text:
Bob Johnson Sets Sights On New Urban Cable Network
BET founder eyes must-carry under 'share-time' license with Ion Media
Ion Media, which boasts the nation's largest station group, is proposing to team with BET founder Robert Johnson's RLJ Companies on an urban-targeted network, Urban Televsiion, which would operate on the majority of Ion TV stations' digital multicast channels. The network's fate would appear to hinge on whether the FCC grants mandatory cable carriage (so-called must-carry status) to the digital channels carrying the network, which they argue is crucial to its success.
Johnson made his billions with an African-American targeted programming service, BET, that became a must-have for most cable operators even without a government mandate. He eventually sold it to Viacom. The companies are promising informational and issue-focused programming targeted to African Americans, though with the caveat that they "will retain the flexibility to adapt its format to changing viewer needs and interests and other programming that is available in the marketplace."
Ion already airs kids and lifestyle programming networks on some of its multicast channels. Those are the channels that digital broadcasting technology allows TV station owners to program along with their primary channels.
According to a copy of the filing obtained by B&C, Johnson's Urban Television is seeking permission to buy share-time licenses from Ion allowing it to broadcast 24/7 on Ion's digital channels while Ion also broadcasts its existing digital station signals in the 42 TV markets where the channel will run, including New York, Chicago, and Boston and a host of other major markets (Ion has stations in all 20 of the top 20 markets). Ion would hold an attriibutable 49% interest in the new network and leases while Urban would hold a controlling 51%, according to the agreement.
Ion and Johnson are seeking government help in the form of mandatory cable carriage status for the urban multicast channels. The FCC does not require cable operators to carry multicast channels, but FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has proposed mandated carriage for digital spectrum leased to minorities and women and programmed as separate channels, calling it a way to encourage programming diversity.
But Urban and Ion are pitching the Urban programmed channels as "new stations" already warranting must-carry status. "In order to avoid disputes with MVPDs that would undermine any realistic opportunity of Urban's fledgling station group to survive, the parties respectfully request that the Commission confirm, concurrent with grant of this application, that Urban's stations would be entitled to carriage under the Commission's rules."
And since the "new station" determination is key to must-carry, which is key to the network's success, there are multiple ownership implications that will limit the distribution of that network, at least on TV stations' digital channels.
Ion actually owns or operates some 60 stations, but the Urban channel will not air in its smaller markets. That is because they confined their request for leases to markets where Ion's interest in those "new stations" won't violate FCC limits on station ownership in one market.
Either side can back out if the FCC does not grant must-carry.
The Urban model more closely parallels the recommendations of the FCC's advisory committee for "diversity in the digital age," which has also recommended that the FCC authorize broadcasters to lease digital spectrum to qualified applicants, effectively creating a new, "
S class" of licensed TV station as proposed by Media Access Projec
The idea is to promote diversity of voices while allowing economically disadvantaged businesses to run stations without having to put up the capital to start a station from scratch or buy one outright, both of which are increasingly tough given the economic slide. Compensation for broadcasters would be determined by baseball style arbitration.
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has proposed allowing small and distressed businesses (which could include women and minorities) to lease digital spectrum and program the channels, which would also get must-carry rights, but did not propose licensing the stations. Neither proposal has been adopted, however, and Martin is expected to exit the commission by mid-January.
Ion's role in the minority programing initiative is part of Ion's three-pronged broadcast strategy,
which B&C reported on last month
when Ion Media Chairman Brandon Burgess outlined it in a speech to The Media Institute. The other two prongs are HDTV and mobile Video.
With multicast channels for children, promoting healthy lifestyles and now, minority programming, Ion has covered most of the public-interest bases in its effort to get multichannel video providers to carry the channel or the government to see the public interest in mandating carriage.
That last prong of that strategy, mobile video, got a boost Wednesday with the announcement that the
Advanced Television Systems Committee had approved a preliminary mobile video standard
Q&A: Bob Johnson
The founder of BET and chairman of RLJ Companies talks about Urban TV's must-carry fight
NCTA Opposes Urban TV Proposal
Cable lobby urges FCC to dismiss Urban/Ion Media proposal on multicast must-carry grounds
Media, Civil Rights Groups Voice Support for Urban TV
Proposed African American-targeted network from BET founder Robert Johnson, Ion Media gets conditional support in FCC filings
TV One Takes On Urban
Network asks FCC to deny Ion and Urban Television's request for mandatory carriage
Ion Media Networks Lobbying Congress
Ion Media Networks sent letters to over 200 members of Congress in hopes of getting legislators to pressure Charter Communcations to carry qubo and Ion Life.
Johnson Looking For Support for Urban TV
Cable pioneer discusses how to make minority media networks successful
Playboy Sets It Sights On Spike
Playboy Show & Tell to be available on Spike.com, Playboy.com.
Johnson Disappointed By TV One's FCC Filing Againt Urban Television
Writes letter to Liggins following TV One's opposition to use of digital must-carry for startup service


Hoteliers are obligated to follow the money and consumer trends, even if that means dissing the name of one medieval castle in favor of another.
A U.S. hotel company is giving up the name of one European castle and taking on another.
Ashford Hospitality Prime Inc., a hotel real estate investment trust named for a medieval castle in County Mayo, Ireland, said on Monday that it would change its name to Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc., after a castle built in the late middle ages in Aberdeenshire, Scotland.
The change was conceived of as part of a strategic shift to high-end hotels, Chief Executive Officer Richard Stockton said in an interview. Last year, the company put some less-luxurious properties up for sale and rebranded others, including Courtyard by Marriott hotels in San Francisco and Philadelphia. It also acquired ritzy properties, including Hotel Yountville Resort & Spa in Napa Valley, California, and the Park Hyatt in Beaver Creek, Colorado.
Stockton is betting on the strongest part of the U.S. hotel market, at a time when stock-market gains and tax reform have boosted consumer confidence and fueled strong performance at luxury hotels aimed at leisure travelers. Revenue per available room at U.S. resort hotels rose 5.4 percent last month compared with a year earlier, according to lodging-data provider STR. Across all U.S. hotels, RevPAR, a measure of occupancy and rates, increased 3.9 percent.


text:
Chicago Tribune hatchet job follow-up
On Thursday, the Chicago Tribune ran a story harshly critical of the decision of DuPage County State's Attorney Joe Birkett to meet with several Chicago area newspaper editorial boards to discuss the Jeanine Nicarico murder case--an indictment of convicted killer Brian Dugan is considered likely.
The case has dragged on since 1983, two other men, Rolando Cruz and Alex Hernandez, were twice convicted--and twice sentenced to death--for the murder of the 10-year old Jeanine. Both of the convicted men have since been exonerated.
Obviously, this is very unusual case, so the rare--if not unprecedented request--by Birkett to meet with these editorial boards should be understandable.
Not everyone agrees. This passage appeared in the Tribune article:
Bob Cummins, a former chairman of the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board who for three decades has lectured on ethics to lawyers and judges, said Birkett's efforts "may be politically savvy, but in my judgment are professionally stupid, if not worse."
"Maybe my ideas are old-fashioned, but aren't we supposed to try cases in the courtroom? Isn't that where you demonstrate the evidence?" said Cummins. "If Joe Birkett were my client, I would tell him to fire the guy who set this up and get a new political advisor."
In addition, Cummins said Birkett, depending on how much he discloses of the evidence he has presented, could be in violation of the law on grand jury secrecy and subject to a contempt of court charge.
Now, this is what the Tribune left out.
Bob Cummins is a partner in a two-person law firm, the other attorney in the firm is Tom Cronin, who was a 1996 primary opponent of Joe Birkett. Their office is at 77 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 4800, in Chicago.
And by some weird coincidence, another Birkett primary opponent, Bob Coleman was able to find space in that tiny office in Suite 4800 to set up his campaign headquarters in 2002.
And finally, one more Tribune omission: Bob Cummins was an attorney who opposed State's Attorney Birkett over the legal battle over whether the public should pay the legal fees of seven DuPage County law enforcement men who were indicted by a special prosecutor over their roles in the Rolando Cruz and Alex Hernandez convictions. Each of the "DuPage 7" were acquitted.
Cummins lost that case against Birkett, and the DuPage 7 did not have to dig into their personal funds to pay for their legal defense.
Shame on the Chicago Tribune. They didn't do much homework, or perhaps they chose to overlooks things. But they thought enough, as I posted above, to include this bit about Cummins:
Bob Cummins, a former chairman of the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board who for three decades has lectured on ethics to lawyers and judges...
Cummins might want to consider talking about ethics to the Tribune. And when he's done with them, he can start lecturing to himself about ethics.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Teruyuki's diet resulted in weight loss.
I've decided to let Hsuan go to Marnix's party.
Edwin is going to have to study harder.
Bobby knew that what he did was wrong.
Tao thinks that she's Bryan's girlfriend, but for Rabin, she's just a friend.
Jiri tried not to look at Kyung.
Oscar is a good girl.
I always keep an eye on Hamilton.
I would never eat anything that Seth makes.
I have no idea what happened to Magnus.
Win looked over at Sorrel.
Stan is devoted to his children.
Why do you believe Griff?
Amanda knows what it takes.
Lorien didn't know what to expect.
Sigurd doesn't want to see Ramanan get hurt.
Robin is missing a finger.
Shel didn't like living in Boston.
Troy didn't do what I asked.
Gypsy hates his last name.
I thought Gail would try to help us.
Donn claimed that he loved Thuan.
I'm sure Alejandro is grateful for your support.


text:
W. Joseph Campbell
Media Myth Alert
Posts Tagged 'Bra-burning'
1968, Bra-burning, Cronkite Moment, Debunking, Distortion, Fact-checking, Getting It Wrong, History, Media, Media-driven myths, Nixon, Research, Version variability, Vietnam War
Recalling 1968, year of media myths
In Anniversaries, Bra-burning, Cronkite Moment, Debunking, Error, Media myths, Television on February 5, 2018 at 8:44 am
Much has been written already this year about 1968, a tumultuous and divisive time of war, civil protest, political upheaval, and bloodshed. It was, we're told, a year that changed America, or even changed America forever.
It's also true, if less hyperbolic, that 1968 can be considered a foundation year for media myths, signaling anew how understanding of the past can be warped by dubious tales and exaggerated interpretations.
