
Month: August 2011
-
CAPTAIN MORGAN’S PIRATE SHIP FOUND
-
The cargo has yet to be opened, but funder Captain Morgan USA hopes it’s rum.
THE GIST- The hull of a 17th-Century ship has been found near Panama.
- Archaeologists say it’s one of five ships that belonged to the pirate, Captain Henry Morgan.
Unopened cargo boxes and chests encrusted in coral were found near the wreck.
Captain Morgan, Chris BickfordThe lost wreckage of a ship belonging to 17th century pirate Captain Henry Morgan has been discovered in Panama, said a team of U.S. archaeologists — and the maker of Captain Morgan rum.
NEWS: World’s Oldest Heidsieck Champagne Found in Shipwreck
Near the Lajas Reef, where Morgan lost five ships in 1671 including his flagship “Satisfaction,” the team uncovered a portion of the starboard side of a wooden ship’s hull and a series of unopened cargo boxes and chests encrusted in coral.
The cargo has yet to be opened, but Captain Morgan USA — which sells the spiced rum named for the eponymous pirate — is clearly hoping there’s liquor in there.
“There’s definitely an irony in the situation,” Fritz Hanselmann an archaeologist with the River Systems Institute and the Center for Archaeological Studies at Texas State University and head of the dive team told KVUE Austin. The Captain Morgan rum group stepped in on the quest for Captain Morgan after team — which found a collection of iron cannons nearby — ran out of funds before they could narrow down the quest.
The new funding allowed the team to do a magnetometer survey, which looks for metal by finding any deviation in the earth’s magnetic field.
“When the opportunity arose for us to help make this discovery mission possible, it was a natural fit for us to get involved. The artifacts uncovered during this mission will help bring Henry Morgan and his adventures to life in a way never thought possible,” said Tom Herbst, brand director of Captain Morgan USA, in a statement.
In the 17th century, Captain Henry Morgan sailed as a privateer on behalf of England, defending the Crown’s interests and pioneering expeditions to the New World. In 1671, in an effort to capture Panama City and loosen the stronghold of Spain in the Caribbean, Morgan set out to take the Castillo de San Lorenzo, a Spanish fort on the cliff overlooking the entrance to the Chagres River, the only water passageway between the Caribbean and the capital city.
BLOG: Laser Defends Against Pirates
Although his men ultimately prevailed, Morgan lost five ships to the rough seas and shallow reef surrounding the fort.
The underwater research team included archaeologists and divers from Texas State University, volunteers from the National Park Service’s Submerged Resources Center and NOAA/UNC-Wilmington’s Aquarius Reef Base. And pirate booty or no, they said the story of Captain Henry Morgan was the real treasure.
“To us, the ship is the treasure — the story is the treasure,” Hanselman told MSNBC’s Alan Boyle. “And you don’t have a much better story than Captain Henry Morgan’s sack of Panama City and the loss of his five ships.”
Artifacts excavated by the dive team in 2010, including the six cannons, as well as any future relics will remain the property of the Panamanian government and will be preserved and displayed by the Patronato Panama Viejo.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE -
-
The London Riots are Neither Political Protest Nor “Mere” Hooliganism
Over at the National Review, Stanley Kurtz (mis)frames the London Riot political question as “whether such events should be seen primarily as political protests by the powerless, or as out-and-out lawbreaking and vandalism.” ThinkProgress then (mis)frames Kurtz’ article as an accusation that Obama secretly supports the mob.We’re never going to get the country on the same economic recovery page, friends, if we keep on misconstruing one another’s intentions as Satanic.
Negotiators, journalists, and, politicians well understand the power of framing. As an early draft of my Dummies Guide to Success as a Mediator (due out February ’12) explains,
A frame focuses the viewer’s attention on what’s inside the frame and excludes anything outside of it. If a photographer snaps a shot of all the medium height students in a fifth grade class, you’re unlikely to think about how tall or short they are. If he includes the shortest or the tallest, your attention focuses on height. If he includes one girl, you focus on gender.
The Question Raised by the London Riots is Not Whether It’s a Political Protest or Mere Hooliganism
Framing a question in an either/or fashion is a way of controlling the debate. The question does not permit the answer “neither” or “all of the above.” It does not allow for ambiguity and discourages discussion of anything outside the frame.
The London Riots are not a political protest. A political protest requires something to protest about. It requires forethought and planning. It requires a point of view. A mob does not have a point of view. Mob violence is an outbreak of lawlessness. Government officials who attempt to place it in a social and cultural context are doing their job. In our present political climate, however, doing that job gets you vilified. Going back to see what Obama said about the ’92 Los Angeles riots, Kurtz finds this quote:
The Los Angeles riots reflect a deep distrust and disaffection with the existing power pattern in our society.
Fair enough. The Los Angeles rioters were not making a political statement other than the mobs’ angry scream. There was, however, something to be angry about – the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped whilenight-sticking an African American motorist, Rodney King, right.But people get angry every day over injustices large and small. They do not normally burn down their own neighborhoods or loot their local stores as a result. Most urban riots reflect “disaffection with the existing power pattern” and the particular riots in Los Angeles also happened to reflect a justifiably “deep distrust” of L.A.’s then-corrupt and violent police force.
