Warning: Keep Kids Away From Cousin Balki

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


First, Jerry Falwell’s National Liberty Journal outed Tinky Winky, the “gay” Teletubby. That seemed silly enough. Not to be outdone, the Christian Actions Network, which claims 250,000 members, now wants to label all television shows with a lesbian or gay character “HC” for homosexual content, according to the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE.

This past week, the organization’s president, Martin Mawyer, sent a letter to FCC Chairman William Kennard proposing the rating, which would be similar to those that warn parents about shows containing violence or sexual acts. If Mawyer gets his way, the mere presence of a gay or lesbian character on a show — he counted 25 on prime-time programs; 12 on NBC alone — would merit the HC warning. And the problem goes beyond the networks, says Mawyer, noting that “HBO is planning to air a program called ‘The Sissy Duckling’, [about] ‘a fuzzy little yellow bird who learns he’s gay.’ ” If, like us, you’re unsure of whether to laugh or cry, take comfort in the fact that his half-baked scheme is unlikely to be adopted by the FCC any time soon.

In fact, a little bit of research shows that the folks at the Christian Actions Network aren’t master strategists. About two years ago, the group campaigned to bring down the filthy NEA — by organizing a traveling exhibition of the NEA’s dirtiest works.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/
archive/1999/02/19/MN68565.DTL

jr

 

_
Tobacco Execs Strong-Armed Nicorette Makers

February 18

Surprise! As if tobacco execs didn’t already have enough bad karma to send them straight to hell, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES reports that Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds, among others, pressured drug companies to stop actively encouraging smokers to quit. So, instead of having a slogan like “Quit smoking — chew Nicorette gum,” Merrell Dow, the gum’s original maker, had to take the less than forceful approach of “If you want to quit smoking, we have a product.”

How did one company force another into adopting an advertising strategy that would cost it market share? One document shows Philip Morris threatening a boycott or a “Philip-Morris-funded negative publicity campaign” against one company if it didn’t restrict its advertising to “people who were committed to quitting,” instead of targetting all smokers.

The article, reprinted in the DALLAS MORNING NEWS, also highlights another memo in which the president of Merrell Dow promised Philip Morris that he was “committed to avoid contribution to the anti-cigarette effort” and that he personally was “screening advertising and promotional materials to eliminate any inflammatory anti-industry statements.” In another memo, Philip Morris threatened to withdraw its contract with a drug company’s chemical division. The company responded by withdrawing the anti-smoking message and promising never to do it again.

http://www.dallasnews.com/national-nf/0214tobacco.htm

MM

 

_
Sarin, Uranium, and El Al, Oh My!

February 17

Sarin nerve gas, depleted uranium, government agents in chemical suits, a high-level cover-up, and a mysterious illness. No, it’s not the plot to next week’s “X-Files,” but the story behind the 1992 crash of an El Al cargo plane in Amsterdam. In a very interesting (if poorly written) article for PACIFIC NEWS SERVICE, Yoichi Clark Shimatsu reveals that the El Al cargo plane was carrying the ingredients for sarin nerve gas and depleted uranium. Shimatsu writes that since the crash, roughly 2,000 local residents and rescue workers have since reported some very particular health problems.

The article then ventures even further into X-philia territory, alleging a Dutch-Israeli-American cover-up. In one passage, Shimatsu paints a surreal picture: “Residents report seeing helicopters, painted black and without markings, landing in their neighborhood. Others tell of a French-speaking team searching the area, and a group of men speaking English, some clad in white chemical protective suits, carrying a heavy box covered with a white cloth.” According to Shimatsu, this was all part of a secret weapons-transfer (or “tarnsfer,” as Pacific News prefers to spell it) program between the U.S. and Israel. But before quickly dismissing the whole thing as lefty conspiracy nonsense, you should know that the ASSOCIATED PRESS, and THE NEW YORK TIMES both ran similar stories (though neither are accessible on the Web).

http://www.pacificnews.org/jinn/stories/5.03/990211-cargo.html

MTH

 

_
Why the Spice Channel Costs So Much

February 15

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 promised consumers lower rates, more competition, and a wider array of choices. But aside from a slew of annoying satellite-TV vs. digital-cable commercials, things haven’t changed much.

In fact, according to OUCH!, a regular e-mail bulletin put out by Public Campaign that details “how private money in politics hurts average citizens,” things have gotten worse. (Unless, like me, you proudly steal your cable.) Most cable customers have seen their rates rise 21 percent over the last three years, and all with the blessing of the Federal Communications Commission. The FCC maintains that these rate hikes are necessary because cable companies need the extra money to deal with increased competition in the marketplace — yes, that would be the same competition that supposedly was going to lower your rates.

But that’s not the whole story. According to the OUCH! bulletin, after intense lobbying by the telecom industry, “the Senate killed a proposal that would have simply asked the FCC to study rising cable rates. On average, senators voting against the proposal got 21 percent more in contributions from cable PACs and individuals who work in the industry than did senators in favor.”

So next time you get your cable bill, instead of just cursing those bastards at TCI or Media One, be sure to include Congress in your tirade.

http://www.publicampaign.org/ouch2_12_99.html

MTH

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate