Sources of Information

____________________________________
MUMBAI ATTACKS
5 SOURCES OF INFORMATION
___________________________________

The November 2008 Mumbai attacks were a series of coordinated terrorist attacks across Mumbai, India’s financial capital and largest city. The attacks began on November 26 2008 and ended on November 29, 2008 when Indian security forced back control of all attack sites. More than one hundred people were killed and at least three hundred were injured in the attacks.

The Mumbai attacks prove that the news is not dead. It is all around. Some are better than others, while some give a new perspective, or new vessel in which to reach it. in any case, these five sources exhibit some of the best news coverage of the attacks because they follow up and update their reports, give sources of information, and keep the reader interested on events that, even though happened thousands of miles away, still affect us and the world everyday.

These five credible sources did an exemplary job in the coverage of the attacks on Mumbai. Each brought an element to the table that aids the reader in understanding the situation, its investigation, and its resolutions.

1. CNN

CNN's information is based on sources that say that all of the attacks were "NO doubt" planned by Pakistan. Late edition with Wolf Blitzer had special coverage from this source, which made the coverage definitive. CNN has even responses from counter terrorist officials explaining their opinions and straight hard facts.

2. The Guardian

The Guardians coverage was spot on, and offered eye witness accounts of the attacks, making it easier for readers to relate and correspond to the similarities to other terrorist attacks (i.e. 9/11). Something that they also had was a daily update of the findings from investigations of the attacks on their website, which had its own sub section for the Mumbai attacks and its investigation.

“We were expecting the worst. We knew the hotel was on fire, we knew there were terrorists next door. We knew they might storm the room any second, the fire might engulf us, an explosive might go off. It seemed too many things were stacked against us. We were ready to die. We had no idea if we'd be there for one day or five days. The uncertainty was terrifying. We decided we wouldn't be separated. It didn't matter if we had to die, we wanted to be with one another.”
-Amrita Jhaveri, jeweler from London, there with her husband

3. BBC

The BBC website was most informative. What the BBC web site had that no other did was the minute by minute, hour by hour coverage of the attacks. From the first gun shots to the arresting of the remaining terrorist, the BBC World news coverage truly took the reader on a step by step journey of the attacks, which made for a better perspective of the situation.

4. Mumbai Mirror

The Mumbai Mirror, not as big as BBC or CNN, had excellent coverage of the attacks. An interesting part to this coverage is that unlike the World news programs, the attacks are considered city news, and in such fashion are covered with attention to every detail. The coverage also brought the effects of the massacre on a deeper level to the city. It offered a side that only a city paper/website can because it is happening in their “backyard”.

5. SAJA: South Asian Journalist Association

The SAJA used the growing technology of the age and applied it to great news coverage. The SAJA used web cats to cover the attacks, and out did eye witness accounts by having live radio updates as the attacks were happening, as well as the aftermath. In the coverage they also include interviews with several analysts and commentators to help in understanding who, what, where, why, how, and most importantly the why questions.

* At the same time, keeping up with the technology that we have at our disposal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m443AvZ0arQ
This clip is taken from the breaking news on CNN IBN. it shows footage of the attack, including the evacuation out of the hotel . It also includes a segment called "the terror time line" where the news correspondent explains in details how the attack exactly happened with location and time of the terrorists' moves. it shows recorded live footage of the terrorists attacking civilians and journalists.

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqeAALzAhKY
This clip is live footage of the terrorists who were caught on camera. It also includes sensational television footage of the hotels on fire, the hijacked police jeep shooting at people, the hostages looking out the window of the Taj, and the terrorists inside the hotel shooting and throwing grenades. As the news anchor explains, "these images will not be forgotten" and will make people realize the danger.

Put the Brakes on an Auto Bailout

Representatives for the big 3 car companies (General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler) were on capitol hill last week begging for money to keep their companies alive.


