top
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

FOLLOWING THE MONEY: WHO FUNDS THE 'ALTERNATIVE' MEDIA?

by FOLLOW THE MONEY
This article suggests that some American 'alternative media' ain't so alternative, and is being funded by various Liberal foundations, the Democratic Party, and even implicates the CIA no less. No wonder Pacifica Radio and other "progressive" media have tried to silence debate about American Government complicity and involvement in the 9-11 attacks. Wonder who funds Indymedia?
Liberal Establishment Foundations, "Alternative" Media and Pacifica Radio:
Investigative Journalist Bob Feldman Follows the Money Trail

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The plan to centralize control of Pacifica Radio stations and to " mainstream" the organization into an inside-the-beltway player actually began to take shape during the tenure of Pat Scott's predecessor David Salniker, who now heads the Tides Foundation. Tides, as well as other "Liberal" foundations such as the MacArthur and Schumann Foundation have positioned themselves to have a major influence in the "alternative" media establishment by providing significant funding to Pacifica, as well as the Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) and the Institute for Alternative Journalism (IAJ). This is of particlualr concern, as Bob Feldman's piece belows outlines, because these foundations have ties to multi-nationals, the CIA and the Democratic Party establishment.

In 1992, Salniker presided over a plan of program centralization called "A Strategy for National Programming. (SNP) " This followed on a groundwork of financial and fundraising centralization which was already being put into place by Dick Bunce, who had been placed in the newly created position of National Development Director. In an introduction to the SNP, Bunce projected that an increase in large foundation grants could be achieved by emulating NPR.

Bob Feldman is a Massachusetts based investigative journalist who has researched the background of some of these so-called "progressive" foundations, where their money comes from, and how it is influencing the media sources they fund. In a letter published in the September 1998 issue of Z Magazine, Bob mentioned Democracy Now! had received funding from the Carnegie Foundation. We contacted Bob, who provided additional information regarding Carnegie and other foundation funders (L.G. 9/30/98)

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Glad to hear that you're sharing information about the role liberal establishment foundations have been playing in the alternative media world in recent years. Ironically, today on Democracy Now (which I generally like, despite its reluctance to report critically on the activities of liberal "progressive" establishment foundations) yet another former or present executive of the Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting [FAIR] group, Martin Lee, was given airtime on the show.

Yet I suspect that most folks who listen to either Democracy Now, Pacifica Network News or the Pacifica Radio-aired CounterSpin show of FAIR haven't been informed by the hosts of these shows that the FAIR/CounterSpin group has received the following foundation grants in recent years:


A $150,000 grant from PBS Commentator Bill Moyers Schumann Foundation on Sept. 25, 1995;
A $30,000 grant from the MacArthur Foundation (which is directed by ABC Radio News Commentator Paul Harvey) on October 3, 1995;
A $15,000 grant from the Schumann Foundation on April 8, 1996; and
A $45,000 grant from the MacArthur Foundation on May 14, 1996.
In addition, Working Assets also gave FAIR/CounterSpin a $59,723 grant on April 15, 1996.
Multi-billion dollar foundations like the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Foundation (which was directed by Clinton Administration Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin and Undersecretary of State Strobe Talbott until 1993) can encourage Pacifica radio producers to engage in self censorship with respect to providing their listeners with critical coverage of the profit-making, tax dodging, news management and grant distribution activity of these powerful Establishment institutions--by directly or indirectly funding shows like Democracy Now and FAIR/CounterSpin. Bill Moyers can discourage the FAIR media watchdog group from monitoring his PBS programs too critically over its Pacifica-aired CounterSpin program by funneling his Schumann Foundation's tax-exempt grant money to FAIR.

A conflict-of-interest may exist between providing Pacifica listeners with critical reporting about the role the Carnegie, MacArthur and Schumann Foundation plays in U.S. political life and society and the vested interest that groups like FAIR/CounterSpin have in not encouraging Pacifica listeners to examine how their foundations funders obtain and distribute their tax-exempt money.