Obama’s pretty neutral academic sizing up of the Rodney King riots becomes, from the perspective of Kurtz at the National Review Alinsky-speak for “We’ve got to use the power of the angry underclass to put capitalism in check.” ThinkProgress then construes Alinksy-speak as code for Kurtz’ supposed opinion that Obama privately “supports” the violence in London today.
If It’s Not Protest and Not “Mere” Holliganism, What Is It?
When violent riots break out in a society known for the quiet queue and adherence to still quite fixed economic and social class boundaries, something has gone awry. As a student of conflict resolution, I know that active disputes – from angry shouting to keying your neighbor’s car to throwing bricks through store windows – arise primarily in two contexts – one having to do with identity and the other having to do with “relative deprivation.”
Because London’s present troubles do not appear to be identity (race or nationality or religious) based, they are more likely to have their origin in power and income inequity. We can think about eruptions of mob violence in the same way seismologists think about earthquakes. The world’s tectonic plates are constantly pushing up against one another. We do not experience continual earthquakes because they occur only when the pressure of one plate against another has accumulated enough frustrated momentum that something has to give and give it does, wreaking havoc on far larger scales than our human eruptions do.
People (civilized primates) are also constantly pushing up against one another, vying for physical space, for scarce resources and for the power to conduct their own affairs in their own fashion without undue interference from others. We live all of the time in competition for resources and space and power.
The Eruption of Perceived Inequities into Active Violence
Grievances are born and suppressed. Those grievances often become bitter resentments. Your boss wrongly fired you or your unemployment benefits ran out. Unless you’re seriously sociopathic, you’re not likely to retaliate with violence. You do, however, owe less allegiance to the “system” than you did yesterday. If you feel the “system” is rigged against you, you begin to push back against it. And then it pushes back against you, further marginalizing and alienating the people increasingly on the edges of the law-abiding society. The more marginalized you become, the more resentful you feel and and the less likely you are to obey the “rules” which appear to persistently benefit others and to exclude you.
A mob, unlike an earthquake, will generally not make the earth move under its feet absent an event that represents and expresses a common community injury. In the case of the L.A. riots, that event was the acquittal of white police officers by a white jury even though the officers were captured on videotape beating up an African American man well after he was “down” and “under control.” In London, it was the shooting and death of a Tottenham man who may have been armed but who had not himself opened fire on the police. The riot itself “grew out of a peaceful vigil . . . for the death of Mark Duggan that quickly spiraled out of control.”
The riots that erupt after the pressure has grown too large for testosterone- and alcohol-fueled young men in the doldrums of summer are not intentional protests against life’s inequities any more than the violence that follows British “football” games. They are, however, a sign of illness, of something out of whack in the society that gives rise to so many people expressing so much anger so self-destructively at the same time.
Just as a physician does not ask the disease what reforms it seeks from the body it is attacking or what bodily sectors it wants to overtake, the government and law-abiding citizens do not ask the mob just what it thinks its doing. The mob is the symptom. And the physician attends to the entire body to find the cause of the symptom. It is the physician’s job to effectively bring the entire organism back into harmonious relationship. Get it on its feet and working again.
If we make talking points of the London Riots instead of listening to the disease threatening the life of our patient, we will continue on our present course until the value of even our Google and Microsoft shares burn into cinders on the ground.
Jezebel has an excellent piece on the same topic today here. A taste of what British writer Laurie Penny is thinking about there below. Well worth clicking on the link and reading the entire post.
The people running Britain had absolutely no clue how desperate things had become. They thought that after thirty years of soaring inequality, in the middle of a recession, they could take away the last little things that gave people hope, the benefits, the jobs, the possibility of higher education, the support structures, and nothing would happen. They were wrong. And now my city is burning, and it will continue to burn until we stop the blanket condemnations and blind conjecture and try to understand just what has brought viral civil unrest to Britain. Let me give you a hint: it ain’t Twitter.
RELATED POSTS:
Copyright. 2011 Forbes.com All Rights Reserved
-
Concerns swirl over safety of ‘uncontacted’ Amazonian tribe
The whereabouts of a remote Amazonian tribe who appeared in remarkable footage earlier this year aiming bows and arrows at a plane flying over their jungle homes was unknown Monday after government officials sent to protect them were forced to abandon their post and flee from armed drug traffickers.
Traffickers crossed the border from Peru and threatened officials from the National Indigenous Foundation (Funai), the government body charged with protecting Brazil’s isolated Indians, a foundation spokesman said, underlining new threats for isolated Indians as traffickers seek new territory and routes.
“This is extremely distressing news,” says Stephen Corry, director of Survival International, an indigenous rights group based in the UK. “There is no knowing how many tribal peoples the drugs trade has wiped out in the past, but all possible measures should be taken to stop it happening again.”
The officials monitoring the tribe fled and the traffickers ransacked their jungle camp before Brazilian police reinforcements could reach the area.