At the Freedom Trash Can
Three prominent and tenacious media myths stem from 1968 — the presumptive "Cronkite Moment," which is said to have dramatically altered views about the Vietnam War; the "secret plan" for ending that war, a plan on which Richard Nixon supposedly campaigned for the presidency; and the nuanced myth of bra-burning at the Miss America pageant in September 1968.
Not surprisingly, credulous references to those myths have appeared in recent news accounts and commentaries about the 50th anniversary of 1968.
Notable among the references have been those about the "Cronkite Moment" of February 27, 1968. That was when CBS News anchorman Walter Cronkite offered a pessimistic assessment of the war in Vietnam, asserting that the U.S. military was "mired in stalemate" in its fight against communist forces there. He also suggested that negotiations might prove to be a way out for the United States.
Cronkite's downbeat characterization was offered at the close of a special report based on the anchorman's visit to Vietnam during the communists' Tet offensive, which had begun at the end of January 1968.
"Stalemate," though, was scarcely an original analysis: It had been invoked for months to characterize the war in Vietnam, as I pointed out in my media-mythbusting book, Getting It Wrong.
What supposedly made it all so exceptional was that Cronkite had turned pessimistic about the war. After all, Cronkite was, as CBS recently recalled, "America's most trusted newsman" whose assessments supposedly projected unrivaled influence.
Often cited as evidence of such influence is President Lyndon B. Johnson's purported reaction to Cronkite's "stalemate" remarks.
As a recent NPR report claimed, "Johnson is said to have told an aide, 'If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost middle America.'" (The San Francisco Chronicle asserted no such qualification last month in stating, "Johnson remarked to an aide, 'If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America.'")
The president's presumptive comment has become the stuff of legend, even if versions of what Johnson supposedly said vary markedly.
Mentioned far less often is that Johnson did not see the Cronkite report when it aired, and that there is no clear evidence about whether, or when, he watched the program later, on videotape.
Cronkite in Vietnam, 1968
And mentioned even less often is that the Cronkite report appears to have influenced the president's public stance on the war not at all.
Indeed, in the days and weeks after the "Cronkite Moment," Johnson doubled down on his Vietnam policy, urging a renewed commitment to defeating communism in Vietnam.
The president was overtly and vigorously hawkish on the war at a time when Cronkite's views should have been most potent. But the president in effect brushed aside Cronkite's pessimism and repeatedly sought to rally popular support for the war effort.
Not only that: the claim that Cronkite was the "most trusted" newsman didn't prominently emerge until 1972; the term was invoked in newspaper advertising bought by CBS, to tout its coverage of Election Night that year.
Nixon's "secret plan" for Vietnam is another hoary myth that dates to early 1968 and likewise has proven resistant to debunking. William Safire, a former speechwriter for Nixon and later a New York Times columnist, once wrote of the "secret plan" myth:
"Like the urban myth of crocodiles in the sewers, the [Nixon] non-quotation never seems to go away …."
Smug MSNBC guest invokes Nixon's mythical 'secret plan'
Huffington Post invoked the non-quotation in a recent look back at 1968, asserting that "the ultimate winner of the year proved to be a man who campaigned on the thesis that he had a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam."
No, Nixon did not campaign in 1968 "on the thesis that he had a secret plan," even though the anecdote does fit the popular image of Nixon as cunning and duplicitous.
As Media Myth Alert has often noted, Nixon never made a "secret plan" a plank of his campaign in 1968. It was a campaign pledge Nixon never made.
His opponents occasionally accused him of having a secret plan for Vietnam, but Nixon pointedly and publicly disavowed the notion.
In an article published March 28, 1968, in the Los Angeles Times, Nixon was quoted as saying he had "no gimmicks or secret plans" for Vietnam.
"If I had any way to end the war," he was further quoted as saying, "I would pass it on to President Johnson." (Nixon's remarks were made shortly before Johnson announced he would not seek reelection.)
That a "secret plan" was not a feature of Nixon's 1968 campaign becomes clear in reviewing a database of the content of leading U.S. newspapers, including for 1968, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Baltimore Sun, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and Chicago Tribune.
The search terms "Nixon" and "secret plan" returned no articles during the period from January 1, 1967, to January 1, 1969, in which Nixon was quoted as saying he had a "secret plan" for Vietnam. (The search period included the months of Nixon's presidential campaign and its aftermath.)
If Nixon had claimed during the 1968 campaign to possess a "secret plan" for Vietnam, America's leading newspapers surely would have reported it.
A column that promoted a media-driven trope
And then there's the "nuanced myth" of bra-burning, which can be traced to September 7, 1968, and a women's liberation protest on the boardwalk at Atlantic City, N.J., against the Miss America pageant.
The demonstration's organizers have insisted that while bras, girdles, high heels, and other items were ceremoniously tossed into a burn barrel dubbed the "Freedom Trash Can," nothing was set afire. Or as a recent 1968 retrospective in the Orange County Register put it, "the protest occurred flame free."
But such a statement ignores the accounts of two reporters who were at the protest that day.
One of them, John L. Boucher, wrote the next day in the Press of Atlantic City that as "the bras, girdles, falsies, curlers, and copies of popular women's magazines burned in the 'Freedom Trash Can,' the demonstration reached the pinnacle of ridicule when the participants paraded a small lamb wearing a gold banner worded 'Miss America.'"
Boucher's matter-of-fact reference to burning bras appeared in the ninth paragraph of his article, which the Press published beneath the headline:
"Bra-burners blitz boardwalk."
Boucher's observation was supported by another reporter at the boardwalk that day, Jon Katz, who in interviews by email and phone, said without hesitation that bras and other items indeed had been set afire during the demonstration.
"I quite clearly remember the 'Freedom Trash Can,' and also remember some protestors putting their bras into it along with other articles of clothing, and some Pageant brochures, and setting the can on fire," Katz said. "I am quite certain of this."
He also said:
"I recall and remember noting at the time that the fire was small, and quickly was extinguished, and didn't pose a credible threat to the boardwalk. I noted this as a reporter in case a fire did erupt."
As I noted in Getting It Wrong, the accounts of Boucher and Katz lend no support for the vivid popular imagery that many bras went set afire in a flamboyant protest on the boardwalk. At most, fire was a modest, fleeting element of the demonstration.
But their accounts make clear that "bra-burning" is an epithet not misapplied to the 1968 protest at Atlantic City.
More from Media Myth Alert:
After the 'Cronkite Moment,' LBJ doubled down on Viet policy
'Mired in stalemate'? How unoriginal of Cronkite
'Lyndon Johnson went berserk'? Not because of Cronkite
Wasn't so special: Revisiting the 'Cronkite Moment,' 44 years on
'When I lost Cronkite' — or 'something to that effect'
The campaign pledge Nixon never made
WaPo, Helen Thomas, and Nixon's 'secret plan'
Arrogance: WaPo won't correct dubious claim about Nixon 'secret plan' for Vietnam
Smug MSNBC guest invokes Nixon's mythical 'secret plan' on Vietnam
Behind the 'nuanced myth': Bra-burning at Atlantic City
Bra-burning in Toronto: Confirmed
'The Post': Bad history = bad movie
Check out The 1995 Blog
'Getting It Wrong' goes on 'Q-and-A'
1968, Best of, Bra-burning, Debunking, Distortion, Eugene McCarthy, Fact-checking, George Romney, Getting It Wrong, Helen Thomas, Jessica Lynch, Media, Media-driven myths, Nixon, Research, Vietnam War, Washington Post, Watergate
Five years on: The best of Media Myth Alert, Part II
In Anniversaries, Bra-burning, Debunking, Error, Furnish the war, Jessica Lynch, Media myths, New York Times, Newspapers, Photographs, Spanish-American War, Washington Post on October 31, 2014 at 1:56 pm
Media Myth Alert revisits its top-ever posts today in observing its fifth anniversary.
The blog went live October 31, 2009, and its objective was, and remains, twofold: Calling out the appearance and publication of media myths and helping to promote Getting It Wrong, my media mythbusting book that came out in 2010.
This is the second of a two-part review of the 10 top posts published at Media Myth Alert, home over the years to more than 640 essays and commentaries. The top posts shared these elements: All were about prominent topics, all received a fair amount of attention in the blogosphere and beyond, and all represented disclosures exclusive to Media Myth Alert.
■ Bra-burning in Toronto: Confirmed (posted February 19, 2011): It is sometimes said, erroneously, that bra-burning "never happened," that such reports were little more than hostile exaggerations by journalists.
Toronto, March 1979
Bra-burning never occurred?
Credible, first-hand accounts are cited in Getting It Wrong that bras and other items were set afire, briefly, at a women's liberation protest at Atlantic City during the 1968 Miss American pageant. And in Toronto in March 1979, a demonstration was capped by a bra-burning, intended as a way to attract media attention. A photograph of the Toronto bra-burning is at right.
I had not seen the photograph before it appeared in February 2011 with an article at the online site of London's Guardian newspaper. I had doubts about its authenticity, given the periodic claims about no bras ever having been burned at a feminist protest.
The Toronto image, I thought at first, might have been faked — or unethically altered somehow.
Turns out that was not the case.
I tracked down one of the participants at the Toronto protest and she confirmed the bra-burning, saying by phone from Vancouver:
"The photo is authentic. Absolutely. It happened."
The participant was Vicki Trerise, who appears at the far right in the photograph above.
The photograph shows a moment of demonstrative bra-burning, although Trerise said that "wasn't a focal point" of the protest, which took place not far from Toronto's City Hall.
The bra-burning came near the end of the demonstration, which was called to protest what the organizers said was an illogical report about rape, prepared by the Ontario Provincial Police. (The report said that of 337 rapes investigated, 140 were "unprovoked." The report also said "promiscuity" was a factor in many rapes.)
Trerise said the demonstrators in Toronto were media-aware and "knew that if they burned a bra, someone would take their picture."
Toronto newspapers the next day reported on the protest — but did not mention the bra-burning.
■ Maddow wrongly declares Pentagon 'made up' bogus tale about Jessica Lynch's battlefield heroics (posted June 4, 2014): In commentary on her MSNBC program in June 2014, Rachel Maddow wrongly accused the Pentagon of having "made up" the bogus account of Jessica Lynch's battlefield heroics early in the Iraq War.
