads are some three to five feet thick. In the summertime they are completely gone.

[Viewer sees an aerial view of green-brown mountains in the summer, then a verdant valley with mountains beyond, a bird walking in the grass, and a close up of bright pink flowers.]

Rascon narrates: This is what the coastal plain looks like in the beauty of summer. Like clockwork every year, the porcupine caribou heard settles on the tundra. It is the heard's camping grounds, grounds that oil companies promise not to harm.

[Caribou trot across a green field, then a herd runs through a river, and downslope away from the camera.]

Sullivan: There's a couple of elements we really have to protect.

[Viewer sees a valley stream bordered by a melting ice ledge with blue mountains rising in the background in low light with voluminous clouds above.]

Sullivan: One is the land itself, and the delicate tundra here. And then there's the wildlife in the area, particularly the caribou is what the Gwichin are concerned about.

[A caribou herd moves over a hill towards the camera, then the viewer sees a large herd grazing in a field. The camera focuses on some small white flowers, then zooms in on a small auburn bird sunning itself on a branch.]

Rascon: This, this is all frozen, frozen tundra...

[The viewer can see a bright blue helicopter in the background. Sullivan and Rascon walk towards the camera.]

Sullivan: Underneath is frozen tundra, it's frozen solid. Then of course we get snow cover on top of that.

Rascon narrates: Bill Sullivan makes his money off finding oil, and is determined to help open ANWR.

Sullivan: It's a significant amount of oil, and be a very important source of oil for the United States.

[Viewer sees an aerial panorama of snow tracks created by heavy seismic equipment that just passed.]

Rascon narrates: Not to mention the profits it would bring many Houston-based oil companies.

[Viewer sees a close up of the large, heavy seismic equipment rolling over the snow, tamping the ground with disks to try and detect what lies beneath.]

Rascon narrates: If ANWR was to open, companies would first bring in heavy equipment, like this to take what would be the equivalent of an MRI of the Earth.

[Viewer sees the seismic machines tamping the ground.]

Sullivan: If we have a discovery, and if we actually would develop an oil field um, then we would do it in a way that would minimize the surface impact.

Rascon narrates: In fact new technology allows oil companies to drill fairly large areas with one small footprint.

[Aerial view of machinery leaving tracks in snow below. A man shows a map of an oil rig footprint from which many drills radiate outwards.]

Mike Lydon - Phillips Petroleum: Right now, you can look at this map and uh. We're all of our wells from this pad right here.

Rascon narrates: Mike Lydon helps run the Phillips and Anadarko oil wells along the northslope.

Lydon: We have such a small footprint here, uh compared to uh, other areas because, uh because of the directional drilling we, we can reach out and go directionally from just one small location.

[Viewer sees a plane flying away. In the foreground is a street sign that says, "Alpine."]

Rascon narrates: The footprint left in ANWR would be similar to those left in the most recent oil discoveries outside of the refuge.

[An Aerial panorama of an oil rig surrounded by snow, then the viewer sees a rig in summer bordered by out-buildings.]

[End of footage. Return to KTRK newsroom.]

Rascon: It is a disturbing issue for some, but many people want to continue of course to move that forward push to exploration.

Joining me now we have Rick Slemaker with Energy Magazine. We discussed a lot about uh, this issue, and others as well. We're going to get to your comments.

And as well, Marc Olivier, Environmental Specialist from the Harris County Democratic Party. Marc, let me start with you.

What's the problem with drilling in ANWR to increase domestic production?

Olivier: Well the main problem is that the increase in domestic production is only going to be temporary. Current preductions vary from providing enough oil from six months to not more than two years. The fact is that fifty-six percent of the nation's, our nation's oil comes from foreign sources. Even if we do get the amount of oil that, that oil companies are saying is retrievable, it's only going to be temporary, but at least fifty percernt because tension in the ground holds some oil, so whatever number they are quoting, you can immediately cut it in half 'cause not all the oil can be extracted, and no technology has solved that yet.

Rascon:And so if we have this major dependency on foreign oil. What is the answer? More domestic production Rick?

Slemaker: Absolutely, that's one of the answers, but we have to understand ANWR is, is the result of a negotiation. The pro-enviro... the environmental people like Marc, who are good people, and the oil industry as well are good people. So they took this twenty million acreas and they messaged it down to one-point-nine million, but the footprint is only two-thousand acres, so an example would be if you took a dime and ropped it on the floor of the Reliant Stadium, football stadium, and that's the amount of space we're talking about in the footprint because we're talking about millions of acres.

To answer Marc's question we need more production, we need it obviouslt from everywhere, but we're a sharing industry and we have t share this like... uh, of all us. So we have to share, we have to have more, uh renewable fuels, which I'm sure arc is for and we are, the industry's for, we're at hydrogen in the future, but until those are developed, we have to keep the, the our responses to what's necessary and what's needed. One of the problwme we have, a big problem is, is Venezuela. We get a huge amount from there, we have a socialist government. A guy that's uh, another Juan Peron or something, and he's hurting us from, that is having oil, and it's preventing us from having this oil and that's why this spike is happening.