Police have now retaken the base close to Brazil’s western border with Peru, and Funai officials are once again on the ground.
Two dozen officers tracked down and arrested one man, named as Joaquim Fadista. Mr. Fadista had already been detained in Brazil on trafficking charges and extradited to Peru. Officials believe Fadista was involved with a group trying to carve out new cross-border cocaine routes, or was working for loggers who covet the timber growing in the untouched forests where the group, called the Xinane, live. They are particularly worried at finding an arrow head in one of the trafficker’s abandoned backpacks.
“Arrows are like the identity card of uncontacted Indians,” says Carlos Travassos, the Funai official in charge of the isolated Indians division. “We think the Peruvians made the Indians flee…We are more concerned than ever. This could be one of the biggest blows in decades to the work of protecting isolated Indians.”
Although Funai sent an official report on the events, it did not mention the whereabouts of the Xinane and it is not known if they are safe. Officials hope they fled the commotion and sought refuge deeper in the forest.
The Xinane came to worldwide prominence at the start of this year after they were filmed for a BBC nature program. The incredible scenes showed the clearly frightened Indians pointing bows and arrows at the plane flying overhead.
The footage turned them into unlikely – albeit unknown – celebrities and indigenous rights activists were today lamenting the developments and praying for their safety. “The world’s attention should be on these uncontacted Indians, just as it was at the beginning of this year when they were first captured on film,” says Mr.Corry. Isolated Indian tribes like the Xinane are often kept on reservations for what officials say is their own good. Funai creates the fenced-off areas not to keep the Indians in, but to keep loggers, farmers, miners, and other threats out.
The policy is designed to protect the Indians and allow them to continue to live the same way they have lived for centuries.
Around 18 percent of the Amazon has been chopped down, and although deforestation rates have slowed in recent years, there are traces or reports of 39 uncontacted tribes still living in remote parts of the rainforest.
Today, there are around 350,000 Indians in Brazil, down from between 3 and 5 million before European colonizers arrived.
Copyright. 2011. Christian Science Monitor. All Rights Reserved
-
Exclusive: Operation Shady rat—Unprecedented Cyber-espionage Campaign and Intellectual-Propert
NATIONAL SECURITY
For at least five years, a high-level hacking campaign—dubbed Operation Shady rat—has infiltrated the computer systems of national governments, global corporations, nonprofits, and other organizations, with more than 70 victims in 14 countries. Lifted from these highly secure servers, among other sensitive property: countless government secrets, e-mail archives, legal contracts, and design schematics. Here, Vanity Fair’s Michael Joseph Gross breaks the news of Operation Shady rat’s existence—and speaks to the McAfee cyber-security expert who discovered it. Related: “Enter the Cyber-dragon”.
WEB EXCLUSIVE AUGUST 2, 2011
Photographs by Molly Riley/Reuters/Landov (Hillary) and Paul Sakuma/A.P. Images (Google); illustration by Brad Holland (center).
When the history of 2011 is written, it may well be remembered as the Year of the Hack.
Long before the saga of News of the World phone hacking began, stories of computer breaches were breaking almost every week. In recent months, Sony, Fox, the British National Health Service, and the Web sites of PBS, the U.S. Senate, and the C.I.A., among others, have all fallen victim to highly publicized cyber-attacks. Many of the breaches have been attributed to the groups Anonymous and LulzSec. Dmitri Alperovitch, vice president of threat research at the cyber-security firm McAfee, says that for him, “it’s been really hard to watch the news of this Anonymous and LulzSec stuff, because most of what they do, defacing Web sites and running denial-of-service attacks, is not serious. It’s really just nuisance.”
“Just nuisance,” that is, compared with a five-year campaign of hacks that Alperovitch discovered and named Operation Shady rat—a campaign that continues even now, and is being reported for the first time today, by vanityfair.com, and in a lengthier report on the larger problem of industrial cyber-espionage in the September issue of Vanity Fair. Operation Shady rat ranks with Operation Aurora (the attack on Google and many other companies in 2010) as among the most significant and potentially damaging acts of cyber-espionage yet made public. Operation Shady rat has been stealing valuable intellectual property (including government secrets, e-mail archives, legal contracts, negotiation plans for business activities, and design schematics) from more than 70 public- and private-sector organizations in 14 countries. The list of victims, which ranges from national governments to global corporations to tiny nonprofits, demonstrates with unprecedented clarity the universal scope of cyber-espionage and the vulnerability of organizations in almost every category imaginable. In Washington, where policymakers are struggling to chart a strategy for combating cyber-espionage, Operation Shady rat is already drawing attention at high levels. Last week, Alperovitch provided confidential briefings on Shady rat to senior White House officials, executive-branch agencies, and congressional-committee staff. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, reviewed the McAfee report on Shady rat and wrote in an e-mail to Vanity Fair: “This is further evidence that we need a strong cyber-defense system in this country, and that we need to start applying pressure to other countries to make sure they do more to stop cyber hacking emanating from their borders.” McAfee says that victims include government agencies in the United States, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, and Canada, the Olympic committees in three countries, and the International Olympic Committee. Rounding out the list of countries where Shady rat hacked into computer networks: Japan, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Indonesia, Denmark, Singapore, Hong Kong, Germany, and India. The vast majority of victims—49—were U.S.-based companies, government agencies, and nonprofits. The category most heavily targeted was defense contractors—13 in all.