Maddow offered no sourcing for her claim, made while revisiting at some length the hero-warrior tale about Lynch, an Army supply clerk thrust into international fame on April 3, 2003, in an electrifying, front-page story in the Washington Post.
PFC Lynch: Fired not a shot
The Post report cited otherwise unidentified "U.S. officials" and declared that Lynch, a 19-year-old Army private, had fought fiercely in the ambush of her unit, the 507th Maintenance Company, in Nasiriyah in southern Iraq on March 23, 2003. Lynch suffered severe injuries in the crash of a Humvee in Nasiriyah. She was taken prisoner by the Iraqis but rescued by U.S. special forces on April 1, 2003.
Vernon Loeb, one of the Post reporters on the hero-warrior story — which was wrong in its important details — later made clear that the Pentagon had not been the newspaper's source.
As I noted in Getting It Wrong, Loeb went on NPR's Fresh Air program in December 2003 and declared, unequivocally:
"Our sources for that story were not Pentagon sources."
None of that vital context was acknowledged by Maddow as she discussed the Lynch case on June 3, 2014.
"If the heroics that the Pentagon made up about her didn't really happen, and they didn't, maybe the U.S. special forces who rescued her, maybe they shouldn't have bothered," Maddow said about Lynch. (Maddow's commentary was inspired by controversy surrounding the release a few days before of Bowe Bergdahl, an Army sergeant who apparently had walked away from his post in Afghanistan and was held captive by the Taliban for five years. The administration of President Barack Obama released five senior Taliban figures to gain Bergdahl's freedom.)
When Maddow was called out on her erroneous claim about the Pentagon, she dodged a correction by cherry-picking — by referring to an obscure report in the Military Times on April 3, 2003, in which a military spokesman, Frank Thorp, was quoted as saying that Lynch "waged quite a battle prior to her capture.
"We do have very strong indications that Jessica Lynch was not captured very easily," Thorp was additionally quoted as saying.
Crowed Maddow: "That information straight from a military public affairs official was not true. It was made up. But it landed in press reports anyway."
What Maddow neglected to mention was that Thorp was recapping for the Military Times what the Washington Post had already published.
Thorp, then a Navy captain assigned to U.S. Central Command headquarters in Doha, Qatar, was not inventing — he was following. He was, unwisely, restating elements of the Post's story already in circulation and quickly gaining international attention.
I wrote in discussing Maddow's cherry-picking that "it is impossible to address the hero-warrior tale about Lynch without considering the Washington Post's central and decisive role in the story." But Maddow ignored the Post's exclusive role in pushing the botched Lynch story into the public domain.
The Post did so by relying on sources it has never disclosed.
It ought to.
■ Digitally scrubbing WaPo's embarrassment on Jessica Lynch? (posted April 27, 2012): The Washington Post's Watergate content from the 1970s is freely available and readily accessible online.
But try finding online the Post's famously wrong reporting about Jessica Lynch's derring-do in Iraq, notably the electrifying front-page report that appeared April 3, 2003, beneath the headline:
"'She was fighting to the death.'"
That story — which said Lynch had fought fiercely against Iraqi attackers and had suffered gunshot and stab wounds before running out of ammunition and being taken prisoner — was in error in all important details. You won't find it online at any Washington Post site. (The Post's story is available in full at the online site of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.)
Nor will you find freely available online the scathing reviews of the Lynch story published by the Post's then-ombudsman, Michael Getler, in April and June 2003.
All of which suggests digital scrubbing of embarrassing content — conduct of the sort the Post criticized in 2012, in noting that Vogue magazine expunged the online version of a fawning profile of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. The Post at that time said Vogue had taken "an almost-unheard-of step for a mainstream media organization" and had committed "a generally acknowledged violation of digital etiquette."
But had the Post not committed a similar "violation" in excising the digital reminders of the embarrassing Lynch case, a dramatic story that it had thoroughly and exclusively botched?
Rather looks like it.
I asked the newspaper's then-ombudsman, Patrick Pexton, about the apparent digital scrubbing of the Lynch content.
Pexton took weeks to reply, finally stating in an email that he had found "nothing nefarious about this." He said the Post since 2003 "has gone through several changes of content management systems," by which articles are posted online.
He noted that the "fighting to the death" story about Lynch and related content are available in the Post's fee-based archive.
But why not make the "fighting to the death" story freely available? Why not remove the fee to allow access to a singularly memorable article of the Iraq War, a mistaken report that made Jessica Lynch something of a celebrity and gave rise to persistent and misguided claims and suspicions that the U.S. military concocted the hero-warrior tale and somehow fed it to the Post?
"Restoring the digital version of the article of April 3, 2003, would represent a contribution to the record about the case of Jessica Lynch, which the Post is solely responsible for having placed in the public domain," I wrote in an email to Pexton.
He never replied before leaving the position in 2013, when his two-year term as ombudsman expired. He was not replaced.
■ George Romney's "brainwashing" — and Gene McCarthy's retort (posted September 4, 2012): Mitt Romney's ill-fated run for the presidency in 2012 prompted reminders of his father's failed presidential campaign in 1968 — a campaign memorable for an astonishingly clumsy gaffe.
The gaffe, in turn, is said to have inspired one of the most scathing putdowns in American political history.
But my research found that the context of the supposed putdown is unclear at best.
The gaffe was committed in late August 1967 by George Romney, then governor of Michigan and a presumptive leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 1968.
In an interview with a Detroit television reporter, Romney referred to a visit he had made to South Vietnam in 1965 and said:
"You know, when I came back from Vietnam, I'd just had the greatest brainwashing that anybody could get. … Well, not only by the generals but by the diplomatic corps over there. They do a very thorough job."
Romney's claim that he had been duped into supporting America's war effort in Vietnam suggested gullibility, muddled thinking, and an uncertain command of foreign policy. His run for the presidency never righted itself; he quit the race at the end of February 1968.
A witty putdown attributed to Democratic Senator Eugene McCarthy ensured that Romney's gaffe would remain unforgettable. Rather than a "brainwashing," McCarthy supposedly said, all Romney needed was a "light rinse."
So incisive was McCarthy's quip that it is said to have "essentially finished Romney" as a candidate for president.
But unclear is where, when, and even whether McCarthy made the "light rinse" comment.
A search of a full-text database of leading U.S. newspapers — including the New York Times, the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, and Baltimore Sun — turned up no published reference to the "light rinse" quip in 1967 or 1968. Or for years afterward. (The first reference was in 1983, a column in the Baltimore Sun that did not say when, where, or to whom McCarthy uttered the remark.)
It seems improbable that American journalists in 1967 or 1968 would have failed to report a retort as deft and delicious as McCarthy's.
But that's what An American Melodrama: The Presidential Campaign of 1968 claims.
American Melodrama, a hefty book published in 1969, described McCarthy's remark as off-hand and said the senator's aides persuaded reporters to hush it up.
While intriguing, American Melodrama doesn't say where McCarthy made the comment, when, or specifically to whom.
Such vagueness invites suspicion about the "light rinse" quip. It also sounds a bit too perfect — not unlike, say, William Randolph Hearst's purported vow to "furnish the war" with Spain or Lyndon B. Johnson's supposed epiphany on the Vietnam War: "If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America."
■ WaPo refuses to correct clear error on Nixon's mythical 'secret plan' (posted August 13, 2013): Even in its clear decline, the Washington Post has moments of sheer arrogance.
This was apparent in late summer 2013, when the newspaper refused to acknowledge and correct an inarguably erroneous reference to Richard Nixon's supposed "secret plan" to end the war in Vietnam.
The wrong-headed reference to Nixon's "secret plan" was embedded in the Post's front-page obituary about Helen Thomas, a querulous and overrated Washington journalist who covered the White House for years for United Press International.
The Post's obit of Thomas
The Post's obituary was glowing and, as if to suggest Thomas's impressive assertiveness, claimed that she once "asked President Richard M. Nixon point-blank what his secret plan to end the Vietnam War was."
Trouble is, there is no evidence that Thomas ever posed such a question, point-blank or otherwise.
The nearest approximation came at a news conference in late January 1969, when Thomas asked Nixon about his "peace plan" for Vietnam. That's probably what the obituary writer had in mind.
But Thomas had asked about Nixon's peace plan, not a "secret plan."
The Post's error in the obituary had broader dimension, in that it suggested an embrace of the persistent notion that Nixon ran for president in 1968 touting a "secret plan" to end the war in Vietnam.
Which is untrue. Nixon did not campaign for the White House on a "secret plan." The belief that he did circulates still, as supposedly powerful evidence of Nixon's devious and conniving ways.
The obituary's writer, Patricia Sullivan, said as much, telling me in response to an email query: "I recall the Nixon years and his promise during his candidacy that he had a plan to end the Vietnam War, which he would not explain in detail."
In fact, Nixon was asked during the 1968 campaign about having a "secret plan" to end the war. And according to a report in the Los Angeles Times on March 28, 1968, he replied that he had "no gimmicks or secret plans."
He also said: "If I had any way to end the war, I would pass it on to President [Lyndon] Johnson."
I brought all this to the attention of Douglas Feaver, who had been designated the Post's reader representative, a sort of ombudsman-lite position set up months after Pexton's departure.
I noted to Feaver that if the Post could identify an occasion when Thomas asked Nixon about a "secret plan" on Vietnam — if the newspaper could back up the claim in its obituary, in other words — then that would represent an intriguing if modest contribution to the understanding about Nixon's campaign in 1968. It would indicate that journalists at the time suspected Nixon was less than forthcoming about his intended war policy.
If, on the other hand, the Post could not identify such an occasion, then, I wrote, a correction was in order.
Feaver took more than two weeks to reply to my query, and when he did, he absolved the Post of error. "I see nothing here that deserves a correction," he wrote.
How obtuse.
Coincidentally, not long after the Post published its flawed obituary about Thomas, the newspaper was sold for $250 million to Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com. In an open letter to the newspaper's employees soon after the sale was announced, Bezos stated:
"We will continue to follow the truth wherever it leads, and we'll work hard not to make mistakes. When we do, we will own up to them quickly and completely."
Sure: Quickly and completely. Just as it did in its mistaken reference to Nixon's "secret plan."
Other memorable posts at Media Myth Alert:
No, Politico, Hearst did not cause the Spanish-American War
Wikileaks and the Spanish-American War?
Bill Clinton: Overstating social media influence in regime change
Twain's famous 1897 quote: The back story
Just what we need: Barbra Streisand, media critic
Jimmy Carter fumbles Watergate history
Media history with Olbermann: Wrong and wrong
Palin's new book invokes bra-burning stereotype
'Getting It Wrong' goes on Q-and-A
1968, Bra-burning, Debunking, Distortion, Fact-checking, Getting It Wrong, History, Media-driven myths, Research, Time
'Bras were never burned at '68 Miss America Pageant'? Might want to check that, 'Time'
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Error, Media myths, Newspapers on June 13, 2014 at 11:47 am
Call it a counter myth. Or a triumph of narrative over evidence.
Or maybe just plain wrong.
At the Freedom Trash Can, 1968
Whatever it is, the common interpretation is that women's liberation advocates burned no bras at their famous demonstration at Atlantic City in September 1968.
They may have had what Robin Morgan, their organizer, called a "symbolic bra-burning," as a way to protest that year's Miss America pageant; but the undergarments themselves were not set afire.
The latest to embrace this narrative is Time magazine, which posted a commentary online yesterday that declared:
"Bras were never burned at the 1968 Miss America protest …."
The commentary, written by filmmaker Jennifer Lee, further stated:
"Bras were just one of the items protestors were encouraged to bring that day that signified how the male-dominated culture was keeping women locked into rigid ideas of beauty, but they weren't burned. … Misinformation and myths sometimes serve as placeholders in our memory when facts are not remembered."
The commentary ignores evidence offered in my media-mythbusting book, Getting It Wrong, that bras were set afire, if briefly, at the Atlantic City demonstration, which was organized to denounce Miss America as a "degrading Mindless-Boob-Girlie symbol" that promoted a "Madonna Whore image of womanhood."
The evidence presented in Getting It Wrong about bra-burning at Atlantic City is from two witness accounts — one of which was published in the local newspaper, the Press of Atlantic City, on September 8, 1968, the day after the protest.
That story appeared beneath the byline of a veteran reporter named John L. Boucher and carried the headline:
The article referred to a burn barrel that the demonstrators dubbed the "Freedom Trash Can" and stated:
"As the bras, girdles, falsies, curlers, and copies of popular women's magazines burned in the 'Freedom Trash Can,' the demonstration reached the pinnacle of ridicule when the participants paraded a small lamb wearing a gold banner worded 'Miss America.'"
Boucher's article, which appeared on page 4 of the Atlantic City newspaper, wasn't particularly sensational. Its reference to burning "bras, girdles, falsies" appeared in the article's ninth paragraph.
The article, as I noted in Getting It Wrong, "did not elaborate about the fire and the articles burning in the Freedom Trash Can, nor did it suggest that the fire was all that important. … Nonetheless, the passage stands as a contemporaneous account that there was fire in the Freedom Trash Can that day — a firsthand report" that typically has been overlooked or ignored.
In addition, the article's description was buttressed by the recollections of the writer Jon Katz, who in 1968 was a young reporter for the Atlantic City Press. Katz was on the Atlantic City boardwalk the day of the protest, gathering material for a sidebar article about reactions to the demonstration.
Katz's sidebar didn't mention fire in the Freedom Trash Can.
But in correspondence with me, Katz stated:
"I quite clearly remember the 'Freedom Trash Can,' and also remember some protestors putting their bras into it along with other articles of clothing, and some Pageant brochures, and setting the can on fire.
"I am quite certain of this."
Katz also said:
"I recall and remember noting at the time that the fire was small, and quickly was extinguished, and didn't pose a credible threat to the Boardwalk. I noted this as a reporter in case a fire did erupt …. It is my recollection that this burning was planned, and that a number of demonstrators brought bras and other articles of clothing to burn, including, I believe some underwear."
So what's the upshot?
Quite clearly, as I wrote in Getting It Wrong, Boucher's article and Katz's recollections "offer fresh dimension to the bra-burning legend. … There is now evidence that bras and other items were set afire, if briefly, at the 1968 Miss America protest in Atlantic City. This evidence cannot be taken lightly, dismissed or ignored." As the Time commentary did.
But I also noted that the witness accounts do not "corroborate a widely held image of angry feminists demonstratively setting fire to their bras and tossing the flaming undergarments into a spectacular bonfire." Spectacular and flamboyant the bra-burning was not.
Toronto, 1979
Another moment of bra-burning took place in Canada in 1979, when members of Women Against Violence Against Women demonstrated outside Toronto's city hall. Near the end of the demonstration, a protester named Pat Murphy dropped a white bra into the hungry flames of a burn barrel (see photo, right).
That demonstration took place March 8, 1979, and coincided with International Women's Day. It was aimed at denouncing a controversial report on rape prepared by the Ontario Provincial Police.
"The bra burning," one participant recalled in a telephone interview with me in 2011, "was a way to entice the media as well as [offer] a critique of the police report."
Interestingly, the Toronto newspapers covered the demonstration. But they did not mention the bra-burning.
Ignoring nuance in the bra-burning myth
Bra-burning: The morphing of a media myth
'Those bra-burning times': When were they?
On columnists and burning bras
The editor and the protest: Bra-burning's intriguing sidebar
Bra-burning 'never happened'?
Enticing the media: More on bra-burning in Toronto, 1979
'Burn our briefs' call in UK evokes myth of 'bra burning'
'Doctrinaire feminist in the bra-burning mold'?
Both left, right embrace media myth about WaPo and Watergate
Maddow cherry-picks to avoid correcting claim about Pentagon, Jessica Lynch
A debunker's work is never done
Getting It Wrong goes on Q-and-A
1968, Bra-burning, Debunking, Distortion, Economist magazine, Fact-checking, Getting It Wrong, History, Media-driven myths, Research
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Error, Media myths on May 30, 2013 at 9:01 am
"Myths die hard."
So says the latest issue of the Economist magazine, in an article that addresses the nuanced myth of bra-burning.
At the 'Freedom Trash Can,' 1968
Only there's not much nuance in the Economist's description.
"When a handful of feminists protested at the 1968 Miss America pageant in Atlantic City," the Economist says, "they burned no brassières. They did, however, dump a few (and make-up and high-heeled shoes) into a 'freedom trash can,' while also crowning a sheep."
The syntax of that paragraph is certainly awkward. But what most interests Media Myth Alert is the assertion "they burned no brassières."
And that's not quite right.
As I discuss in my myth-busting book, Getting It Wrong, there is compelling evidence that bras were indeed set afire, briefly, during a women's liberation protest on the boardwalk at Atlantic City.
That protest took place September 7, 1968, and denounced the Miss America pageant as a degrading spectacle. Demonstrators carried placards that expressed such unsubtle sentiments as: "Up Against the Wall, Miss America," "Miss America Sells It," "Miss America Is a Big Falsie," and "Miss America Goes Down."
A centerpiece of the demonstration was what the organizers called the "Freedom Trash Can." The Economist is correct in noting that high-heel shoes and other items were tossed into that converted burn barrel.
Bras went into the Freedom Trash Can, too. And according to a first-hand account published the following day in the Atlantic City newspaper, the Press, "bras, girdles, falsies, curlers, and copies of popular women's magazines [were] burned in the 'Freedom Trash Can.'"
The Press account appeared beneath this headline:
That account was endorsed by Jon Katz, who in 1968 was a young reporter for the Press and who wrote a sidebar article about the women's liberation demonstration.
"I quite clearly remember the 'Freedom Trash Can,' and also remember some protestors putting their bras into it along with other articles of clothing, and some Pageant brochures, and setting the can on fire," Katz told me in my research for Getting It Wrong.
"I am," he added, "quite certain of this."
When the fire flickered out, Katz said, the police dragged the trash bin to the sand.
The reference to bra-burning in the Press article the day afterward as well as Katz's recollections "offer fresh dimension to the bra-burning legend," I write in Getting It Wrong, noting:
"They represent two witness accounts that bras and other items were burned, or at least smoldered, in the Freedom Trash Can. There is now evidence that bras and other items were set afire, if briefly, at the 1968 Miss America protest in Atlantic City.
"This evidence cannot be taken lightly, dismissed or ignored."
However, these accounts do not support the much more vivid and popular notion that bras went up in flames that day, in a flamboyant protest on the boardwalk.
The witness accounts, I write, do not corroborate the "widely held image of angry feminists demonstratively setting fire to their bras and tossing the flaming undergarments into a spectacular bonfire."
And yet, as the evidence presented in Getting It Wrong makes clear, "bra-burning" is an epithet not entirely misapplied to the women's liberation demonstration at Atlantic City.
'They even started wars': Nonsense in the Economist's holiday double issue
'Economist' indulges in media myth
On bra-burning, Eric Jong is wrong
PBS set to embrace 'mass hysteria' myth in anniversary on 'War of Worlds'?
Jon Krakauer rolls back claims about WaPo 'source' in Lynch case
Why history is badly taught, poorly learned
JHistory: 'Getting It Wrong' deserves to be 'required reading'
1968, 1979, Bra-burning, Debunking, Fact-checking, Getting It Wrong, History, International Women's Day, Journalism, Media, Media-driven myths, Miss America, News, Research, Toronto
On bra-burning, Erica Jong is wrong
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Media myths, Photographs on March 28, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Bra-burning in Toronto, 1979 (Bettmann/Corbis)
The writer Erica Jong asserts in a rambling commentary posted yesterday at the Daily Beast that bra-burning "never actually occurred."
The mischaracterization of bra-burning was an element of Jong's defense of feminism and the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.
Jong wrote in the commentary:
"The fact that the so-called mainstream press reduced our valid struggles to sex, drugs, rock and roll, and bra burning (which, btw, never actually occurred) was their attempt to further disempower us. And they surely prevailed."
It's not an infrequent claim, that feminist bra-burning was a media trope, a media myth. That it "never actually occurred."
But there were at least a couple of documented occasions when feminist protesters set fire to bras.
One occasion came 33 years ago this month, when members of Women Against Violence Against Women demonstrated outside Toronto City Hall. As the demonstration neared its end, a protester named Pat Murphy dropped a white bra into the hungry flames of a burn barrel (see photo, above).
The demonstration in Toronto on March 8, 1979, coincided with International Women's Day and was aimed at denouncing a report on rape prepared by the Ontario Provincial Police.
The police report said "promiscuity" was a factor in many rapes.
The Women Against Violence Against Women group assailed the report as outrageous and "dazzling in its illogic." Protesters carried signs saying: "Take a Rapist to Lunch — Charcoal Broiled" and "Hookers Who Wink Go to the Clink! Men Who Rape Escape."
The Globe and Mail newspaper reported that the protesters lighted "a fire in a garbage can, to the obvious annoyance of about a dozen watchful constables, [and] shouted: 'Burn the rapists, burn the city, burn the OPP,'" acronym for Ontario Provincial Police.
The newspaper's account did not specifically mention bra-burning which, one participant has told me, "wasn't a focal point" of the protest.
But bra-burning did happen there.
Another participant has recalled that "weighing in on the stereotype of 'feminist bra-burners' was actually an effective way [for protesters] to say: Women will control our own bodies, thank you!
"The bra burning," she said, "was a way to entice the media as well as [offer] a critique of the police report."
A little more than 10 years before the demonstration in Toronto, some 100 women gathered on the boardwalk at Atlantic City, New Jersey, to protest the 1968 Miss America pageant. The demonstration was organized by a small group called New York Radical Women and was an early manifestation of the women's liberation movement.
In Getting It Wrong, my mythbusting book that came out in 2010, I offer evidence that bras were set afire, briefly, during the demonstration at Atlantic City.
The evidence is from two witness accounts, one of which was published in the local newspaper, the Press of Atlantic City, on September 8, 1968, the day after the protest.
Boucher (1949 photo)
That account appeared beneath the byline of a veteran reporter named John L. Boucher and carried the headline:
Boucher's article referred to the burn barrel that demonstrators dubbed the "Freedom Trash Can" and stated:
That published account was buttressed by recollections of the writer Jon Katz, who in 1968 was a young reporter for the Atlantic City newspaper. Katz was on the Atlantic City boardwalk the day of the protest, gathering material for a sidebar article about reactions to the demonstration.
Katz's sidebar didn't mention the fire in the "Freedom Trash Can."
Many thanks to Instapundit
Glenn Reynolds for linking to this post.
Recent and related:
How's that? 'Bra-burning' influenced mid-1960s fashion?
Palin's new book invokes 'bra-burning' stereotype
A history lesson not to miss? No, but it's entertaining
Invoking media myths to score points
1968, Atlantic City, Bra-burning, Distortion, Fact-checking, Getting It Wrong, Media-driven myths, miss america pageant, Washington Post
The 'seismic cultural shifts' of the 1960s: Protests, assassination — and bra-burning?
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Media myths, Washington Post on March 25, 2012 at 9:59 am
Feminist "bra-burning" of the late 1960s was more media myth than sustained reality.
But a commentary in today's Washington Post places "bra-burning" among the "[s]eismic cultural shifts" of the late 1960s.
A column that promoted a media trope
Yes, "bra burning."
This bizarre and baseless claim appears in a commentary that ruminates about the Mad Men television series.
The opening paragraph says:
"On 'Mad Men,' the AMC television show that returns for its fifth season Sunday night, booze, cigarettes, unprotected sex, cholesterol-rich foods and negligent parenting play starring roles in a surprisingly accurate and yet idealized picture of a New York ad agency in the mid-1960s. Seismic cultural shifts — Vietnam War protests, bra-burning and the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. — are just over the horizon."
The show, the Post's commentary avers, "gives us a window into the mind-sets of our parents and grandparents."
Oh, sure it does.
But even frivolous ruminations can bring opportunities for myth-busting, and bra-burning was hardly a "seismic" event of the late 1960s.
It hardly signaled "cultural shift."
In fact, feminist "bra-burning" was mostly a non-event.
I call it a "nuanced myth" in my latest book, Getting It Wrong, which debunks 10 prominent media-driven myths.
The derivation of the nuanced myth can be traced to September 7, 1968, and the women's liberation protest against the Miss America pageant at Atlantic City, N.J. The protest was organized by a small group called New York Radical Women.
The demonstrators included about 100 women who traveled to the Atlantic City boardwalk to denounce the pageant as a "degrading Mindless-Boob-Girlie symbol" that placed "women on a pedestal/auction block to compete for male approval" and promoted a "Madonna Whore image of womanhood."
The harsh rhetoric notwithstanding, the daylong protest on the boardwalk wasn't very raucous. A centerpiece was what the demonstrators called the "Freedom Trash Can," into which they tossed "instruments of torture" such as brassieres, girdles, high-heeled shoes, and copies of Playboy and Cosmopolitan."
One demonstrator held a girdle over the Freedom Trash Can, according to the New York Times, and chanted:
"No more girdles, no more pain. No more trying to hold the fat in vain."
The protest's organizers had let it be known in advance of the demonstration that they planned to set fire to bras and other items at Atlantic City. But once there, plans supposedly were abandoned in favor of what of was called a "symbolic bra-burning."
And through the years, the demonstration's organizers have been adamant that no bras were burned during the protest.
Nonetheless, newspaper columnists writing in the demonstration's aftermath offered highly imaginative accounts of "bra-burning" at Atlantic City.
Notably, Harriet Van Horne wrote in the New York Post that a highlight of the demonstration "was a bonfire in a Freedom Trash Can."
Van Horne, who was not at the Atlantic City protest, also wrote:
"With screams of delight they consigned to the flames such shackling, demeaning items as girdles, bras, high-heeled slippers, hair curlers and false eyelashes."
Nationally syndicated humor columnist Art Buchwald also picked up on the bra-burning meme, writing with tongue in cheek that he was "flabbergasted to read that about 100 women had picketed the Miss America pageant in Atlantic City against 'ludicrous beauty standards' that had enslaved the American woman.'"
Buchwald also wrote: "The final and most tragic part of the protest took place when several of the women publicly burned their brassieres."
And a media myth took hold.
What nuances the myth are witness accounts, discussed in Getting It Wrong, that bras were set afire, if briefly, during the protest.
Boucher, 1949 photo
One witness account appeared in the Press of Atlantic City the day after the protest. The newspaper's first-hand report, written by a veteran reporter named John L. Boucher, included this passage:
Also covering the demonstration was Jon Katz, then a young reporter for the Atlantic City Press. In my research into bra-burning, Katz told me:
"I quite clearly remember the 'Freedom Trash Can,' and also remember some protestors putting their bras into it along with other articles of clothing, and some Pageant brochures, and setting the can on fire. I am quite certain of this."
As I point out in Getting It Wrong, these accounts that bras were burned in the "Freedom Trash Can" cannot be "taken lightly, dismissed or ignored."
At the same time, I write, the witness accounts "offer no evidence to corroborate a widely held image of angry feminists demonstratively setting fire to their bras and tossing the flaming undergarments into a spectacular bonfire."
There was no mass bra-burning at Atlantic City, no feminists twirling flaming bras over the heads. Fire at most was a modest and fleeting aspect of the protest on that long ago September day.
It was, to be sure, no seismic event.
Recalling the 1960s 'bra-burning days of women's lib'
No bra-burning at Atlantic City?
'Burn our briefs' call in UK evokes myth of bra-burning
'Exquisitely researched and lively'
1968, Bra-burning, Debunking, Distortion, Fact-checking, Getting It Wrong, History, Media-driven myths
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Media myths on March 22, 2012 at 4:50 am
The notion that "bra-burning" was a widespread element of feminist protest is a media myth that's probably too engrained, and euphonic, ever to be thoroughly debunked.
Fashion statement? (Press of Atlantic City)
It's a notion that's given rise to much hyperbole since the late 1960s. An Associated Press report yesterday added to the overstatement reflex with this astounding and wrong-headed passage about "bra-burning":
"Culturally, beatniks were becoming mods, rock 'n' roll was taking hold, and the move from stockings to pantyhose — and eventual bra-burning — all influenced mid-'60s fashion."
The AP report was about how the Mad Men television series has reflected "the evolution of fashion" during the 1960s.
But it wasn't such froth that caught the attention of Media Myth Alert: It was the absurd claim that "bra burning … influenced mid-1960s fashion."
Left unsaid by the AP report was how — how "bra-burning," even if it were a frequent manifestation (which it wasn't), could have influenced fashion of that time.
The AP claim was especially puzzling because the "bra burning" meme did not even emerge until the late 1960s, when it came to be associated with the Miss America protest at Atlantic City on September 7, 1968.
A centerpiece of the 1968 protest was the "Freedom Trash Can," into which demonstrators deposited so-called "instruments of torture" — including brassieres, girdles, high-heeled shoes, false eyelashes, and copies of magazines such as Playboy and Cosmopolitan.
Organizers of the demonstration have long insisted that no bras were set afire that day — that there was only a "symbolic bra burning" at Atlantic City.
But "bra-burning" is a nuanced media myth — as I describe in my latest book, Getting It Wrong.
I discuss in the book two previously overlooked witness accounts that bras were burned, briefly, during the protest at Atlantic City, which often is credited with marking the rise of the feminist movement of the late 20th century.
One of the witness accounts was published the day after the protest in the Press of Atlantic City, beneath the headline:
The newspaper report, written by a veteran reporter named John L. Boucher, included this passage:
The other witness account discussed in Getting It Wrong was that of Jon Katz, a writer who covered the 1968 protest as a young reporter for the Atlantic City newspaper.
"I recall and remember noting at the time that the fire was small, and quickly was extinguished, and didn't pose a credible threat to the Boardwalk. I noted this as a reporter in case a fire did erupt," Katz told me, adding:
"It is my recollection that this burning was planned, and that a number of demonstrators brought bras and other articles of clothing to burn, including, I believe some underwear."
These witness accounts offer fresh dimension to the legend of bra-burning: They represent evidence that bras and other items were set afire, if briefly, at the 1968 protest in Atlantic City.
"This evidence," I write in Getting It Wrong, "cannot be taken lightly, dismissed or ignored."
I also point out, though, that neither witness account lends "support to the far more vivid and popular imagery that many bras went up in flames in flamboyant protest that September day. [The] accounts offer no evidence to corroborate a widely held image of angry feminists demonstratively setting fire to their bras and tossing the flaming undergarments into a spectacular bonfire."
The reference in the AP report to "bra burning" as a fashion-molder is not only wrong; it suggest the insidious nature of media myths — how they can be invoked so readily and casually, without reference to any supporting evidence or detail.
They're often treated as if they're common knowledge, widely accepted.
And "bra-burning" is a media myth with a sting. The term often has been employed casually, as derogatory epithet, to ridicule feminists and dismiss their objectives as trivial and insignificant. As such, "bra-burning" underscores the potential of media myths to feed and promote stereotypes.
Not to mention misleading impressions of fashion history of the 1960s.
James Fallows and 'furnish the war': Indulging in a media myth
Bra-burning, a myth that 'will never die'?
Remembering bra-burning — er, make that bra-smoldering
Why they get it wrong
Bra-burning, Cronkite Moment, Debunking, Getting It Wrong, Jessica Lynch, Krakauer, Murrow, Nixon, Washington Post, Watergate
Taking stock: Top mythbusting posts of 2011
In Anniversaries, Bra-burning, Cronkite Moment, Debunking, Jessica Lynch, Media myths, Murrow-McCarthy myth, Quotes, Washington Post, Watergate myth on December 31, 2011 at 4:45 am
Reviewing the year in media-mythbusting reveals a number of memorable posts. Here are the Media Myth Alert five top writeups of 2011, with a roster of other mythbusting posts of note:
■ Krakauer retreats from Lynch-source claim (posted November 11): This post revealed author Jon Krakauer's quiet retreat from claims in a 2009 book that Jim Wilkinson, a former White House official, was the source for the bogus Washington Post report about Jessica Lynch and her supposed battlefield heroics in the Iraq War in 2003.
The claims in Krakauer's book were unattributed — and vigorously denied by Wilkinson, who sought a correction.
When it came, the correction was inserted unobtrusively in a new printing of the paperback edition of Krakauer's book, Where Men Win Glory. It read:
"Earlier editions of this book stated that it was Jim Wilkinson 'who arranged to give the Washington Post exclusive access' to this leaked intelligence [about Jessica Lynch]. This is incorrect. Wilkinson had nothing to do with the leak."
I've noted that the Post's enduring silence about its sources on the Lynch story has allowed for the emergence not only of false allegations such as those about Wilkinson, but of a false narrative that the military concocted the tale about Lynch's derring-do.
The false narrative also has deflected attention from the soldier whose heroics apparently were misattributed to Lynch. He was Sgt. Donald Walters, a cook in Lynch's unit.
■ 'Deep Throat' garage marker errs about Watergate source disclosures (posted August 18): A handsome historical marker went up in August outside the parking garage in Arlington, Virginia, where Bob Woodward of the Post conferred occasionally in 1972 and 1973 with his stealthy Watergate source, "Deep Throat."
The marker, I pointed out, errs in describing the information Woodward received from the "Deep Throat" source, who in 2005 revealed himself as W. Mark Felt, formerly the FBI's second in command.
The marker says:
"Felt provided Woodward information that exposed the Nixon administration's obstruction of the FBI's Watergate investigation."
Which just isn't so.
Such evidence, had "Deep Throat" offered it to Woodward, would have been so damaging and so explosive that it surely would have forced Richard Nixon to resign the presidency well before he did, in August 1974.
Felt didn't have that sort of information — or (less likely) didn't share it with Woodward.
I noted in my post about the marker that All the President's Men, the book Woodward wrote with Carl Bernstein about their Watergate reporting, says Woodward's conversations with "Deep Throat" were intended "only to confirm information that had been gathered elsewhere and to add some perspective."
■ Bra-burning in Toronto: Confirmed (posted February 19): I ascertained in this post that an image of a bra-burning protest in Toronto in 1979 was no hoax, that the photograph was authentic.
I had not seen the photograph before it appeared in February with an article at the online site of London's Guardian newspaper.
I had doubts about the photo's authenticity — given the periodic claims that no bras ever were burned at a feminist protest. The Toronto image, I suspected, might have been unethically altered.
The photograph shows a moment of demonstrative bra-burning, although Trerise said it "wasn't a focal point" of the protest, which took place not far from Toronto's City Hall.
The bra-burning came near the end of the demonstration, which was called to protest what the organizers said was an illogical report about rape, prepared by the Ontario Provincial Police.
Trerise said the demonstrators in Toronto were media-savvy and "knew that if they burned a bra, someone would take their picture."
■ Suspect Murrow quote pulled at Murrow school (posted February 17): The online welcome page of the dean of the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University contained a quotation attributed to Murrow that's only half-true.
Murrow
The quote reads:
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it."
As I've reported previously, the first portion of the quote was indeed spoken by Murrow, in his mythical 1954 television program that addressed Senator Joseph McCarthy's red-baiting ways.
The second part of the quote — "When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it" — is apocryphal.
In February, I found that the full quotation — accompanied by a facsimile of Murrow's signature — was posted at the welcome page of Dean Lawrence Pintak of Murrow College at Washington State, Murrow's alma mater.
I asked the dean what knew about the quote's provenance, noting that I had consulted, among other sources, a database of historical newspapers which contained no articles quoting the "loyal opposition" passage.
Pintak referred my inquiry to an instructor on his faculty who, a few hours later, sent an email to the dean and me, stating:
"While [the 'loyal opposition' quotation] seems to reflect the Murrow spirit, the lack of evidence that he phrased it that way is indeed suspicious."
He added: "I feel the evidence says no, Murrow did not say this."
By day's end, the suspect quote had been pulled from the welcome page. Just the authentic portion — "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty" — remained posted there.
■ Mythmaking in Moscow: Biden says WaPo brought down Nixon (posted March 12): Joe Biden, the hapless U.S. vice president, repeated the dominant but misleading narrative about the Watergate scandal in March by telling an audience in Moscow that the Washington Post had "brought down" Richard Nixon's corrupt presidency.
The gaffe-prone Biden told his audience:
"In my country it was a newspaper, not the FBI, or the Justice Department, it was a newspaper, the Washington Post that brought down a President for illegal actions."
It's a version of scandal that few serious historians accept. Not even the Washington Post buys into such a myth-encrusted interpretation.
Indeed, principals at the Post from time to time have sought to distance the newspaper from that misleading assessment.
For example, Katharine Graham, the newspaper's publisher during and after the Watergate scandal, said in 1997, at a program marking the 25th anniversary of the scandal:
"Sometimes people accuse us of bringing down a president, which of course we didn't do. The processes that caused [Nixon's] resignation were constitutional."
More recently, Michael Getler, then the newspaper's ombudsman, wrote in 2005:
"Ultimately, it was not The Post, but the FBI, a Congress acting in bipartisan fashion and the courts that brought down the Nixon administration."
Such comments are not the expressions of false modesty. Instead, they represent a more accurate reading of the history of Watergate than Biden offered up in Moscow.
Even so, in the run-up to the scandal's 40th anniversary in 2012, the Watergate myth — the heroic-journalist trope — is sure to emerge often and insistently.
But the Post and its reporting of Watergate assuredly did not bring down Nixon, as I discuss in Getting It Wrong, my latest book which was published in 2010.
Other memorable posts of 2011:
The debunking of the year, 2011
'Too early to say': Zhou was speaking about 1968, not 1789
As if it were toxic: Media ignore exculpatory Jefferson-paternity study
Carl Bernstein, disingenuous
BBC calls Hearst's quote apocryphal, quotes it anyway
Apocryphal, but still quotable
Indulging in myth on the way out
Area 51 book offers implausible, myth-based tale
Juan Williams' new book repeats Spanish-American War myth
NYTimes flubs the correction
When we err, we correct: Still waiting, Bill Keller
Fact-checking Keller on NYT-Bay of Pigs suppression myth
Fact-checking WaPo columnist on the 'McKinley Moment'
No 'rock-em,' no 'sock-em': What ails WaPo?
WaPo journo on Jessica Lynch story rejoins paper
Accepting the 2010 SPJ award for Research about Journalism
1968, Bra-burning, Fact-checking, Freedom Trash Can, Getting It Wrong, History, Media-driven myths, Research, Women's liberation
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Media myths on September 6, 2011 at 4:33 am
Ah, yes: "the 60s bra-burning days of women's lib."
Those "bra-burning days" can be traced to the boardwalk at Atlantic City, NJ, 43 years ago, when about 100 women's liberation demonstrators protested the Miss America pageant at the city's Convention Center.
At the 'Freedom Trash Can,' 1968
A centerpiece of the protest was what the demonstrators called the "freedom trash can," into which they consigned such "instruments of torture" as brassieres, girdles, high-heeled shoes, false eyelashes, copies of Playboy and Cosmopolitan magazines.
The protesters have long insisted that, contrary to legend, bras and other items were not set afire that long ago September day.
The protest's principal organizer, Robin Morgan, has asserted:
"There were no bras burned" at Atlantic City. "That's a media myth."
But in my latest book, Getting It Wrong, I offer evidence that bras were set afire, briefly, during the protest at Atlantic City. It was perhaps more akin to bra-smoldering.
The evidence is from separate witness accounts — one of them published in the local newspaper, the Press of Atlantic City, on September 8, 1968, the day after the protest.
"Bra burners blitz Boardwalk."
The article's key passage stated:
Boucher's account, as I note in Getting It Wrong, "did not elaborate about the fire and the articles burning in the Freedom Trash Can, nor did it suggest the fire was all that important. Rather, the article conveyed a sense of astonishment that an event such as the women's liberation protest could take place near the venue of the pageant."
Boucher's contemporaneous account was buttressed by the recollections of Jon Katz, a prolific writer who in 1968 was a young reporter for the Atlantic City Press.
He was on the boardwalk the day of the protest, gathering material for a sidebar article about reactions to the demonstration.
Katz's article did not mention the burning bras. But in correspondence with me, Katz stated:
He added: "I recall and remember noting at the time that the fire was small, and quickly was extinguished, and didn't pose a credible threat to the Boardwalk. I noted this as a reporter in case a fire did erupt …."
Boucher's long-overlooked article and Katz's more recent recollections represent strong evidence that bras and other items were burned at the 1968 protest.
As I write in Getting It Wrong, "This evidence cannot be taken lightly, dismissed or ignored.
"But it must be said as well," I add, "that the witness accounts of Boucher and Katz lend no support to the far more vivid and popular imagery that many bras went up in flames in flamboyant protest that September day."
Still, the notion that bra burnings were numerous during the late 1960s and 1970s became well-ingrained in American popular culture — as the recent reference in the Australian newspaper to "the 60s bra-burning days of women's lib" suggests.
The phrase "bra-burning," as I note in Getting It Wrong, became a sneering, off-hand way "of ridiculing feminists and mocking their sometimes-militant efforts to confront gender-based discrimination in the home and the work place."
Bra-burning was hardly a common element of women's liberation protests of the late 1960s and 1970s. Evidence is scant at best of feminist protesters during those years setting fire to bras and tossing the flaming undergarments into spectacular bonfires.
Challenge the dominant narrative? Who, us?
Meaning what, 'all that bra-burning'?
'A debunker's work is never done'
1789, 1968, Bra-burning, China, Crack babies, Debunking, Distortion, Fact-checking, France, French Revolution, Getting It Wrong, History, Journalism, Long view of history, Media, Media-driven myths, News, Nixon, Quotations, Research, Stereotypes, Upheaval, Zhou Enlai
'What's a couple of centuries' when it comes to China and Zhou Enlai?
In Bra-burning, Debunking, Media myths on July 3, 2011 at 5:58 am
When Zhou Enlai observed that it was "too early" to assess the significance of political upheaval in France, he was speaking about the turmoil of 1968, and not, as is often believed, about the French Revolution that began in 1789.
Zhou greets Nixon, 1972
The Independent newspaper in London referred to the Zhou misunderstanding in an editorial posted yesterday, and essentially shrugged it off, stating :
"Revisionists now claim that he was commenting not on the storming of the Bastille in 1789, but on the student riots of 1968. But what's a couple of centuries to a China still engaged in its own long march to modernity?"
The editorial's snark and breezy dismissiveness may be because the "revisionists" include the Financial Times, a rival London newspaper.
The Financial Times was first to call attention to the mistaken interpretation of Zhou's remark.
Zhou, the Chinese premier, said during President Richard Nixon's trip to China in February 1972 that it was "too early to say" what were the implications of political upheaval in France.
Charles (Chas) Freeman, an American diplomat who was Nixon's interpreter on the China visit, told a panel discussion in Washington, D.C., last month that Zhou clearly was speaking about the turmoil and student protests in France in 1968 — not the French revolution of nearly 200 years before.
A reporter for the Financial Times moderated the panel discussion and in his article wrote that Freeman said:
"There was a misunderstanding [about Zhou's remark] that was too delicious to invite correction."
In a subsequent interview with me, Freeman said:
"I cannot explain the confusion about Zhou's comment, except in terms of the extent to which it conveniently bolstered a stereotype" about Chinese leaders' taking an exceptionally long and patient view of history.
Stereotyping helps explain why Zhou's comment has been so widely quoted — and why debunking its erroneous and more extravagant interpretation really does matter.
Stereotyping, as I discuss in my latest book, Getting It Wrong, can be buoyed by media-driven myths, those dubious media-centric stories that masquerade as factual.
In Getting It Wrong, I note a number of examples of stereotypes that have been bolstered by media myths.
I write: "The misleading if euphonic epithet of 'bra-burning' emerged from a demonstration on the Atlantic City boardwalk in 1968 to become shorthand for denigrating the emergent feminist movement and dismissing it as trivial and even a bit odd. The widely misreported pandemic of 'crack babies' in the late 1980s and early 1990s seemed to confirm the worst pathologies associated with inner-city poor people."
Rather than reflecting China's supposedly long and patient view of history, Zhou's "too early" observation was cautious analysis about events that were fairly recent and still under interpretation.
Zhou's was a pragmatic observation, hardly sage or long-sighted.
Those delicious but phony quotes 'that refuse to die'
List of flubs by pols incomplete without Biden's Watergate gaffe
Did he say it? A curious Murrow quote
Suspect Murrow quote pulled at Murrow School
'Follow the money,' again and again
Scoring political points with 'follow the money,' that made-up line
Too bad it's only in French: A neat little book of impressive debunking
Puncturing media myths: A case for modest media influence
OlderEntries »
Media myths: FAQs, Part One
The subtlety of media myths: A 'New Yorker' brief and the napalm-attack myth
The hero-journalist trope: Watergate's go-to mythical narrative
'Richard Jewell,' pack journalism, and a cinematic disappointment
10 years on: News media shy from revisiting flawed Katrina coverage
It's like 1948 all over again for American media
Media myth as cliché: 'The War of the Worlds' radio 'panic'
The 'Cronkite Moment,' 50 years on: Remembering why it's a media myth
CounterPunch embraces bogus Lynch narrative
'War of the Worlds' radio panic was overstated
Archives Select Month December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009
The anniversary of a #mediamyth. Had it been written, #Hearst's cable to Frederic Remington, purportedly vowing to… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…Posted	1 day ago
This is good stuff, @pollskepticdave twitter.com/imediaethics/s…Posted	1 day ago
Read more about 1995, now 25 years on, from The 1995 Blog: wp.me/p4HZIe-Vc @ucpress #yearthefuturebegan twitter.com/JHistoryJourna…Posted	1 week ago
Well done interview by @nickhirshon #yearthefuturebegan twitter.com/JHistoryJourna…Posted	1 week ago
At the outset of 2020, recalling 1995 as #watershed year in new media, domestic #terrorism, political #scandal, cri… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…Posted	2 weeks ago
Follow @wjosephcampbell
Categories Select Category 'Napalm girl' 1897 Anniversaries Bay of Pigs Bra-burning Cinematic treatments Cronkite Moment Debate myth Debunking Error Furnish the war Hurricane Katrina Jessica Lynch Journalism education Media myths Media myths and radio Murrow-McCarthy myth New York Sun New York Times New Yorker Newspapers Photographs Quotes Reviews Scandal Spanish-American War Television War of the Worlds Washington Post Watergate myth Year studies Yellow Journalism


text:
Senna multiglandulosa
Scientific Name: Senna multiglandulosa
Common Names: Buttercup bush
Plant Type: Shrub
Environment: Buttercup Bush should be grown in full sunlight. It is very adaptable to both dry and moist locations, and should do fine under typical garden conditions. It is not particular as to soil type or pH. It is somewhat tolerant of urban pollution.
Bloom: Mid-winter through early summer.
Uses: Excellent as a loose screen or tall border planting; can be invasive
Other: In its native humid mountainous regions of Central and South America, the flowers are used in stews, the root stems and leaves used for dyes, and the branches are often used to make baskets. Traditional medicinal uses include protecting against fever, typhoid, and dysentery.
Exhibition Garden (Beds 3H, 3I, 3M)
Chilean Garden (Bed 57A)
Visit the back entrance to the Exhibition Garden today! It is a riot of color. Buttercup Bush and Marmalade Bush are blooming at the same time, and the area is brilliant with shades of yellow, orange and gold.
Known also as Downy Senna, and with botanical synonyms of Cassia tomentosa, and Cassia multiglandulosa, Buttercup Bush is widespread across the warmer parts of the world as a cultivated ornamental. Usually a shrub, it can become tree-like (up to 12 feet) with multi-stems giving a striking appearance in the garden. Senna requires lots of sunlight and is tolerant of drought, yet adjusts to moist conditions too. Nor is it particular about soil conditions. It can even be grown as an annual and can be replaced if winter temperatures drop too low for its survival. Its suckering habit, sending up secondary stems from its roots, allows it to become invasive in some climates. In New Zealand it has become naturalized and is considered a weed!
Senna is a woolly shrub with long compound leaves divided into 10 to 14 leaflets. Canary-yellow, five-petaled flowers, drooping in racemes, can completely cover the bush. Inside each bloom are seven fertile stamens, their anthers covered with brown pollen, and three staminodes, smaller sterile stamens. The fruits are long inflated hairy pods that hang with many beans inside. The seeds of various species have played a part in herbal and folk medicines over millennia.
Senna multiglandulosa is native from Mexico to Guatemala, and parts of South America. It spreads easily and is also found on the islands of the Caribbean, in Florida, wherever it finds humid tropical weather. There are almost 300 other species of Senna that are found mainly in tropical areas of the Americas but also in Africa. Our fog and mild climate permit many plants like Senna to thrive at the Garden, giving them extra moisture and moderate temperatures.
IN BLOOM CONTRIBUTORS: Text: Kathy McNeil. Photos: Joanne Taylor, Mona Bourell.


text:
Midcoast Latest News | Vegan Cafe | Bangor Metro | Trump's Tweets | Today's Paper
Democratic state representative from Rockland resigns
Troy R. Bennett | BDN
State Rep. Elizabeth Dickerson, D-Rockland, in a 2013 BDN file photo.
By Stephen Betts, BDN Staff • January 11, 2015 11:13 am
ROCKLAND, Maine — State Rep. Elizabeth Dickerson, a second-term Democratic House member from Rockland, announced she is resigning.
Dickerson was re-elected in November to a second term from House District 93, which encompasses Rockland and Owls Head. She defeated Republican James Kalloch 1,744 to 1,612.
"After much thought and deliberation, I am announcing that I will resign the office of State Representative for District 93 this coming week. I am moving out-of-state for professional and personal opportunities that have developed since the election, but it is with a heavy heart that I leave Knox County and the Midcoast region," Dickerson said in a news release issued Sunday afternoon.
"It has been a privilege to serve the people of Rockland and Owls Head over the last two years. I want to thank the residents of the district for the honor of serving them in Augusta. I look forward to helping during this transition time and I thank everybody for allowing me to serve our communities," she said.
Dickerson posted a letter to the community to explain her decision. The site is http://www.elizabethdickerson.com/.
In December, Dickerson also resigned her position as a computer science teacher at Oceanside High School East in Rockland.
She recently moved to Colorado.
Dickerson was first elected to the Legislature in 2012, while serving her third term on the Rockland City Council. She did not seek re-election to the council when her term expired in 2013.
A special election will be held, although a date for that vote has yet to be scheduled. The political parties will also hold caucuses to nominate people for the special election.
The Democrats currently hold a majority in the House. Democrats hold 79 seats compared to 68 for Republicans and four independents.


There are 2 top-rated home cleaning services in your area.
Business Description: TLC Janitorial Offers Cleaning Services For Your Commercial & Domestic Needs.
Business Description: For professional flooring and tile cleaning and repair services in and around Medina and Jackson, Tennessee, please call CleanRite. Our team of experts offers a variety of high quality services from repair to cleaning to maintenance of interior and exterior flooring and tile.


Where is your center located?
Can you consult patient without his/her presence of the patient, not an Armenian citizen?
Yes, we consult by correspondence. To do this you need to send your existing medical records (information) by e-mail or fax.
Can I get a second opinion in your Center?
Yes, of course, in our center you can get a second opinion of our experts.
Can I get an appointment in the clinic without an entry to the clinic?
Pre-registration allows you to avoid queues, save your time and nerves. You can make an appointment by phone: 37 410 65 58 20 or 65 43 95, explaining the patient's condition.
Can the patient choose a doctor himself?
Yes, of course. We take into account the desire of patient.
Do you meet foreign patients at the airport?
Yes, patients tell us the date of their arrival and the flight number, based on the appointment of part-time consultation.
If a foreign patient cones to the clinic him/herself how he will stay at the clinic?
For these patients we provide a nurse, who stays with the patient during his stay in the hospital.
Do you conduct a study of the fetal heart in pregnant women? If so, when?
Yes, the Center is carries out utero fetal cardiac ultrasound examination during pregnancy, not later than 17-19 weeks in the Pediatric Clinic.
Do you take any patients who have an insurance policy?
We cooperate with the leading Insurance Companies of Armenia and international organizations. To be more exact, you can contact the Department of Finance Consultation: +37410 65 59 22.
Do you spend coronary stenting?
Yes, we perform such a coronary stenting coronary artery, as branches of the pulmonary artery, coarctation of the aorta, etc.
How long does the patient stay in hospital after stenting?
After stenting the patient stays in hospital for 1-2 days with no complications.
Can I hold you angiography? And for how long does the patient remain in hospital after coronary angiography?
Yes, after a survey if necessary you can have coronary angiography at our center. After coronary angiography the patient is discharged home the same or the next day.
What are the most common operations performed in the Center?
Adult patients often spend coronary artery bypass grafting, and the children - ventricular septal defect and Tetralogy of Fallot.
What is the statistics of survival after surgery?
The survival rate after cardiac surgery in NMMC has an average of 96.2%.
Can you carry out heart surgery on a newborn or to wait until a certain age? If so, to when?
Heart surgery in our center is performed according to the testimony, irrespective of the patient age. There are cases of severe congenital heart disease, when surgery is indicated in the first days of life.
Does your clinic do operations for a heart transplant?
In our Centre we carry out various operations on the heart and great vessels except transplantation.
What conditions are provided in the wards?
All rooms of cardiac surgery department are equipped with monitors and have all the conditions of life for a comfortable stay.
How long does the operated patient stay in the intensive care unit?
How long is the patient in hospital after surgery?
In the absence of possible complications the patient`s average stay in the hospital is 7-14 days.
Who can be located together with the patient and how long?
Visits are allowed in the intensive care unit and in the cardiac unit next to the patient .Time of visits should be limited.
In what currency is the cost of surgery paid?
Payment for the transaction is conducted in AMD or in cash to the account.
How many interventions do you spend in the year?
There are about 850 cardiac interventions / cardiac surgery /.
Do you use other treatments in addition to open heart surgery?
In the treatment of some congenital and acquired heart defects bloodless methods for closing defects with the help of special devices are used: balloon dilatation of narrowed blood vessels and valves, and hybrid operation.
Do you conduct treatment of congenital heart disease?
Yes, the treatment of congenital heart disease in our center is invasive and surgical.
0047, A. Armenakyan, 13, Yerevan, Armenia.


AfriBusiness, the civil society organisation aiming to protect the rights and interests of the business community and to ensure that the business community can participate in the South African economy on a fair and equal level like other communities, is inviting suitable candidates to apply for the post of Researcher-Spokesperson. The post is based in Kloofsig, Centurion.
The successful candidate will be responsible for research and liaison to promote free markets, property rights and business communities that are independent of the State.
editing, writing and compilation of opinion pieces, media statements, reports and other official documentation of the organisation.
Candidates must be available for the delivery of closed and public submissions, as well as act as spokesperson for the organisation.
a drive to deliver outputs independently, yet functions well in a team.
To qualify, candidates need an applicable degree and between 2 and 5 years' experience.
If you fit the profile, send an Afrikaans version of your CV to [email protected] by no later than 31 March 2018.
If you have not received any feedback within 3 weeks after the closing date, accept that your application was unsuccessful.
View the ad, in Afrikaans, on the AfriBusiness website.
Visit the AfriBusiness Facebook page.
Follow AfriBusiness on Twitter @AfriSake.


Having spent the better part of the last 20 years in health care, the only constant has been change … slow change in many respects. However, the last 5-10 years marked a period of rapid change with massive legislative reforms: from the creation of the ONC, implementation of the MU mandate and explosion of the marketplace from ACA, to the replacement of the SGR with MACRA. Many of my colleagues have argued it's been way too much, way too fast. We all agreed that change was needed, but none of us rarely agreed on exactly the best path to achieve the triple aim.
Depending on your perspective, and often political persuasion, we are either on a collision course, or on the path of redemption to stave off volume and induce value from our health care delivery system. However, many agree that technological innovations will continue to propel our industry towards this elusive goal to squeeze value from our health care delivery system. It has been my experience that trust is the fundamental ingredient needed to make change happen at scale. Although we have achieved rapid deployment of health care data digitization, we know that the information coming from our systems is suspect. As a result, we have lost the trust of key stakeholders necessary to make the shift from volume to value. Providers need to trust their data and patients need to trust their providers. Trust is critical when change is needed.
As we continue to make the shift to a value-based health care system, the veracity of the information provided from the proliferation of electronic data will become even more important; as we seek to measure the value we're getting from all of these reform efforts. In this spirit, NCQA applauds the latest CMS request for information regarding the direction they should head with respects to infusing veracity into the electronic quality measurement reporting framework of the future. Based on our 25 years of experience in collecting quality measures, we are pleased to provide our comments to CMS's request for information (CMS-3323-NC).
As NCQA's Chief Information Officer, Rick Moore is responsible for the vision and strategic direction of the Information Services, Information Technology and Information Products. He also works closely with NCQA's stakeholder partners and represents NCQA on leading several national health information technology initiatives and panels including the Health Information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP), the National Quality Forum (NQF) Health Information Technology Expert Panel (HITEP), the Markle Foundation's Steering Committee on Connecting for Health, and the American Medical Association (AMA) and NCQA Collaborative for Improving Quality Measurement in Electronic Health Records.


To celebrate realscreen's 15th anniversary, an all-star team of festival programmers and TV commissioners have united to select 15 emerging directors (or directing teams) that represent the future of feature-length non-fiction. Click through for the full list.
To celebrate realscreen's 15th anniversary, we've selected 15 emerging directors (or directing teams) that we think represent the future of feature-length non-fiction.
In making the selections, we assembled an all-star team of top-level festival programmers and TV commissioners, and asked them to pick their stars of tomorrow.
Who is the next Pennebaker, we demanded, or the new Herzog? Which directing duo could go on to match the feats of the Maysles, and which provocateur could reach the heights of Morris or Moore?
Beyond the final list of 15, the judges were falling over themselves to suggest other doc-makers worthy of inclusion. These included Maite Alberdi (The Lifeguard), Nina Pope and Karen Guthrie (Jaywick Escapes), Alison Klayman (Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry), Malika Zouhali-Worrall and Katherine Fairfax Wright (Call Me Kuchu), Neil Berkeley (Beauty is Embarrassing), Yance Ford (Strong Island), Angad Bhalla (Herman's House), Matthew Heineman (Escape Fire), Matthew Akers (Marina Abramovic: The Artist is Present), Dylan Southern and Will Lovelace (Shut Up and Play the Hits), Jeanie Finlay (Sound It Out), Rebecca Richmond Cohen (Code of the West), Pete Nicks (The Waiting Room), Joshua Oppenheimer (The Act of Killing), Treva Wurmfeld (Shepard & Dark), Dan Lindsay & TJ Martin (Undefeated), Bart Layton (The Imposter) and Alma Har'el (Bombay Beach).
Think the judges missed a name? Add your suggestions for hot doc director talent in the comments section below!


The Carolina Panthers are bringing in former Atlanta Falcons safety Thomas DeCoud for a visit, according to NFL Network.
He previously visited the Detroit Lions.
DeCoud was a Pro Bowl selection in 2012, but was due a $4.2 million base salary in 2014 and was released.
The Falcons saved $3 million in salary-cap space by cutting DeCoud.


Hand numbered, limited edition silver cassette. Only 25 made.
Includes unlimited streaming of (Flossy017) Dalembert S/T EP via the free Bandcamp app, plus high-quality download in MP3, FLAC and more.
The long awaited debut EP by sadboy acoustic pop punk artist Dalembert.
All sounds created, recorded by Dalembert. All lyrics by Dalembert. Dalembert is Sam Wilson.


Since crossing the big pond too long ago to count, the Goode family has dedicated itself to sharing the culinary convergence of our flavorful past: the salt of the Gulf, the soul of the South, the spice of Mexico and the sweet smoke of Texas. We discovered along the way that Houston, Texas food is but a portion of what we love to highlight about our homeland.
The Armadillo Palace is a celebration of true Houston, Texas food, music and culture. A destination for friends and family to break bread and make merry. Our BBQ, Mexican and Cajun kitchen is an invitation to sit down and savor everything that makes our buttons-pop-proud to be a Texan.
From live Texas tunes to live-fire barbecue pits, full-service bars to a full lineup of shows and events, the Armadillo Palace combines the communal atmosphere of a traditional Texas ranch house with an outdoor dining, dance and entertainment space of a BBQ, Mexican and Cajun kitchen, unmatched in Houston. Or anywhere, we dare say.
Whether you're visiting from across town or from across the Atlantic—grab a drink. Grab a partner. And come stay awhile.
This is how we serve Texas.