Rascon: Alright, so let's talk about the uh, dependency here on foreign oil. What is the answer? You do agree that we need more domestic production?

Olivier: Yes, we do, and there's no way around that. Um, but the fact is that Democrats, especially in Congress have been overrun by Tom DeLay and Joe Barton of Texas who have not allowd them to put their amendments into the bill calling for greater benefits for those to buy hybrids. Right now you get a $2,000 tax break, but next year in 2006 that tax break will drop to $500, so that is a huge drop in incentive for people to buy hybrid vehicles rather than to continue buying Excursions and Hummers that only get eight miles an hour [I meant to say 'gallon'.]

Rascon: So your answer to this, the Democratic Party's, is alternative fuels?

Olivier: Yes.

Rascon: Ok, we're going to discuss this more in just a minute but first, in a moment, some final thoughts about the battle over Arctic oil. And we'll take you back as well to Northern Alaska for a look at the native Indians celebrating the discovery of oil there.

[End of segment three.]

===============================
[Return from commercial break.]

Rascon: Welcome back to City View this morning. Now, despite the controversy searching for oil in Alaska, most residents there in the region support oil companies. The oil companies provide jobs and millions in revenue.

[Nuiqsit, Alaska. Viewer sees people chanting and hitting tambourines.]

Rascon narrates: But the strongest supporters in this fight may well be those that live in the native villages along the northslope.

[Villagers dancing to the beat of drums in the school gym.]

Rascon narrates: A traditional dance of gratitude for oil tells their story.

[Gail Norton, Secretary of Interior is shaking hands at a reception. The camera then focuses on her sitting in the front row watching the dance with the audience behind her.]

Rascon narrates: Villagers recently greeted the Secretary of Interior and a delegation of senators from Washington with a clear unified voice.]

Man addressing adudience: We do support opening less than ten percent of ANWR as our target, and we do support it wholeheartedly. Thank you very much for visiting the northslope corridor. We want to see you again. Thank you.

[Audience claps, and Gail Norton is beaming. The camera then shows a sunrise and a dog sled passes by.]

Rascon narrates: Meantime, far from the politics of this debate...

[Brooks Range of ANWR. Viewer sees a metallic pipeline shining in the sunlight cutting across the snow-covered ground.]

Rascon narrates: Ever since the pipeline went through. Um, things have really changed

[Sweeney and Rascon sitting around a fire.]

Rascon narrates: Sitting alone in the ANWR forest is Charlie Sweeney.

Sweeney: Then there's a lot of times you go out fifty miles, and you don't see nothing.

Rascon narrates: His long hunt has not been successful.

Sweeney: You come back and, you get ready and go out a different direction.

[Viewer sees a stand of spruce trees behind the fire.]

Rascon narrates: Charlie has a family to feed, aerials to make.

Rascon: That's a rough life.

Sweeney: A rough life.

Rascon: But one that you love?

Sweeney: Oh yes and uh, I wouldn't change it for nothing. No place like home.

[Camera pans across a tree-filled valley with low, blue mountains in the distance as the sun shines.]

[End of segment. Return to KTRK newsroom.]

Rascon: Oil companies want to turn less than ten percent of ANWR into an oil production field. Even with that Marc, the footprint is small, there may be thirty billion barrels of oil they say underground there. What is the harm in having that for ten or fifteen years, or twenty years?

Olivier: Well, the fact is that the ANWR areas of Northern Alaska, ninety-five percent of it has already been explored over the past thirty years. Five percent is actually the area that they are going to be looking in, so, I mean regardless of what they are going to find, there's such a small fraction of that area...

[The remaining part of City View was not recorded on my tape, signal was weak.]

However, I was saying how the amount of oil that potentially lies beneath ANWR is only a very small portion of America's total consumption and won't have a significant impact on oil supply. I mentioned the fact that I lived in England and that the British pay two pounds (as in the currency) per liter of gasoline, roughly equivalent to four dollars. A liter is about one-fourth of a gallon, so the British pay about twelve dollars per gallon of gas. I also mention that gas prices in Texas are relatively low compared to other parts of the nation, like Hawaii where they pay over three dollars a gallon. I ended by saying that what we pay is good compared to other parts of the world. In fact, Americans pay some of the cheapest gas prices in the world, and that what we pay for a gallon of gas will only go up in the future.

Art Rascon said something about "Are we supposed to find sollace in that?" and asks Rick Slemaker what he thinks the sollution is.

Rick countered my example of British gas prices with the fact that three-fifths of their gas price is tax.

Art Rascon ended the interview with the fact that even if oil companies are approved to drill in ANWR, it will be ten to fifteen years before that oil is available on the market.

Basis for my facts:

- ANWR oil supply will last from 6 months to not more than 2 years

The following is from the Belfer Center of Science and International Affairs at Harvard University:

Estimates of how much might be recoverable, if it is found there, have ranged from 3 billion barrels (by the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment in 1989), to 3.6 billion barrels (by the Department of Interior in 1991), to 4-12 billion barrels (by the USGS in 1998). This means, in round numbers (and assuming oil would be found there in one of the indicated quantities), that ANWR could provide between 6 months and 2 years' current US oil supply, or 1 to 4 years' current imports, or 4 to 16 years' current imports from the Persian Gulf. [Emphasis added]

However, it must be considered that these estimates do not include potential growth in future oil consumption/demand due to a growing population.

- 56% of America's oil comes from foreign sources
Depending on where you read it, the United States is importing from 56% (Source) to near 60% (Source) of its oil from foreign sources.

- Surface tension will hold up to 50% of oil in the ground. There is no technology avaiable to totally overcome this problem.

Read about it at US Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy site. Take particular note of the pie chart.

- Tom DeLay and Joe Barton overran Democratic amendments to the energy bill.

Here's a quote from the Washington Post:

Democrats also failed to add language that would have set national standards for the amount of renewable energy that needs to be produced. Some states have set such requirements, and supporters of the measure said it would encourage more production. Opponents argued that the amendment would increase costs and improperly exempt municipal power companies.

- One-time tax break for hybrid vehichles with drop from $2,000 in 2005 to $500 in 2006.

The following is from the US government's Fuel Economy site:

Vehicles in the table to the right may be eligible for a "clean fuel" deduction of $2,000 for those placed in service by the end of 2005 or $500 for those put in use during 2006.

- Excursion, Hummer get less than 8 mpg.

From SUV Info Link:

A Harper's Magazine writer took the massive Ford Excursion, the biggest of all SUVs for a test drive. During a drive around a city, the mighty Excursion was only getting 3.7 miles per gallon.

Hummers vary depending on model/engine (Source):

Turbos: 10.5 mpg worst at 83 mile per hour 14.2 mpg best driving easy under 55 miles per hour easy stop and go

Non turbo:
10.00 mpg is worst at 78 miles per hour
13.2 mpg best

Gas:
3.8 mpg worst at 78 miles per hour
6.8 mpg best easy in town driving

- 95% of Alaska's northslope has already been explored and drilled for 30 years, only 5% of that is ANWR.

I got information about the percentages from the Sierra Club.

- Gas prices in Britain roughly equivalent to $12 per gallon.
I misremembered the calculation. This is one of the problems you run into when you have less than an hour to prepare and get to an interview on time. KTRK did not call the Harris County Democratic Party until about 1pm and wanted someone at the studios by 2pm to start taping the interview. Nevertheless, $12 even for England is high. The highest I have found is in a town called Teeside, England. There it is $5.64 per gallon (Source). Yes, the British pay a much higher portion of gasoline in taxes, somewhere between 70% and 76% is tax (Source). However, the British have a very extensive public transportation system and developed rail network. The tax also goes towards maintaining roads as well as renewable energy projects. Additionally, while nearly $6 a gallon gasoline sounds absurd, it does encourage conservation and people use public transportation much more frequently. Additionally, cars are smaller in the UK. There are no (or only a very few) Excursions, Suburbans, pickup trucks, etc. This is partly because roads are narrower and parking spaces are limited as well as being too small for these types of vehicles.

- Gas prices in Hawaii over $3 per gallon.
I made a mistake here, but not a big one. The gas price in Hawaii is now about $2.67 per gallon on May 2. However, on April 8, gas cost nearly $2.78 per gallon, and in late October 2004, they were just short of $2.90. (Source).

I should have said California. For example, in San Mateo county, gas prices topped $3 at $3.19 per gallon on April 7 this year. (Source).

My claim that we are paying the some of the cheapest gas in the United States is correct according to the Energy Information Administration. Currently (as of May 2), the Texas average is 2.115 per gallon, while only Minnesota is lower at $2.023 per gallon. The average for Houston is $2.08, the lowest on the EIA's list for the entire country, excluding the Minnesotan state average.


Posted by at 10:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack

April 28, 2005

Are these not underhanded reporting tactics? -- You Decide

An account of my first-hand experience with biased media:

Today was an extremely exciting day down at the Harris County Democratic Headquarters. At about 1:20 pm Susan Gates, HCDP Executive Chair, received a call from KTRK Channel 13 News requesting someone to come do an interview with Art Rascon as part of his "City View: The Community as a Whole" program to be aired this Sunday at around 11 to 11:30 am.

As many of you may know, I volunteer every Thursday at HCDP Headquarters. Most of the time the shift isn't too exciting, but it's a chance to be surrounded by Democrats and I can plug away on doing research for the blog or other tasks that need attention.

Today, I was in for a much bigger surprise, far more than the time when I had to inform a caller that "No, the Democratic Party does not sell chewing tobacco."

However, none of what we accomplished would have been possible without everyone's help at Headquarters.

Here's the story...

At about 1 pm, I was getting ready to go home, and was in the process of showing Ross McDonald, the afternoon volunteer, the task he would be working on. I had spent a good part of the morning calling fellow Democrats to remind them about the Real Texas Heroes event on Friday, May 6 and Ross was going to continue working on making calls. As I was in the process of showing him the names and who I had already contacted, I hear this exclamation from the next room: "Marc! Would you like to be on TV!"

I'm thinking, me?! Is this some kind of joke? Apparently not! Susan said someone named Rick Slagerman from KTRK Channel 13 called and needed a "replacement" for the Sierra Club representative. He told Susan the Sierra Club representative who had been scheduled to do the interview about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) had cancelled, and he was looking for someone to represent the opposition to drilling in ANWR. KTRK already had two other people lined up to represent the case for drilling in ANWR. However, that 'someone' had to be able to get to the KTRK studios at 3310 Bissonnet Street by 2 pm. This is despite the fact that the show will not be aired until around 11 or 11:30 am this Sunday. It seemed like a reasonable request (other than the fact it was very short notice), and most of us in the office were wondering why the Sierra Club would cancel at the last minute. I will have more to say on the supposed "cancellation" by the Sierra Club in a moment.

Just keep in mind this is all occurring at just past 1 pm, so there is less than an hour to get ready.

Susan said that because I am a young person, and because I follow environmental issues fairly well in addition to the other topics I post about here on the blog, I should be the one to go down to do the interview, if I was free to do so. Well, I had kind of planned to go back and work on a presentation for class, but the chance to be on TV kind of excited me, and a chance to speak against drilling in ANWR is not one to be turned down. So, there went any plans I may have had. I kind of replied with a dazed voice, "Sure, I'll do that. It's no problem." I'm sure I looked flabbergasted at being asked to do an interview on TV.

Susan and I talk for a little while. We considered how feasible getting to KTRK would be. I have very little experience getting around Houston since I live in Spring on the northwest side of town, so directions to KTRK were going to be crucial, and even then uncertain because directions don't always work in reality and are much harder to follow in heavy traffic.

I then called Rick Slagerman back and told him I would be willing to do the interview. Apparently he was at a bank (It sounded like a drive-through bank since I could hear a lot of background motor noises and birds chirping.) He said he would call me back in just a few minutes. While I was waiting, Phil Donovan, the afternoon office manager arrived, and in very little time unbeknownst to him, he would become a lynchpin in our operation. Susan Trapp also arrived and would play a role too.

We all set about figuring out how I am going to get ready in time to be at KTRK by the set 2 pm interview time. I start rushing to find maps and directions on the internet. I realized that I was wearing a plain green t-shirt and jeans, and that I wasn't really dressed for an interview. After all, it's not everyday I wake up and think, "You know what? I feel like wearing a suit today." Of course there are no idle suits lying around the office, and Ross and Phil are the only other guys there, and they just happened to be as careless as I was to not wear a suit today. Plus, this is the Democratic Party, if we all wanted to act like pampered millionaires, we would be Republicans. Martha Cottingham, our invaluable precinct chair organizer, offered to phone a niece in town to see if she had a blazer available. Susan thought about calling Charles Soechting's wife to see if they could lend a coat. Then, we all realized Phil Donovan lives near the KTRK studios, and he just returned from getting his delectable barbeque sandwich from the reastaurant next door. He hadn't had lunch yet.

Just then the phone rings. He is saved by the bell, for the time being anyway. It's Rick again. He thanks me for being willing to fill in at such short notice and proceeds to tell me how to get to KTRK. I ask what the format of the interview will be and what he would recommend I wear. He asked me what size jacket I wear, and of course I'm a guy, so how would I know, never mind the adrenaline rush I am getting from the fact I am supposed to do an interview on the spur of the moment. In addition, I asked what specifically the ANWR interview would be about since I wanted to read up on the issue in the little time I had. I figured I could be reasonably successful since I had majored in environmental and internationl studies in college. Rick said he really didn't want to tell me anything specific because the show, "City View," is intended to reflect the views of general citizens in our community, but he suggested I might be able to get some talking points from the Houston Chapter of the Sierra Club.

The time is now about 1:15pm, 45 minutes remaining

I told Susan the interview was a 'go,' and she asked if Rick had given me directions, but I realized I had neglected to ask for the street address. I have to say the internet is really great at finding information on a moment's notice. I hopped on the nearest computer to look for maps and directions, which weren't too hard to find. I then turn to Google to figure out the Sierra Club's Houston number since I don't have a phonebook for a brain. In exactly 0.20 seconds, I find Evelyn Merz's number. She is Sierra's Houston Group Chair.