In addition to the International Olympic Committee, the only other victims that McAfee has publicly named are the World Anti-doping Agency, the United Nations, and ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (whose members are Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Burma [Myanmar], Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam).
In an e-mail to vanityfair.com, I.O.C. communications director Mark Adams wrote, “If proved true, such allegations would be disturbing. However, the IOC is transparent in its operations and has no secrets that would compromise either our operations or our reputation.” WADA spokesman Terence O’Rourke wrote in an e-mail that “WADA is constantly alert to the dangers of cyber hacking and maintains a vigilant security system on all of its computer programs.” He added that “WADA’s Anti-Doping Administration & Management System (ADAMS), which is on a completely different server to WADA’s emails, has never been compromised and remains a highly-secure system for the retention of athlete data.”
A prominent cyber-security expert who was briefed by McAfee on the intrusions says that the Associated Press was also a victim. McAfee declined to comment on that suggestion. Jack Stokes, A.P. media-relations manager, said, “We don’t comment on our network security,” when I asked if it was true that the A.P. was among Shady rat’s victims. Alperovitch believes the hacking was state-sponsored, pointing to Shady rat’s targeting of Olympic committees and political nonprofits as evidence, and contending that “[t]here’s no economic gain” to spying on them. Citing McAfee company policy, he refused to speculate on which country was behind Shady rat.
One leading cyber-espionage expert, however, thinks the likely culprit’s identity is clear. “All the signs point to China,” says James A. Lewis, director and senior fellow of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, adding, “Who else spies on Taiwan?”
Alperovitch first picked up the trail of Shady rat in early 2009, when a McAfee client, a U.S. defense contractor, identified suspicious programs running on its network. Forensic investigation revealed that the defense contractor had been hit by a species of malware that had never been seen before: a spear-phishing e-mail containing a link to a Web page that, when clicked, automatically loaded a malicious program—a remote-access tool, or rat—onto the victim’s computer. The rat opened the door for a live intruder to get on the network, escalate user privileges, and begin exfiltrating data. After identifying the command-and-control server, located in a Western country, that operated this piece of malware, McAfee blocked its own clients from connecting to that server. Only this March, however, did Alperovitch finally discover the logs stored on the attackers’ servers. This allowed McAfee to identify the victims by name (using their Internet Protocol [I.P.] addresses) and to track the pattern of infections in detail.
The evolution of Shady rat’s activity provides more circumstantial evidence of Chinese involvement in the hacks. The operation targeted a broad range of public- and private-sector organizations in almost every country in Southeast Asia—but none in China. And most of Shady rat’s targets are known to be of interest to the People’s Republic. In 2006, or perhaps earlier, the intrusions began by targeting eight organizations, including South Korean steel and construction companies, a South Korean government agency, a U.S. Department of Energy laboratory, a U.S. real-estate company, international-trade organizations of Western and Asian nations, and the ASEAN Secretariat. (According to McAfee’s “Operation Shady rat” white paper, “[t]hat last intrusion began in October [2006], a month prior to the organization’s annual summit in Singapore, and continued for another 10 months.”) In 2007, the activity ramped up to hit 29 organizations. In addition to those previously targeted, new victims included a technology company owned by the Vietnamese government, four U.S. defense contractors, a U.S. federal-government agency, U.S. state and county government organizations, a computer-network-security company—and the national Olympic committees of two countries in Asia and one in the West, as well as the I.O.C. The Olympic organizations, strikingly, were targeted in the months leading up to the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. Shady rat’s activity continued to build in 2008, when it infiltrated the networks of 36 organizations, including the United Nations—and reached a crest of 38 organizations, including the World Anti-doping Agency, in 2009. Since then, the victim numbers have been dropping, but the activity continues. Shady rat’s command-and-control server is still operating, and some organizations, including the World Anti-doping Agency, were still under attack as of last month. (As of Tuesday, according to a WADA spokesman, the group was unaware of any breach, but “WADA is investigating” McAfee’s discovery.) The longest compromise duration—“on and off for 28 months,” according to McAfee’s report—was one Asian country’s Olympic committee. Many others were compromised for two full years. Nine organizations were compromised for one month or less. All others were compromised for a minimum of one month, potentially allowing for complete access to all data on their servers.
Alperovitch says that McAfee is “working closely with U.S.government agencies, a variety of them, law enforcement and others,” in hopes of eventually shutting down Shady rat’s command-and-control server. (He declined to say whether U.S. intelligence agencies are involved in the investigation.)
Alperovitch’s diagnosis of the problem raised by Shady rat is troubling: “It’s clear from this and other attacks we’ve been witnessing that there is an unprecedented transfer of wealth in the form of trade secrets and I.P., primarily from Western organizations and companies, falling off the truck and disappearing into massive electronic archives. What is happening to this data? Is this being accumulated in a giant, Indiana Jones–type warehouse? Or is it being used to create new products? If it’s the latter, we won’t know for a number of years. But if so, it’s not just a problem for these companies, but also for the governments of the countries where these companies are located, because they’re losing their economic advantage to competitors in other parts of the world overnight. That is a national-security problem, insofar as it leads to loss of jobs and lost economic growth. That’s a serious threat.”
His account of attempting to inform some of Shady rat’s victims may be even more troubling. Some victims seem determined to deny they’ve been attacked, even when offered empirical proof that a smash-and-grab has taken place. Two weeks ago, McAfee sent e-mails to officials at four organizations, informing them that their computer networks had been compromised. To each, Alperovitch wrote, “We would be glad to work with you and provide our assistance … to help you determine the impact of the intrusion … or how to prevent this type of infiltration in the future.” Three of those organizations—including one whose breach is ongoing—made no response to McAfee’s notifications. Even after McAfee’s second attempt to offer information about the breaches to two of the groups, Alperovitch says, they expressed no interest in learning details of the intrusions. The spokesman for one of those organizations, WADA, told me that he considered Alperovitch’s first e-mail to be “spam.” He said, “We are conducting our own investigation of the allegations.” When asked why WADA chose not to accept McAfee’s offer to provide detailed information that could help in that investigation, the spokesman answered, “I am under no obligation to answer your questions about my investigation.” (Later that day, according to McAfee, WADA did request information concerning the attack.)
“We’ve seen this before,” Alperovitch says. “Victims don’t want to know they’re victims. I guess that’s just victim psychology: if you don’t know about it, it’s not really happening.”
-
Domenicali: Alonso better than Schumacher in Some Ways
Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali believes that Fernando Alonso is not only the best driver in Formula 1, but that in some ways he is better than Michael Schumacher – who won five world titles with the Italian outfit.Domenicali, speaking at the Wrooom Summer 2011 event at Madonna di Campiglio, said that Alonso has bonded with Ferrari much faster than Schumacher did when he joined in the winter of 1995
“For me, Fernando is the number one driver in F1 at the moment,” said Domenicali. “I see a lot of similarities with Michael Schumacher, a driver who made his mark on our history. In fact, in some areas Fernando is even better, for example when I think of the speed with which he integrated himself into the team and the way he became its leader.
“In this he was much quicker than Michael who took a while to do that.”
When told of this Alonso responded: “I don’t know what to say, except that I immediately felt comfortable at Ferrari.
“But it would be very difficult to repeat what Michael did, because things are very different now to what they were a decade ago. Having said that, I am currently experiencing the best years of my career and that makes me very optimistic for the future.”
Domenicali added that he believed Felipe Massa was also turning his season around, having come in from criticism earlier in the season for not matching Alonso’s pace.
“I have seen that he was clearly on the up in the last three races and I am sure he will do very well in the second part of the year,” said Domenicali. “Felipe has to stay calm and make the most of his talents, of which there are many: he is a very quick driver over a single lap, but maybe he needs to improve a bit in terms of his consistency in the races.
“It is definitely not easy being paired with someone like Fernando, but that should be a motivation for him not an excuse. For us, it is vital for Felipe to be on top of his game, given that for at least another year and a half, he is one of our drivers.”
Alonso added that he was very happy to be driving alongside Massa, but added that he would not be concerned about being teamed with anyone – including his old McLaren nemesis Lewis Hamilton.
Asked what he thought of Sebastian Vettel and Hamilton’s remarks that they would not rule out joining Ferrari at some point in their careers, Alonso replied: “It seems a normal thing to say: all drivers want to race for Ferrari. Some might say it openly, others deny it even if they are thinking it.
“For my part, it makes me feel even more privileged, because I am at Ferrari now and I will be for many years to come, at least to the end of 2016. I am very happy to have Felipe as a team-mate and we work very well together.
“If the day arrives when someone else was to come here, that would not be a problem for me, even if it was Hamilton.”
Domenicali though said he thought it unlikely that Hamilton would be a part of the Ferrari set-up anytime in the near future.
“I am pleased he said never say never on the subject of Ferrari, in fact it is logical that everyone aspires to come to Maranello sooner or later, given what we represent in the history of this sport,” he said. “Having said that, I don’t think the question will arise, neither in the short nor in the long term.
“For the Ferrari of the future, I believe the right combination is to have one well established driver with great experience, alongside a talented youngster on the way up. I do not think that, with the pressure we are under, we can consider having two youngsters in the team at the same time.”
Copyright. 2011 Autosport.com All Rights Reserved
-
Paying for News? It’s Nothing New
August 6, 2011By JEREMY W. PETERS
Jeremy W. Peters is a media reporter for The New York Times.
IN April 1912, the surviving operator of the Titanic’s wireless communications system was paid a handsome sum for his account of narrowly escaping death aboard the sinking ship.
It will probably surprise some journalistic purists to learn that the news outlet that forked over $1,000 for Harold Bride’s harrowing tale — multiple times his annual salary — was not some sensationalist purveyor of yellow journalism, but The New York Times.
Evolving standards or no, checkbook journalism has been a persistent and problematic feature of news coverage at even the most powerful and reputable news organizations, long predating the hyper-competitive 24-hour cable news cycle and the celebrity gossip boom.
And the issue is not likely to disappear anytime soon, even with ABC News’s contrite acknowledgment last month that to protect its reputation, it would have to cut back on the kinds of payments that have helped the network score a string of major exclusives in recent years. In Britain, public tolerance seems to have reached its limit with revelations that journalists working for Rupert Murdoch’s recently closed News of the World routinely paid the police for information as well as hacked the phones of crime victims.
Far from existing at the periphery of journalism and society, the payments have reached the highest levels of politics. Newsmakers who have been cut large checks over the years include not just players in courtroom melodramas like the Casey Anthony and O. J. Simpson trials, but former presidents.
When the British journalist David Frost secured his interview with Richard M. Nixon in 1976, it was because he outbid his American competitors, offering the former president a staggering sum of $600,000. But Mr. Nixon wasn’t the only ex-president paid to appear on camera. Dwight D. Eisenhower and Lyndon B. Johnson both received sums from CBS News for sitting for interviews after they left office.
Networks have long employed the use of high-dollar consulting contracts, which allow them to effectively place prominent political figures on retainer. Gerald R. Ford and former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger signed exclusive arrangements, each reported to be in the $1 million range, as NBC News consultants. Exclusive consulting arrangements exist today most visibly on Fox News, with its hiring of Sarah Palin, Karl Rove and other prominent Republicans as contributors.
Every so often, instances of checkbook journalism produce enough of an outcry that the media business does some soul-searching, as it is doing now. ABC News in particular is under scrutiny for a flurry of payments in pursuit of sought-after news subjects like Ms. Anthony, the mother tried and acquitted in the death of her young daughter; Jaycee Lee Dugard, a kidnapping victim held in captivity for almost a decade; and Meagan Broussard, the 26-year-old who received lewd photos from Anthony D. Weiner, the congressman who later resigned.
After each revelation that money has changed hands in pursuit of a major scoop, a familiar cycle of denial followed by a carefully parsed explanation tends to emerge. News outlets twist themselves into logical knots insisting that they do not pay for interviews. The payment is always for something else, tangible or intangible, like one’s time or the rights to memorabilia. It is a rare but sometimes necessary evil, they say.
The jargon may be different now, but the debate has been the same for decades. Before there were licensing fees — the arrangement popular with news outlets today, in which they pay an interview subject to broadcast personal photos or video — there were “memoir” fees paid to newsmakers for recounting their stories at length. Esquire, for instance, paid $20,000 in 1970 to William L. Calley Jr., the Army lieutenant at the center of the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, for his “confessions,” which the magazine used as the basis for a series of articles.
One of the biggest controversies over such payments erupted in 1975 after CBS News coughed up a reported $100,000 for an extended interview with the former Nixon chief of staff H. R. Haldeman, who spent 18 months in prison for his role in the Watergate scandal.
At the time, Robert Chandler, a CBS vice president, justified the payment as “a memoir of his five years at the White House. That’s different from paying for a breaking news story.”
The CBS rationalization — after all, its payment was little different from a hefty book advance to a controversial figure — shows that the issue of paying for news is rarely black and white.
More than 30 years later, the gray areas are as opaque as ever. ABC News is correct when it says a $200,000 payment for videos of Ms. Anthony’s dead daughter didn’t violate network policy. It didn’t pay for an interview, after all. But it did indirectly subsidize Ms. Anthony’s lawyers, who used the money for her legal defense.
It wasn’t the first time a news outlet had subsidized the defense of prominent criminal suspect. During the Lindbergh kidnapping trial in 1935, Hearst Newspapers paid for a high-profile attorney to defend the man accused, Bruno Hauptmann, in an arrangement that guaranteed them exclusive access.
Experts said the practice of paying for news might not keep embarrassing news organizations if they weren’t so murky about their standards.
“It has been handled in a fairly dishonest way by news organizations that view it as a disreputable practice,” said Lorna Veraldi, an associate professor of journalism and mass communications at Florida International University, who has studied and written about the issue. “They pretend not to engage in it by paying for memoirs or for photographs, but that has made it a subject of more outrage.”
Just how much outrage is focused on the issue is difficult to gauge. Indeed, part of the reason checkbook journalism endures could be that most Americans don’t see it as a major offense.
“I’ll be honest with you,” said Kevin Z. Smith, chairman of the ethics committee of the Society of Professional Journalists, “there’s no groundswell from citizens’ groups’ saying, stop paying for stories because you’re tainting the truth.”
For now, though, ABC News has acknowledged that paying for exclusives harms its reputation, and a criminal inquiry is unfolding in Britain.
But experts said don’t be surprised if checkbook journalism resurfaces, perhaps under another guise.
“These news organizations will have to feign shock and horror and figure out another way to do it surreptitiously,” said Robert Boynton, director of the long-form journalism program at the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute at New York University.
“It goes on because money is the literal coin of the realm. It is going to continue no matter what.”
Copyright. 2011. The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved.
-
Google Plus Could Be the Fastest-Growing Site in Histor

Google+may be the fastest-growing site in historyGoogle+ now has 25 million users, according to analytics firm comScore. That’s very impressive, especially considering that the site is working off an invitation-only model for expansion.In a Reuters report, comScore said that number cements the new network as the fastest-growing Web site in history. Google launched its network in late June and is currently growing at a rate of one million users per day, the report said.
So does that mean that Google+ is going to take over the social networking sector? Don’t jump to conclusions so quickly.
For one thing, Google+ has the advantage of being the newest kid on the block at a time when users are increasingly willing to join social networks. Google has a huge userbase to build from and — as my Post colleague Ezra Klein pointed out — gives this plugged-in generation the chance to make a digital fresh start.
The report points out that Facebook hit 25 million users in three years, while Twitter took just 30 months.
Early growth doesn’t necessarily mean lasting success. MySpace only took two years to hit 25 million users. Now the network has been sold by News Corp. for far less than its asking price and is looking to the star power of Justin Timberlake to revive its flagging numbers.
And, really, you need to look no further than Google’s own past to see a social network that fell as fast as it rose — Google’s Buzz was the hot limited-release ticket (at first, anyway) until privacy concerns and a lack of interest knocked it flat.
Do you think Google+ is here to stay? Or is it another flash in the pan?
Related stories:
More technology coverage from The Post
Nexus S is free at Best Buy today
Report: Google Plus seeing a traffic slump
GALLERY: Click the image above to view the gallery.
By Hayley Tsukayama | 10:50 AM ET, 08/03/2011
©2005-2011 Mashable, Inc.
Reproduction without explicit permission is prohibited. All Rights Reserved. -
Many happy returns! World Wide Web celebrates its 20th birthday
- First web page born on August 6, 1991
- Now there are more than 19.68billion pages
Last updated at 12:29 PM on 7th August 2011
It began as a simple page of links that allowed a group of scientists to share data in the confines of their laboratories.
But in the 20 years since, it has become an inextricable part of the lives of billions of people.
The World Wide Web (WWW) was born on August 6, 1991, when the first web page was launched on the internet by Sir Tim Berners-Lee.
Basic: Sir Tim Berners-Lee’s first web site was simply a page of links to allow scientists to share data and news
The London-born physicist and computer scientist was working at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva when he sought to find a better way for his colleagues to link up.
He first proposed the WWW in 1989 and posted a prophetic summary of the project on the alt.hypertext newsgroup, saying: ‘The WWW project aims to allow all links to be made to any information anywhere.’
The first website – http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html – was hosted at the rather cryptic URL nxoc01.cern.ch.
Revolutionary: Sir Tim Berners-Lee was named Greatest Briton at the Great Britons 2004 Awards for his invention of the World Wide Web
This NeXT Computer used by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN became the first web server
When it went live, Sir Berners-Lee, 56, said: ‘We are very interested in spreading the web to other areas and having gateway servers for other data. Collaborators welcome.’
And collaborate they did. By 1992, there were 50 web servers around the world and, as of Friday, there were 19.68billion pages – more than three times the world’s population.
In between, it has been the platform for the boom and bust of dot-com businesses in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the inexorable rise of social networking, Google and YouTube, and the more sinister art of cyber crime.
Searching power: The rise of Google has made it even easier to find and access information over the web
Rise of the World Wide Web
-
Domain names that now form the base of the web network, pre-date the first web site by six years.
The first commercial domain name, symbolics.com, was registered on March 15, 1985.
The phrase ‘surfing the internet’ was coined by author Jean Armour Polly in June 1992.
Archie was the first tool to search the internet.
In 2008, mobile access to the web exceeded desktop computer-based access for the first time.
According to worldwidewebsize.com, the web now contains of least 19.68 billion pages – more than three times the world’s population.
The WWW should not be confused with the internet. They are related, but not the same.
The term internet, coined in 1974, refers to the vast networking infrastructure that connects millions of computers, while the WWW is the method of accessing information over the internet through web pages.
Berners-Lee isn’t credited with connecting up all the computers – he developed three technologies that made it possible for users to better find and share information among these connected systems.
The first development were uniform resource locators (URLs), which are like mailing addresses for information.
The second is HyperText Markup Language (HTML), which is the code a web browser needs to show the text, graphics and hyperlinking systems.
His third invention was the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) that enables requests and file transmissions to occur between Web browsers and web servers.
Keeping connected: Internet cafes would not exist were it not for the web
Apple CEO Steve Jobs shows how far web technology has come in 20 years when he reveals the iPad2 earlier this year
Copyright. 2011. DailyMail.com
-
London and European Equity Markets Tank on Dire Predictions.
- FTSE 100 index opens 190 points down at 5,203
- Asian markets in turmoil in response to global crisis
- Dow Jones also falls by more than 500 points closing down 4.3%
- Spanish and Italian markets drop 3%
- BoE holds interest rates at 0.5% for 29th month in row
Last updated at 9:01 AM on 5th August 2011
London shares have plunged by another 3.5 per cent this morning as investors panicked over the prospect of world financial meltdown.
The FTSE 100 index dropped sharply again on the open to stand 190 points down at 5,203 as world stock markets endure their biggest rout since the height of the financial crisis three years ago.
Part taxpayer-owned bank RBS was a notable casualty in the Footsie: its shares lost 12% or 3.76p to 26.52p after it reported a big hit to profits from Greek sovereign debt write-offs.
Concerns that the U.S. may be facing another recession and worries Europe’s sovereign debt crisis is threatening to engulf two of its largest economies saw markets descend into panic yesterday.
Wall Street sustained its worst sell-off since the global financial crisis last night, with the Dow Jones losing 4.31 per cent – the largest drop since October 2008 and its ninth plunge in ten days.
This morning, Asian markets were the latest to suffer, with Japan’s Nikkei down more than 4 per cent and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng down 4.79 per cent.
Nervous times: London traders will be eyeing the sell-off nervously this morning
According to one trader, equity markets ‘are heading into the weekend break in a state of absolute panic’.
‘There’s quite literally no support being seen in the market despite previous assertions that even with the outlook being so shaky, equities are left looking increasingly cheap,’ Cameron Peacock, market analyst at IG Markets.
The FTSE 100 index saw £50billion wiped off the value of Britain’s biggest companies yesterday, bringing a total fall of £125billion in the space of only a week.
The Footsie’s worst recorded weekly session was October 2008 when the index lost 1,048 points: as of last night’s close, the index had lost 422 points since Monday.
‘Obviously the question everyone is now asking is precisely just how protracted this rout will prove to be…’ said Peacock.
‘We can expect the focus to be increasingly turning to the non-farm payrolls to see if a glimmer of hope can be found here … but a shortfall is likely to result in more simply joining the exodus.’
Today’s U.S. jobs data could prove a make-or-break moment for global financial markets increasingly alarmed that the world’s largest economy could skid into a fresh recession.
The latest meltdown was also triggered by the failure of European leaders to deal with the debt crisis crippling the single currency.
In a dramatic admission of the scale of the single currency crisis, European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso conceded for the first time that major eurozone economies are now in danger.
The Brussels boss warned that the debt maelstrom means Spain and Italy may be too big to rescue.
But he also called for a dramatic increase in eurozone funds for future bailouts, which could mean British taxpayers forced to contribute through the International Monetary Fund.
British taxpayers have already stumped up around £13billion to rescue Greece, Ireland and Portugal, with Rome and Madrid tipped as the next dominos to fall.
To make matters worse, the United States has been hit by a torrent of bleak economic news, triggering fears that it is heading for a double-dip recession. Unemployment figures today could wreak further havoc in the financial markets.
One trader said the turmoil was reminiscent of the start of the banking crisis in 2008 when shares plunged day after day before the global economy fell into recession.
The market turmoil comes at a difficult time for the UK Government because David Cameron, Chancellor George Osborne and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg are all abroad on holiday. If it continues, MPs are likely to call for them to return to safeguard Britain’s interests.
The FTSE 100 index fell 191.37 points or 3.43 per cent to 5393.14 – its lowest level since September last year.
The FTSE 250 – often seen as a better barometer of the UK economy because it contains fewer foreign companies – dropped even further, by 3.86 per cent.
It was the fifth straight day of heavy selling in London and came as fearful investors dumped shares and other risky assets and piled their money into safe-havens such as gold.
But even gold was not immune to the turmoil. After soaring to a record high above $1,680 an ounce, it dropped below $1,650 as rattled investors sold bullion to cover losses in the stock market.
The loss of confidence in financial markets threatens to spread to the wider economy as shareholders suffer heavy losses and workers and pensioners see their retirement pots dwindle.
The bloodbath in London was echoed around the world with the French stock market down 3.9 per cent in Paris and the German index off 3.4 per cent in Frankfurt. The Italian stock market sank more than 5 per cent in Milan, making it the biggest faller in Europe.
Fears are mounting that Italy and Spain will not be able to repay their debts and may require bailouts worth hundreds of billions of pounds.
Mr Barroso did little to reassure the financial markets when he warned that the crisis is spreading and more money was needed in the emergency pot.
In a letter to European leaders, he also criticised last month’s second bailout of Greece, which has failed to stem the rising panic on financial markets.
Mr Barroso said ‘the complexity and incompleteness’ of the package had led to ‘a growing scepticism among investors about the systemic capacity of the euro area to respond to the evolving crisis’.
He said the £380billion fund should be significantly enlarged.
‘We are no longer managing a crisis just in the euro area periphery,’ said Mr Barroso. ‘Euro area financial stability must be safeguarded.’






COMMENTS (10