The cash deprived members of the auto industry arrived in Washington DC via corporate jets; a move that members of the House of Representatives did not take kindly to. At one point, a representative asked the 3 men who would be selling their private jets and returning to Michigan, the car capital of the US, in commercial aircraft. Nobody raised their hand.


"This is all part of what we signed up for after we made this request," said Rich Wagoner, the chief executive of GM after the hearing.


Wagoner along with Robert Nardelli of Chrysler and Alan Mulally of Ford were also criticized for poor business practices like failing to produce more fuel efficient vehicles like the Germans and Japanese auto makers have been doing.

As of November 25th, the auto makers haven't been given any money yet, but that doesn't mean it isn't going to happen. Senator Harry Reid, a democrat from Nevada, wanted to take $25 billion dollars of of the Wall Street bailout package and give it to the auto makers. Senate Republicans rejected the plan which killed it for a little while.

A compromise is however in the works that would free up $25 billion dollars that the auto makers would be receiving anyway sooner than expected. Sen Reid objected to that plan because the money was supposed to be used for developing more fuel efficient vehicles, according to The New York Times.

These bailouts, the Wall Street one and the proposed auto industry one are a bad idea. The US doesn't have the money to award businesses that behave badly. An extra $25 billion here and $700 billion there isn't there at all. IT DOESN'T EXIST! THEY'RE MAKING THE MONEY UP!

Whenever the government prints new money, the value of the money in your pocket goes down. Therefore, the price of goods and services goes up. This is called inflation. Inflation is bad.

We can't bailout car companies and banks because they did the wrong thing. You can be sure that no one is going to bail out the average citizen when they can't pay their bills. Why should these huge companies get help when they can't pay theirs?

Martin Eisenstadt Hoax

Question: Martin Eisenstadt hoax. What was it? What does it say about journalism today, in particular the coverage of the 2008 presidential race?

The Decisive Group
Response: As noted at ABC News, Martin Eisenstadt is just a fraud created by two filmmakers, Eitan Gorlin and Dan Mirvish, in an attempt to highlight today's media's "liberal use of anonymous sources." The two men essentially tricked the media into believing that Eisenstadt was a key political insider.

They have been using the fraudulent Eisenstadt through blog postings and video clips, which the media incorporated into their reports.

Of course, the most famous and recent instance of this was when Fox News reported that an anonymous John McCain aides stated that Sarah Palin doesn't know Africa is a continent. The suspicious "Martin Eisenstadt" came forward as the anonymous source. But after further investigation, William K. Wolfrum of the Shakespeare's Sister concluded that "There is no M. Thomas Eisenstadt. There is no Eisenstadt Group. There is no Harding Institute for Freedom and Democracy. M. Thomas Eisenstadt is a hoax."

It was later revealed that Eisenstadt was not the true source of Fox News correspondent Carl Cameron, which suggests that the Sarah Palin allegation may still be true.

It is also significant to note that Eisenstadt's previous hoax in which "he attempted to promote a smear aimed at Samuel Joe Wurzelbacher ("Joe the plumber"), whose verbal confrontation with Barack Obama had become the centerpiece of the McCain campaign's effort to paint Obama as a socialist who wants to raise everyone's taxes. Eisenstadt falsely claimed that Wurzelbacher had hidden connections to both the McCain campaign and to "Charles Keating of the Keating 5 scandal." That of course, was a complete lie, but it convinced a number of people.

More importantly, the Martin Eisenstadt hoax shows "the media's willingness to report (and the public's willingness to believe) unverified falsehoods." It shows that the media, perhaps in an effort to publish news quickly, fails to verify their sources. This can be a bit disturbing considering most people perceive the media (at least in the United States where there is freedom of press) to be reliable in the sense that it acts as a filter through which politicians and other public figures are put through to ensure the validity and credibility of their statements. But the Eisenstadt hoax completely shatters that belief and essentially questions the validity of the news we read, hear, and see in newspapers, radio broadcasts, and televised news, respectively. With today's standards of "whoever publishes first wins," it seems in the midst of competing for the latest story, they fail to complete the goals that journalism strives for, which is objectivity and factuality.

In terms of the 2008 Presidential Election, the Eisenstadt hoax has been going on for more than half a year and has certainly added unnecessary and unvalidated claims to the heated political battle. Many conservatives also cite the hoax as "proof that Sarah Palin is an unfairly maligned victim" and complain about "journalistic recklessness," which more information can be found below from the first source.Also, the Chicago Tribune's Frank James noted that "Sarah Palin deserves an apology."

Technosailor.com makes a number of conclusions that are significant and definitely worth discussing. "People tend to belief that which reinforces their expectations." That is certainly true of the Sarah Palin Africa story because people already had negative views about her after her SNL performance. It also states that "Modern Day journalism is about being first, not being right." "In an era of 24 hour news cycles, news organizations (and news bloggers too) have taken the tact that it’s better to be first than right."

-Pengbo Jiang & Anne Rivera (The Decisive Group)

Best source:
http://technosailor.com/2008/11/13/journalistic-recklessness/

Other sources:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=6250151&page=1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/10/martin-eisenstadt-non-exi_n_142785.html

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/11/14-3

Conservative Media Critical of McCain's Reputation as an Republican/ Obama used the Internet To His Advantage

Q:What was the impact of conservative media in cable television, the blogosphere, and talk radio on the McCain candidacy? How important to the Obama effort were his operations on the Web? What do these developments suggest about the resent and future of the media?

A: Promoting their selves to all of America, both John McCain and Barack Obama used the media as a way for American citizens to get to know them. For John McCain, in terms of conservative media, some were supportive while others were not. Some conservative radio talk show hosts described him as putting the Republican party's reputation in danger. During the time of the February primaries Rush Limbaugh claimed McCain (as well as Presidential candidate ,Republican Mike Huckabee) would "destroy the Republican Party". Some conservative republicans accused McCain of being not conservative enough with his ideas (especially on his unclear views on abortion & Roe vs. Wade) and back in February he declared himself a proud conservative liberal republican but he immediately corrected himself afterwards.

Other conservatives in the media did not approve of Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential candidate and/or the way he operated his campaign. In early October, conservative Bill Kristol ( Op-Ed columnist for the New York Times) wrote "It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed. He may be anyway."

President Elect Barack Obama used the World Wide Web as another method to benefit his campaign. Along with having his own website he also has a number of profiles on popular networking sites to use for his advantage including profiles on Myspace, Facebook, Youtube. As well as other social networking sites catering to a specific ethnic background and/or sexual orientation: Black Planet (popular site for African-Americans), Mi Gente (online community for latino/a's) , Asian Ave (social site for Asian-Americans) and Glee (social networking site for people of the LGBT community).

Using the Internet to campaign was a way to get the youth vote and be more well-known in the media. Media Channel(on Wordpress)'s quote from Julie Germany, Director of George Washington University’s Institute for Politics Democracy & the Internet states Obama's promotion online and how it was an advantage for him “What we’re talking about is a very sophisticated, very elaborate database that allowed the Obama campaign to micro target all of its efforts online and offline,” she said. “They used emails to communicate with people with messages relevant to their districts and relevant to the issues that they cared about and to organize and mobilize get-out-the-vote efforts,” Germany said."

With newspapers and magazines closing at what seems like a rapid rate, the popular use of the Internet in this year’s Presidential election shows that the future will consist mostly online than on paper.

-Ashley-Nicole Weatherington of The Team

Other Links to Check Out:
1) John McCain :Your Conservative Liberal Candidate for President
2) Conservative Media on McCain-Palin Campaign
3) Why Does Conservative Radio Hate John McCain?
4) Did The Internet Elect Obama?

THE END OF THE ROAD

Whether Republican or Democrat, black or white, young or old, tonight was a momentous event in everyones lives. This is the beginning of a new era, and a new frontier for the United States of America. Barack Obama is the new President of the United States, the first African-American President in the history of this country. Four states have shifted their party views. New Mexico, Iowa, Virginia, and a key battleground state, Ohio. Obama's victory stems from the shift in these states. Pennsylvania was also a very important state and Obama won that as well. Obama has reached out to the middle class, and the working class, as seen in his winning Pennsylvania and Ohio.
To be studying the oppression of African Americans in class, the time period where it was filled with chaos and turmoil due to the Civil Rights Acts and the Vietnam War and the need for change. Tonight, history has been written, and written clearly. Obama has won by a landslide, in a country that is in turmoil and chaos, due to a war in Iraq and an economy in shambles.
The support of the young voters for Obama was also very significant. 62% of 18-29 year olds voted for Obama. 59% of 30-44 year olds voted for Obama. 54% of 45-64 year olds voted for Obama. 56% of citizens 65 and over voted for Obama. Obama is the choice of the Americans.


It goes without saying that this is a very exciting moment for all of us (some more then others by the looks of the after party that is already starting on the lawn in front of my dorm). But when it comes time for reality to set in, what does this mean for the country. For one thing it is the begining of a new time in this country when people, no matter what race religon, or creed can be judged on the value of their character and not what they look like or believe in. At least that is the goal. Everyone should be able to agree that this is a change for the better. Obama has been the candidate for change and we can all hope that some of these changes will indeed occur and we can see a time in our near future when benefits will be available for the middle class, that Obama has been professing. As with any election I can't help but to remain cynical to a certain extent. How many of the planned changes will actually come to pass? But one thing is for sure, this election has sparked a nenewed interest in politics in the younger generation. I can't remember an election that was this closely followed by this many college aged students. I know that my most sincere hope is that this political fire that has come to light my
peers remains even now after this historical election has finished.
-Kaitlyn Mallory


This has been the most exciting presidential election in history with revitalized participation from young voters. The issues definitely determined the course of this election with the economy at the forefront. Barack Obama the first black president and a democrat surprisingly won states that consistently vote republican changing the electoral map, and making history. Ohio, Virginia, Iowa and Florida were key.The state of the economy and the war in Iraq has caused the majority of people to look beyond superficial things like race, gender. As president Obama has many challenges and people should not look for magic. John McCain gave a substantive concession speech supporting Obama.
-Glenda Montgomery

THE FREEDOM WRITERS

What Are the Polls Indicating?

According to the USA Today Presidential Poll, it is blantantly obvious that Obama has taken the lead. The difference between votes is not staggering, though the two have been closer in difference throughout April and May this year. Still, Obama has managed to dominate the East and West coasts, with McCain taking most of the Mid/Southwest and the South. And while the "Solid South" is known for upholding Republican ideals, it is interesting to note that Virginia, Florida, and Arkansas have been won by Obama.

The New York Times stated that Obama from the beginning has held a “stronger position than McCain.” And though he takes the lead now, it's in the end where the outcome of the election will tell us how accurate the polls are.

The Associated Press wrote on their site five days ago that Obama's seven point lead could be attributed to the fact that most people believe he is better suited to handle the economic crisis. However, there are people who doubt Obama's "socialist strategies" and were won over by McCain after the final presidential debate and his "Joe the Plumber" analogy. A recent survey has also noted that since September, McCain made modest gains among whites of both genders, now leading by 22 points among white men and by 7 among white women. Perhaps this surge from women is the result of nabbing Sarah Palin?

In the words of Sen. Obama “For those of you who are feeling giddy or cocky or think this is all set... I’ve been in these positions before, when we were favored and the press starts getting carried away and we end up getting spanked.”

Some may feel that where each candidate is favored shows just how complex this election is and the results could fall either way. However, the only result that truly matters will be determined by registered voters who do their part on November 4th.

-Garden Print