Fortunately, she was in her office and answered immediately. I hurriedly recount our predicament, and she explains why the Sierra Club did not send someone to the interview. She was quite understandably upset, because KTRK had called her just prior to phoning Susan to ask for someone to do the interview. Furthermore, Evelyn added that this is not the first occasion the station has done this to the Sierra Club. That's when I realized what KTRK was up to.

The Sierra Club had not "cancelled" as Rick told Susan, but had declined simply as a result of a lack of time to locate and get someone to the television studios to do the interview. (We found out over the course of the afternoon that this is a very difficult thing to do.)

This sounds highly suspicious when you consider that KTRK already had two industry representatives lined up (possibly for days in advance), and the show doesn't air until this coming Sunday. It makes you wonder why today at 2pm, had to be the exact time. Nevertheless, Evelyn Merz kindly accepted my request for information about ANWR and promised she would fax it immediately.

Time: 1:30 pm, 30 minutes remaining

By this time, Phil is in the middle of enjoying his sandwich, and Susan and I set upon him, asking if he had a coat and shirt that I could borrow. He does, and we agreed that Phil would go ahead to his house to pick up the items and that I would meet him at KTRK's studios. Unfortunately, in his rush to get home, he dropped his sandwich while trying to open the office door. Sue Trapp assumed command of the office manager's desk and remained along with Ross and Martha to support Susan Gates with running the office. While waiting for Evelyn's fax to arrive, I down a quick bite to eat, part of a roast beef sandwich Sue picked up at Randalls on her way in from home.

At 1:40 pm, after what seems like an eternity, but in reality was probably only about seven minutes, Evelyn's fax arrived. She called to confirm to ensure I received both pages, and I thanked her for the help she provided under the difficult circumstances. Finally, after gathering my things I am ready to set off to KTRK.

Time: 1:44 pm, 16 minutes remaining

I turn right onto the 610 Loop feeder, right onto Durham Street, right on Kirby, and then another right onto Bissonnet. The traffic was fairly heavy but at least it never got too congested. I finally see the aerial antenna of KTRK come into view at 2:14 pm. Under the circumstances, being only 14 minutes late was pretty good. KTRK probably didn't expect anyone to be able to show up anyway. Phil was waiting in the main lobby with a pressed shirt and coat. I quickly dressed in the lobby while the secretary and security guard watched me, talk about entertainment (It must have been a dull afternoon).

Once I finished, the security guard escorted me through to the studio where Art Rascon was already in the midst of interviewing the staunch oil industry supporter (I don't remember his name or the oil company he represents, but it is one based in Houston). I am told to wait at the back of the room until Art Rascon is through interviewing him.

After about 40 or 50 seconds, the segment is completed, and they go on commercial break. Then Rascon said he still had another segment to do with the industry representative, following some taped footage of Rascon in Alaska. There was a series of shots showing all the good things that corporations are doing while Rascon narrates that these villagers want the corporations there to drill oil because they want new schools and more business, etc., etc.... (Nothing was mentioned about what will happen when all the oil is depleted and the corporations leave.)

The interview begins:

Once the footage ends, Rascon began questioning the oil industry representative, which took another 40 to 50 seconds. All this time the industry supporter was the only other person on stage with Rascon, receiving ample time to make his points and to spout the corporate mantra the big oil companies expound upon incessantly.

I should mention that in addition to the oil industry representative I've already mentioned, KTRK invited another energy industry representative from Energy Magazine, which the man told me is a publication that represents an array of energy corporations, both fossil fuel based ones and renewable energy companies. I discovered after I returned home that it is produced by Business Communications Strategy, Inc.

Quite honestly, it was very hard to figure out his position at first. He kept agreeing that I raised significant points, but kept disagreeing with the information I stated. I came to the conclusion he is more middle of the road than the oil industry representative, but still inclined towards the oil industry. I represented the sole person in opposition to drilling in ANWR. If I had not been able to show up, no one would have been available to support the environmental cause. Art Rascon probably would have made some remark about having offered environmentalists a chance to speak, but that they declined the interview.

Once the segment was completed, Rascon summoned me to sit across from him on stage. The other individual being interviewed came up as well and sat between us. One of the technicians set me up with a microphone during another segment of pre-filmed footage in Alaska. This time you saw the frozen tundra, covered in thick ice and snow as a herd of caribou runs across it. You hear Rascon narrating that a Native Indian is having trouble meeting his catch of caribou for the year in order to make leather goods to sell, so he can feed his family. Only briefly, for a period of about 10 seconds, does Rascon spend time interviewing a lone Gwichin Indian who opposes drilling in ANWR. Then the segment breaks away to another commercial break, during which time Rascon explains how the interview will work.