The Chicago based MacArthur Foundation, for instance, made $500 million from the co-op/condominium conversion/gentrification process in Manhattan in the 1980s and operated the 10,000 unit Fresh Meadows apartment complex in partnership with the late billionaire Harry Helmsley's real estate firm until 1995. In addition, a current consultant to the MacArthur Foundation, Northwestern University President Henry Bienen, was employed as a CIA consultant between 1982 and 1989, according to Who's Who In America.

Yet I suspect Pacifica listeners rarely hear any discussion about some of these facts over the Pacifica network airwaves. In fact, when I appeared on a Pacifica-aired radio show, Undercurrents, in 1991 to discuss with FAIR executive director Jeff Cohen an article I had written (for the Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown) about the Rockefeller family's connection to a Times- Mirror-Newsday director, Mr. Cohen actually defended the Rockefeller family linked Newsday--without disclosing to Pacifica listeners that FAIR was then being subsidized by a $20,000 grant from the Rockefeller Family Fund.

Feel free to share the info about FAIR's liberal Establishment foundation sponsors with Pacifica listeners since--unlike even the Schumann Foundation sponsored liberal Columbia Journalism Review--FAIR's Extra! magazine doesn't often print the names of its foundation sponsors on its inside cover, for some strange reason.

You ask about the Tides Foundation. Well, in recent years the FAIR organization that produces the CounterSpin show which Pacifica airs has also been funded by the Tides Foundation. In 1994 the Tides Foundation gave FAIR an $11,000 grant. On August 30, 1995 the Tides Foundation gave FAIR a $5,000 grant. And On January 18, 1996, an additional grant of $20,000 was funneled to the group that produces the Pacifica-aired CounterSpin by the Tides Foundation. And I suspect that few folks who criticize the Tides Foundation's activities from a radical left perspective have been given much airtime on CounterSpin in recent years.

The U.S. Trust Co. of Boston which invests the Tides Foundation's "socially responsible" portfolio of corporate stocks regards the BP/British Petroleum oil company as a "socially responsible" entity, despite BP's involvement in the exploitation of Middle East oil resources and the fact that a large chunk of BP stock is owned by the Al-Sabah family government of Kuwait Inc. One of the directors of the U.S. Trust Co. of Boston's parent company, U.S. Trust Co. of NY Director Richard Tucker, is both an American Petroleum Institute Director and a Mobil director.

Coincidentally, the person at the U.S. Trust Co. of Boston who is manager of the Women's Equity Mutual Fund portfolio, Cheryl Smith, is also a director of the Resist group which decides which progressive groups in New England are to receive small grants to fund their work.

Another alternative media group which receives a lot of bread from the foundation of former Lyndon Johnson Administration Press Secretary Bill Moyers--is the Institute for Alternative Journalism. In 1994, for instance, Moyers' Schumann Foundation gave the IAJ a $35,000 grant. And in 1996 a second grant of $200,000 was funneled to the Institute for Alternative Journalism to help fund its "Media and Democracy Congress" by Moyers' Schumann Foundation. Coincidentally, Bill Moyers was the fellow who chaired one of the main evening panel discussions at the October 1997 "Media and Democracy Congress" in NYC, although--as a radical woman activist friend of mine commented before the conference--"what's alternative about Bill Moyers?"

Bob Feldman
________________________

by now you know
It's nothing but a front for The International Communist Jewish Bankers Conspiracy, Inc.

http://www.stwallskull.com/Excr.htm
by Mr. Normal (mistermaster [at] mrnormal.gov)
What's this bullshit about a secret cabal? There's no secret cabal... I control SF-IMC absolutely. They publish and/or censor anything and everything based upon my personal whims. And why shouldn't they? I mean, I'm the one who holds the pursestrings, aren't I? After I simultaneously cornered the market on marinated tofu squares AND organic bananas, I decided to flex some of my new economic muscle by buying up local media outlets. Unfortunately, even a dominant market position in tofu and bananas doesn't yield the kind of economic clout currently required to be a meaningful player in the high-powered Media Monopoly. So, rather than becoming a minor stockholder in a major telcom, I opted for a controlling interest in the emergent "Independent Media Center" market. What a magalomaniacal high it is to be king of SF-IMC!!! But, you know, it wasn't as easy as that... I couldn't just walk right in, pass out a few tofu sandwiches and organic bananas, and begin to assert totalitarian control. Noooo! Those anarchists may be idealistic (and hungry), but they're not THAT idealistic! (though they certainly did scarf down those sandwiches!) (what?) In fact, in order to wield TOTAL control at SF-IMC, I had to conspire with Bill Moyers. Yeah, that's it. Together, we agreed that the local imc would pretend to whine and complain about US officials' complicity in crimes against humanity and destruction of the global ecosystem, but in reality that imc would serve as a primary datapoint for FBI COINTELPRO agents to publish disinformation and systemiatically subvert the basic foundations of democracy. How much better does it get than that?

And now that I'm in control, I can ensure that nobody ever finds out about my secret alien autopsy experiments!

Oh, yeah... one last thing...
Maybe you should use a little bit -- no, perhaps a LOT -- of (extremely) critical thought when you read the news... especially when you don't personally know the author of the article you're reading.

Ask for proof, sources, objective criteria to determine the credibility (or lack thereof) of the material you are shoving into your brain.

Good Luck.
by anarchist
for sf-imc, i think their budget is whatever they make off of the video screenings they do. as for major liberal places, hell yes they are funded and fronted for the democrats or whomever else, thats why we dont trust them. the right-wing has its own brand of thinktanks, media garbage, etc. the difference is that the anarcho-folks break through that whereas the most grassroots thing you have on the right is freerepublic, and we all know how censored that place is.
by anarchist
It isnt about free speech you idiot. Where did I say free speech? I said the agenda isnt set by funders. As for whining about how you want to post unintelligible garbage rehashed from frontpage magazine, you can go fuck yourself. If you had guts you wouldnt hide behind your keyboard. But you dont you whining sack of shit.
by alkfsd
>...the difference is that the anarcho-folks break through that...

>I said the agenda isnt set by funders.

At least he has the balls to admit this site has an agenda. This is not an "independent news"source as they claim. Oh, they say it is because the articles are posted by writers not holden to the "corporate media" as they like to say. But, that is not independent media, not really. Independent media is where the news is reported without any slant at all. That's how it's defined. Just the facts, that's all. One only needs to read the headlines here to see this place adds a slant to its coverage of events. See below:

>Not content to let the alleged "authorities" control their every move, demonstrators took matters into their own hands at the meeting of the G7 Finance Ministers in Halifax, Nova Scotia, marching through the city, toppling barricades, and fighting back. Not surprisingly, the "Blue Bloc" turned violent in its attempts to restore "order," lobbing volleys of tear gas and using clubs and stun guns to corrale demonstrators, 34 of whom were arrested.

That's not independent news, it has a slant. If it were truly independent, it would read like this:

At the meeting of the G7 Finance Ministers in Halifax, Nova Scotia, demonstrators marched through the city, toppling barricades and fighting what they preceived as the authorities controling their every move. The police, in its attempts to restore order, lobbed volleys of tear gas, used clubs, and used stun guns to deter those demonstrators who they perceived as being dangerous, 34 of whom were arrested.

There.


by anarchist
Tell you what, you build an international network of websites and call it "independent" whatever and then you get to define what "independent" means. Otherwise you are just putting up a strawman attack. There is no such thing as "objective" journalism.
by elvishasleftthebuilding
>There is no such thing as "objective" journalism.

Then you're no different than the corporate media in respect that they have their "slant", and this site has it's "slant". I can accept that, but it needs to be acknowledged as being so.
by anti-authoritarian
when is reporting *ever* "objective?" and yeah, when did sf indymedia ever claim "objectivity" like that which the corporate media claims?
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$190.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network