Rascon would open the segment by saying something to the effect, "Many people are against drilling in ANWR. With us here today is Marc Olivier, Environmental Specialist for the Harris County Democratic Party, and the other guy's name." Thus, I discovered that those titles displayed on screen can be trumped up as well. While being relatively knowlegeable about environmental issues, I don't see myself as a 'specialist.' Rascon added there would be only one take (or filming) for us to have our say. So, despite the fact that the interview is being taped on a Thursday and is going to be broadcast on Sunday, the director did not allow the possibility for a second take if we made any mistakes. It was as if we were doing the show live.

Rascon said he would address his first question to me and then alternate between the two of us. However, by setting up the interview this way, the Energy Magazine representative always had the opportunity to rebut anything I said. I never had an opportunity, not once, to specifically reply to his statements. Plus, we were told to keep our statements as short as possible because there wasn't much time left in the story for our interview. Of course here I am, I had just seen the oil industry representative have two full segments for a combined total of at least two minutes, maybe more, I can't say since I was still just trying to get there. Furthermore, from what the Energy Magazine representative said to Art Rascon, it seemed like he had already participated in an earlier segment, probably about 40 to 50 seconds in length. I guess we'll find out about that on Sunday. Clearly, you can see the case was stacked against me and the oppposition to drilling in ANWR.

Throughout the two segments in which the Energy Magazine representative and I were a part, I probably only had Art Rascon's attention for about a total 30 seconds, maybe 40 seconds. (It's really hard to judge time when you're being filmed. It seemed like it was longer during the filming, but I can't imagine it was much more than that.) Unlike the staunch oil industry supporter, our time was divided in half, or even less when you consider that Rascon asked us more questions per unit of time than when he interviewed the industry representative.

Of course, I realized during the interview that by making me jump through the numerous hoops to get ready on such short notice that my adrenaline was pumping the whole time. As a result, I was somewhat off my footing when it came to giving quick, concise, and powerful answers. While I did not hesitate in response to any questions, the short time format and my adrenaline rush meant I was not able to give the most effective responses possible.

I had many, many things I wanted to say in response to the oil industry representative, the Energy Magazine representative, and the previously prepared footage, but I never had the opportunity. During the breaks I was thinking about everything I could say and realizing there would be only a minuscule amount of time in which to express my thoughts. Rascon basically steered my response to his questions to some degree by phrasing his question in a manner that fairly obviously favors the oil industry.

Evidence of bias:

To give an example of his bias, after the first segment of the three of us were on stage. All of a sudden Rascon decides he is going to change the next segment title. He announces that it will be called, "Corporations provide millions in revenue to Indians," or something very close to that. I noticed he had his talking points on the table in front of him and I was able to read the original title as he scratched it out. I think he saw me, but I didn't care. I understood what he was doing. By the way, the original segment title was something like "Native Indians depend upon the environment to survive." Ok, you tell me what you think he was trying to accomplish by changing the title. Obviously, one is phrased in a manner that heavily favors big oil corporations, and paints them in a favorable light.

An example of the Energy Magazine representative's rebuttal to one of my statements is the following. Rascon asked me something about the rising cost of oil and what do I have to say about that? I respond that in England where I lived for three years, the British pay the equivalent of $2 to $3 dollars per liter of gasoline (a liter is roughly about one-fourth of a gallon), which means per gallon the British pay at least $12. I continued by stating that we have the cheapest gas in the world and some of the cheapest in the United States since people in Hawaii are paying over $3 per gallon. The prices we are paying now are only going to increase and that it was ridiculous to have people driving Hummers that only get 8 miles per gallon. The Energy Magazine representative retorts with the fact that in England three-fifths of the total cost of gasoline is taxes and then goes off about how I raised an important point and that there needs to be more people like me who support the environment etc., etc.... You get the idea. He said stuff that is true, but distorts the intention of what I said, while saying flowery things about me, but really he opposed my statement.

During the break between the two segments, he even asked Rascon for a chance to rebut one of the details I said, and Rascon nodded his approval. Rascon then chided us for taking so long with our comments because there wasn't much time left in the segment. Of course he did not give us much time to begin with.

The Energy Magazine representative then turned to me and said that he agreed with much of what I said, and that Congress had passed some legislation to benefit renewable energy companies in the recent energy bill. I concede that statement is probably true, but the oil companies got a heck of a lot more help than renewable companies did. I responded to his comments that the gas mileage standards for passenger vehicles have not been increased since 1975 or 1977, during the last oil crisis, and that we could accomplish significant reductions in our fuel consumption by just improving the efficiency of our cars with technology already available on the market. I went on saying my 1991 Honda Accord gets better gas mileage than most of today's vehicles. Oh, I wished the cameras were rolling for that, but alas they weren't, and I never had a chance to make the point on air. Rascon cracked a thin smile when I mentioned the Honda Accord example, but I wasn't sure if he was smiling in agreement or because I drive a 14-year old car. The Energy Magazine representative was trying to console me by saying that oil companies are doing what they can to prevent pollution, etc., etc.... His overly comforting, talk-down tone made it pretty apparent to me what he believed.

Specifically, he wanted to respond to the fact I mentioned that Tom DeLay and Joe Barton who are both from Texas (They are the ones primarily responsible for ramming the energy bill through the House, and Joe Barton is Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce) pushed the latest energy bill over the objections of Democrats who wanted to implement more incentives for renewable and alternate forms of energy. I added that the one-time tax break for the purchase of new hybrid vehicles is going to drop from $2,000 this year to just $500 in 2006, which will be a huge disincentive to the environmentally conscientious individuals who would like to purchase those vehicles.

I don't remember exactly how it all wrapped up, but the interview didn't last much longer. In summary, I had spent nearly an hour and twenty minutes to get to KTRK's studios for a total of only about 40 seconds of on air time in which to respond only to Art Rascon's loaded questions and not the other representative being interviewed.

Now, do you think that I, the Harris County Democratic Party, and the Sierra Club were given a good deal? You may insert your response [here] (Add expletives if you feel they are necessary).

If you believe we got a bum rap, here is the address of KTRK Channel 13 News studios in Houston and their phone number.

Write in or call them to explain we all deserve fair reporting and equal opportunity to hear the representatives being interviewed express their facts and views on the issue, not to be superficially glossed over by a biased anchor person. (It would probably be a good idea to hold comments until after the program airs Sunday)

KTRK Channel 13 News, "City View: The Community as a Whole," 3310 Bissonnet Street, Houston, TX 77005, Phone: 713-666-0713

I would say that in our favor, most of those who agree with drilling in ANWR are most likely to be those who will be attending church Sunday during the airing time (around 11 to 11:30 am). Therefore, they are likely to never know any of it ever happened.

I would also like to add that this experience was a very good first-hand look at our "liberal" media, one I have never experienced before, but has been very educational for me. I never thought much about what individuals are put through to get to a television studio on time for an interview. I had always had a fairly good regard for the job KTRK has done in the past, but today has changed my opinion of their news reporting in a very negative way.

I also would like to thank the following people:

Evelyn Merz the Houston Group Chair of the Sierra Club for providing valuable talking points on immediate demand;

Phil Donovan for dropping everything, including his sandwich, to run to his house so that I could look decent on camera;

Ross McDonald for assuming the position of acting office manager for the afternoon shift and taking phone calls as we rushed to get ready;

Sue Trapp for staying at HCDP headquarters the entire afternoon when she wasn't scheduled to in order to help run the office;

Martha Cottingham for her part in helping track down clothes; and

Susan Gates for generally just being a great Executive Chair who is always willing to give her time, to motivate us, and to do whatever it takes to get things done for Democrats (and I should say for people in general).

No matter how seemingly insignificant the task these people did today, there would have been no way, and I mean NO way that we could have succeeded on such short notice without each person's individual contribution. I don't wish to show myself in some kind of righteous, self-gratifying light. I am not particularly more qualified than anyone else, but instead just at the right place at the right time and willing to do whatever I could with the resources available, supported by a very capable team of committed Democrats to promote our common cause. Through all of us working as a team, we were able to push back against the biased media, even if it was only a little part on our hometurf that won't get any attention outside the city limits.

Clearly, you can see what we are up against in the world of the alleged "liberal" media, and what each of us must do:

We must present a united front to counter the disinformation that the 'yappers' propagate profusely in society today. Everyone deserves a chance to be heard and to voice their own views -- the community as a WHOLE.

I now call upon each of you to show KTRK what you think of their underhanded reporting tactics (It is probably a good idea to watch the interview and to call in after it airs Sunday).

KTRK Channel 13 News, "City View: The Community as a Whole", 3310 Bissonnet Street, Houston, TX 77005, Phone: 713-666-0713

Then go to the HCDP web site and help support the efforts of OUR Democratic Party, The Party for the People.

(Jaybird, I agree with you. John Edwards' term is certainly a keeper and a great imagery word. Please be sure to add the appropriate Carolinian accent.)

Posted by at 10:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack

April 27, 2005

Greg Wythe to Become TV Star

Greg Wythe of GregsOpinion.com who was instrumental in getting this blog off the ground will be making a TV appearance tomorrow night on Warner Channel 17:

May God Have Mercy On Televisions Everywhere!

From my PR consultant:

If you have been wondering who the guy behind www.gregsopinion.com is and what makes him tick, you are going to get your chance when he makes a one hour live appearance on Houston's longest running cable television show dedicated to politics - Texas Politics-The Real Deal, Thursday night 04-28-05 from 6:30 p.m.until 7:30 p.m.

That's right, Greg Wythe will be the sole guest of program hosts, liberal Democrat attorney David Jones and former Harris County GOP chair Gary Polland. You can find the show on Warner Cable Channel 17 (channel number is different depending on location within county). You will even get the chance to call in live with questions for Greg at 713-807-1794.

Greg is going to give his take on the political situation around us as well as talk about the ins and outs of blogging - the hottest thing going since sliced bread.

Tune in Thursday to Warner Cables Channel 17 (Houston Media Services) and find out who the guy behind gregsopinion is. Texas Politics-The Real Deal hosted by our own David Jones and their Gary Polland.

I'm sure I'll survive if I can figure out how to make french toast out of a blog. Now for a real challenge ... to see if I can rustle up some celebrity call-ins. In order of preference (in case anyone in blogville can make this happen):

1 - Nicole Kidman
2 - Dominique Sachse
3 - Joe Lieberman (my this list really took a turn for the worst)
4 - Chris Bell (who will promptly whine about not being #1 on this list)
5 - Jay Aiyer (who will no doubt give me an earful about being behind Chris Bell)
6 - Richard Morrison
7 - either Ed Kilgore (New Donkey) or Marshall Whittman (Bull Moose)
8 - Samantha Power (who, realistically belongs at the top of this list)
9 - Charles Kuffner (whose name may be used in vain if the hour goes poorly)
10 - Any member of The Ringwalds ... or maybe Weird Al

Look for a recap to be written late Thursday night

Posted by Lyn Wall at 07:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 26, 2005

Watch Blogger James Robertson on Channel 2 at 4pm today!

Our own James Robertson, along with several other local Democrats will be on Channel 2 at 4pm today. This email announcement came from one of the participants, Joy Demark - Chair of Clubs and Organizations:

Giovanni Garibay of Harris County Tejano Democrats, James Robertson of www.blackdems.com and member of several clubs, Ernest McGowen, Jr of Houston Black American Democrats and myself watched the Presidential Town Hall in Galveston on Social Security – by Live Feed at Channel 2. To see our reactions – watch Channel 2 at 4PM today. Here’s hoping that what we said will not be too chopped. Thanks to Channel 2 and the Texas Democratic Party for getting our side of the story aired locally. And yes – Radar the weather dog has his eye on everything at the studios. He welcomed each of us – no doubt hoping we carried treats. While we were there – David Jones, our upbeat Democratic spokesman and Gary Polland (GOP) came in to do their political commentary – also to be aired at around 4PM.

Posted by Lyn Wall at 02:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 19, 2005

Action Alert: Defend Online Democracy

From the One America Committee:

The Federal Election Commission has proposed new regulations concerning political expression on the Internet - and has called for public comments. Please sign this petition using the form to the right. Tell the FEC that it is critical that the new regulations strengthen online democracy - not weaken it.

SIGN THE PETITION BY CLICKING HERE!

You may have heard a lot about this issue in recent days. One FEC commissioner has said that new rules could even extend to activities as simple as forwarding a campaign's press release to your e-mail list, or posting a link to a campaign on your blog. We are hopeful that the FEC will do the right thing. And in fact, the proposed regulations do seem to indicate that cooler heads may be prevailing at the FEC.

That said, these are still "proposed" regulations. The fight is not over, it is just beginning. For this reason, it is critical that public comments to the FEC include those from defenders of online democracy. We must keep up the pressure.

SIGN THE PETITION BY CLICKING HERE

Posted by Stace Medellin at 11:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 19, 2005

For your listening pleasure...

Take advantage of the all too rare breath of fresh air in Houston radio. Ed Schultz will be broadcast on KTRH at 4pm today!

Thanks to Phillip McNutt for alerting us to this:

KTRH, AM740 (owned by Clear Channel) has begun broadcasting Democracy Radio's Ed Schultz. Ed Schultz is our version of Rush Limbaugh. He can be found "on the local airwaves" at 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays. I received a response from Ken Charles, Regional Vice President of Programming for Clear Channel Houston. He assures me that Ed will remain on the air on weekends and KTRH plans on moving him to weekdays, 7p - 10p beginning April 4th. Our message comes through loud and clear from this source!

Posted by Lyn Wall at 07:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

March 18, 2005

Stop Fake News

Spending my tax dollars to propandize the repulsive Bush agenda is a dangerous practice, not to mention that it really ticks me off. Send a message to the FCC and the Justice Department at http://www.stopfakenews.org/.

On Sunday, March 13th, The New York Times broke a major story outlining how the Bush administration has used millions of dollars of taxpayer money to produce and disseminate fake news programs that support a partisan political agenda.

These government-produced segments have frequently aired on broadcast TV stations across the country without proper disclosure.

Not only is this unacceptable, it is also illegal.

Please send an email to the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department and ask them to Stop Fake News.

Posted by Lyn Wall at 01:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 14, 2005

Air America Launched in Austin Today!

The Al Franken show broadcast live from Austin today. Guests included our own Chris Bell and Molly Ivins among others.

If you missed the show, look for the archive at http://www.airamericaplace.com/archive.php?mode=show&id=5

Now we need to start working on getting AAR right here in Houston!

Posted by Lyn Wall at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack