absolutely alex’s adventures & times

Even as he is busy fending off attacks for the “bitter” remark that he had made to San Francisco donors, Senator Barack Obama now has to deal with another own goal.

His controversial pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, though retiring, has unleashed his fiery tirade again, this time at the funeral of former appellate judge R. Eugene Pincham.

The Chicago Sun-Times, whose reporter slipped into the event even though it was expressly closed to the media, managed to capture more damning words from the pastor. While the journalistic integrity of the paper is in question, the story which it unearthed would probably overshadow its dubious methods.

Wright was caught once again railing against America’s alleged mistreatment of its African-American community saying that it “planted slavery and white supremacy in the DNA of this republic”.

While Wright might have pointed out that Thomas Jefferson himself said ‘God would punish America for the sin of slavery.’, and blasted Fox News and its anchors, the most polemical statement Wright suggested was perhaps his equating Jefferson to a pedophile.

If Wright was not Obama’s pastor, no one would have cared very much about the hate and anger he spews. But because the Obamas have been a part of his congregation of the Trinity United Church of Christ for 20 years, Obama’s opponents would only too happily seize on Wright’s statements and exploit it to question Obama’s faith and judgment.

Someone has to stop Wright from sounding off whenever he pleases and knock some sense into his head. Besides sounding bitter, crazed and anti-American, does he not know that he is hurting Obama’s chances worse than his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton and the Republicans’ John McCain could?

Obama’s speech on race following the first Wright episode has been highly-praised for his level-headedness and eloquence in dealing with the potential fall-out. But now that Wright has made incendiary remarks all over again, what will Obama have to do this time? Would he have to be forced to denounce not just Wright’s remarks, but the man too?

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

What part of “off the record” does the reporter in the Scottish newspaper, The Scotsman, not understand?

While speaking to the newspaper, Senator Barack Obama’s senior policy adviser, Samantha Power, was outed in her comment about Obama’s rival for the Democratic party’s presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton.

“She is a monster, too – that is off the record – she is stooping to anything,” Power said in her description of Clinton to the newspaper, along with throwing the F-bomb with regards to Obama’s performance in Ohio.

Not that I condone Power’s remark one bit. It was childish name-calling, bone-headed and a sign that the campaigns are getting their claws out as the stakes get higher. The point though, is that she had clearly stated that her candor to the reporter was off the record, something which the newspaper itself also did not bother to hide. So why was it published?

Journalistic integrity is in question here. When an interviewee says something is off the record, it should mean exactly that — off the record and not for publication. How could The Scotsman betray that trust in such a spectacular fashion? Was it so caught up with the excitement of having some juicy dirt on the Obama campaign that it would compromise the integrity of the paper for a cheap shot? You can bet that the backlash would come soon and no newsmaker would want to talk to The Scotsman off the record ever again. The publication will henceforth be known as an untrustworthy and it is shooting itself in the foot as people and sources will not be willing to give it information.

While Power’s outburst was ghastly and makes a lie of Obama’s intention to run a positive campaign, away from the old style of negative campaigning and exposes the Illinois Senator’s campaign as disingenuous, it is still appalling how The Scotsman felt such a need to call them out in such an underhanded manner.

Maybe the reporter felt it was time to humble a very condescending Power, who in the next breath belittled Clinton’s supporters in Ohio. “You just look at her and think, ‘Ergh’. But if you are poor and she is telling you some story about how Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it will be more effective. The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive,” Power told the paper.

The Scotsman is unrepentant. “I do not know of a case when anyone has been able to withdraw on-the-record quotes after they have been made. The interview our political correspondent Gerri Peev conducted with Ms Power was clearly on an on-the-record basis. She was clearly passionate and angry with the tactics of the Clinton camp over the Ohio primary, and that spilled over in the interview. Our job was to put that interview before the public as a matter of public interest. It was for others to judge whether the remarks were ill-judged or spoke of the inexperience in the Obama camp,” the paper’s editor said in its defense.

Power is no dumb bimbo. She is a professor of public policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and a Time magazine columnist, so she should have known better, especially when it came to the notoriously cut-throat British media. She made another faux pas when she spoke to the BBC, suggesting that Obama’s plan to bring back troops from Iraq within 16 months might not come to pass. For her serious lapses, Power deserves to be out of the Obama campaign so that she would not put her foot further in the mouth and cause him more damage. While Power’s holier than thou attitude really does not warrant much sympathy, she did not deserve The Scotsman’s treatment.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

In the end, money talks.

Never mind that the Bancroft family has apparently insisted on retaining the Wall Street Journal’s top editors and wrangled an agreement to limit Murdoch’s ability to replace the newspaper’s top dogs.

You just know that it’s a matter of time before Murdoch gets his way. He always does anyway. That’s the sad reality of the power of his billions.

Murdoch’s $5 billion offer, or $60 per share, was just too good to pass up, especially with the younger and less wealthy elements of the Bancroft clan. Ever the shrewd businessman, Murdoch further sweetened the deal by offering to pay for the costs that the Bancrofts have incurred by engaging expert advice from bankers and lawyers, on the deal. That came up to some $40 million.

Despite the news of the Bancrofts caving in being splashed all over the place, the newspaper’s lifeblood, its reporters and editors, have yet to get an official announcement from the management.

No wonder they were reportedly standing round drinking whiskey and mourning the future (or lack thereof) of their careers and the newspaper.

Now that Murdoch has gotten his paws on his most-coveted prize, he would be an even more formidable force, being in charge of one of the most influential newspapers in the US. He would pitch it in even fiercer competition against international papers such as the Financial Times and the New York Times. He especially has a bone to pick with the New York Times.

It’s not just in the newspaper industry that he would soon be a stronger force to be reckoned with.

In the television news arena, especially in financial news, he is likely to become even more powerful. His Fox network has shaken up the cable television industry, especially the news division, with the right-wing biased Fox News. He’s now closer to establishing a financial news channel and with the resources he could harness through the Wall Street Journal and the Dow Jones newswire, he is going to give rivals like CNBC and Bloomberg a serious challenge, and could even eventually dominate cable financial news.

But at least, journalists should rejoice at one act of courage in the face of the cynical march towards money and rewards.

Leslie Hill, a Bancroft family member and a board member, resigned in protest against the deal. Let it not be on Hill’s conscience, but that of the other Bancroft members who were seduced by the deal, when the standard of the Wall Street Journal goes down the drain in pursuit of Murdoch’s agenda.

After constantly tightening the screw, Hamas, which now runs Gaza, has managed to get a Palestinian militant group holding BBC reporter Alan Johnston to set him free.

The Army of God had held the reporter hostage since March 12, or for nearly four months.

He was reported to be back in the BBC’s Gaza office, in good health.

Television footage showed Johnston exiting a building and entering a white car while accompanied by armed men. Johnston was handed over to the Hamas authorities.

Hamas, which beat its Palestinian rival Fatah to gain control of Gaza in June, had made freeing Johnston a top priority, vowing to “use all means to secure his life and to free him”. Two weeks ago, hopes had been running high that Johnston would be immediately released, thanks to Hamas’ insistence.

But the members of the Army of God had said they were not complying and even threatened to kill Johnston if their demand for the release of several Palestinian prisoners, some of whom are held in the UK. The Army of God even heightened fears for Johnston’s life when they showed a video of the reporter with an explosives belt strapped onto him. They had also released other videos of Johnston.

The BBC reports that on Monday, Hamas security forces had detained members of the Army of God in Gaza.

“The arrests were carried out after all negotiation attempts… failed to free the abducted journalist,” the Hamas-run interior ministry said in a statement. “The arrests are targeting figures who were involved in the abduction of the journalist.”

The BBC has put an online petition on its website, urging people to sign it for Johnston’s freedom.

Things have taken a decidedly worse turn for abducted BBC reporter Alan Johnston today, as his captors released a video of him with an explosives vest strapped to him.

The BBC showed a new video tape that is purportedly released by Johnston’s captors, a little-known Gaza-based group known as the Army of Islam.

“The situation now is very serious. As you can see I have been dressed in what is an explosive belt, which the kidnappers say will be detonated if there was any attempt to storm this area,” Johnston said in the tape. “Captors tell me that very promising negotiations were ruined when the Hamas movement and the British government decided to press for a military solution to this kidnapping.”

The Washington Post said the newest developments could be the sign of a split between the Dagmoush clan, which controls the Army of Islam, and the Islamic gunmen holding Johnston. Part of the complications also involve the fear that Hamas, which now runs Gaza after winning a bloody showdown against Fatah, will move against the Dagmoush clan after Johnston’s release.

Hamas has made it a priority to release Johnston after it came to power. Hopes had raised for Johnston’s safe return soon, as the Hamas leadership had vowed to free him, and also prevent other foreign journalists from being held against their wills.

The Army of Islam had demanded the release of prisoners, such as Abu Qatada, a Palestinian-born Muslim cleric held in the UK on suspicion of being linked to al-Qaeda.

Johnston has been in captivity for over 100 days, after he was snatched in the middle of March in Gaza City.

In what is perhaps a setback for the release of kidnapped BBC reporter Alan Johnston, his kidnappers have gone to the media, not with news of his freedom, but with threats to kill him if their demands were not met.

Gaza-based extremist group, the Army of Islam, which had said it has held Johnston since March, denied the Hamas’ line last Friday that Johnston’s release was imminent.

Hopes had earlier been raised that Johnston might see freedom soon after Hamas took control of Gaza late last week after a week of bloody fighting with its rival Palestinian faction, Fatah.

“Freeing this detainee has not been part of any deal with any faction or organisation. What appears on television screens and through the media here and there are untrue,” an Army of Islam spokesman said on al-Jazeera television channel. “If they do not meet our demands there will be no release for that detainee and if things become more difficult … then we would seek God’s satisfaction by slaughtering this journalist.”

The Army of Islam wants the release of Islamist prisoners, in particular Palestinian-born cleric Abu Qatada, who is detained in the UK.

Hamas has been anxious to secure Johnston’s release as it tries to show the world that it is battling the lawlessness in Gaza which its says is due to the lack of good governance by Fatah. It was also a sign to the international community that Hamas had no intention of threatening or holding foreign journalists.

In many ways, this would be a test for Hamas. It is anxious to prove that it has control over Gaza and has the ability to bring a semblance of stability there, even as most predict its failure, due to Gaza’s isolation and its dwindling supplies of electricity and food. International governments have reacted to Hamas’ victory there by bolstering their support of its rival, the Palestinian Authority’s President Mahmoud Abbas. The US has pledged to stop its embargo against the Palestinian Authorities, while Israel had said it could work with a Palestinian government that does not have Hamas as a part of it.

Treated as a pariah state by the international community, Gaza will face much hardship in the coming weeks. It would be to Hamas’ advanatage to score a public relations victory by securing Johnston’s release.

Pearson, the owner of Europe’s top business newspaper the Financial Times, is said to be in talks with US conglomerate General Electric to hammer out a deal to jointly buy Dow Jones, whose crown jewels is the US newspaper powerhouse, the Wall Street Journal.

Pearson and General Electric are looking into the possibility of launching a bid to foil Rupert Murdoch’s takeover attempt of Dow Jones with his $6 billion offer made last month.

Dow Jones’ controlling shareholders, the Bancroft family, meanwhile is looking at ways to make unsavory Murdoch’s bid more palatable.

They must be wishing and hoping that companies like Pearson and General Electric would hurry up and throw them a bone.

The Bancrofts are faced with tough choices — hold their noses, take Murdoch’s money and run as they’re unlikely to get another offer so attractive. Or watch the share price of Dow Jones go down eventually if they reject Murdoch’s offer. Or keep praying and hoping for a much more acceptable offer, such as from white knights.

Who can blame them?

The Bancrofts certainly don’t want to be remembered as the ones who sold out, choosing a tidy profit over safeguarding the journalistic integrity of one of the most respected newspapers in the world.

Which self-respecting journalism outlet would honestly want to be bought over by Murdoch, the king of shrill, low-brow and populist media, a la the New York Post in the US and News of the World in the UK?

Murdoch is famously meddling in his newspapers’ editorial line. So the Bancrofts rightly fear the loss of integrity and editorial independence of the WSJ under Murdoch’s reign.

On the other hand, the Pearson and General Electric bid, if it comes to pass, would make a lot more sense for the Bancrofts.

Besides the much more respectable reputations of those two companies in the handling of their journalism units, there is plenty of synergy and good fit between the Pearson-GE-Dow Jones merger.

Pearson, who’s strong in Europe through the FT, would complement the WSJ’s dominance in the US. Together, both could conquer the rest of the business reporting world in Asia and Latin America. The only thing they would have to work through is their editorial styles, which is not an easy task but neither is it impossible.

Together with General Electric, the owner of top business channel CNBC, in the mix, the three partners could make a formidable business news team, leading in the print and broadcast areas and being more than able to take on rivals in business news such as Bloomberg and Thomson-Reuters.

GE, with its deep pockets and the motivation to defend its highly-successful CNBC, ought to think hard about cementing its partnership with Dow Jones. This would thwart Murdoch’s grasp of Dow Jones and using its resources to rival CNBC through his upcoming business news channel under the Fox Network banner.

The $60 per share offer that Murdoch threw on the table is financially daunting, even for a giant like GE. It was rumored to have held talks earlier with Microsoft for a joint bid against Murdoch but the high price was insurmountable, leading both Microsoft and GE to abandon talks. Perhaps this time, with Pearson, GE could work something out that would not only be a relief to the Bancrofts and the staff of WSJ, but also stymie Murdoch’s plans.

The WSJ needs to remain authoritative and respected. With Murdoch’s track record, it would not be easy for the WSJ to remain so once it is under his thumb. The WSJ’s integrity and independence stand a much better chance if the Pearson-GE talks succeed and a counter-bid against Murdoch successfully occurs.

Perhaps Hamas’ control of Gaza will yield at least one good thing — the freedom of captured BBC journalist Alan Johnston.

After a week of bitter fighting with Fatah, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s forces, Hamas has gained the upper hand in Gaza. And one of the first things they have done, to their credit, is to announce that they have contacted Johnston’s kidnappers and demanded his release, according to the BBC.

Calling Mr Johnston a “guest of the Palestinian people”, a Hamas spokesman said Mr Johnston should be treated with welcome amongst the Palestinian people.

Mr Johnston went missing since the middle of March, and the Army of Islam, a Palestinian group, claims to have him, releasing a video of Mr Johnston earlier this month. In the video, Mr Johnston had said he was well-treated by his kidnappers.

The Hamas spokesman went beyond just demanding Mr Johnston’s release. He said Hamas won’t tolerate the captivity of foreign journalists.

Despite the bloodshed and power struggle, Hamas had pledged to work with President Abbas, recognizing his authority.

But the reality of the situation on the ground is more complex. Gunmen are known to be wielding the real power, not necessarily the politicians. There is no guarantee that they would follow orders from politicians.

We can only hope that Hamas will be able to enforce some form of discipline over its victorious forces in Gaza and direct them towards working to honor their pledge of freeing Johnston and ensure no more journalists are kidnapped by fringe groups.

At the very least, we can say that abducted BBC reporter Alan Johnston is probably still alive.

His kidnappers, the Army of Islam, have released online a videotape of the Gaza-based reporter, who went missing in early March.

Claiming to be in good health and that his kidnappers have been treating him well, Johnston was dressed reminiscent of the detainees of Guantanamo Bay in a bright orange shirt, looking thin.

More distressingly, Johnson was most likely compelled to make the case for the plight of the Palestinians, condemn the war in Iraq, and denounce the situation in Afganistan.

And in what’s sure to cause deeper anguish for his family, Johnston started to address his family on tape but was cut off.

The British government was united in their condemnation of Johnston’s abduction, calling for his immediate release while adding that his captivity doesn’t help the Palestinian cause.

His kidnappers had demanded the release of Abu Qatada, a Palestinian-born Islamic cleric suspected of having close ties to al-Qaeda and is under the UK government’s detention as a threat to national security.

The BBC said that it was not ascertained when the video was made and what kind of conditions Johnston was in.

For now, let’s hope he is still alive and well, with the right channels working hard to ensure he is freed at the soonest.

See the Alan Johnston video here.

BBC journalist Alan Johnston, who has been missing since March 12, has reportedly been kidnapped by a Gaza-based group called Jaish al-Islam (Army of Islam).

In a tape submitted to the Arabic news channel al-Jazeera, the group claims they have Mr Johnston, showed his BBC work pass and demanded the release of Muslim prisoners held by the UK, specifically the release of Abu Qatana, a Palestinian-born cleric currently in British custody. According to the BBC, there isn’t much information about Jaish al-Islam other than it being a Palestinian group.

The Palestinian government says it is still working on securing Mr Johnston’s release and believes he is still alive. Here’s hoping they will soon get Mr Johnston free.

Sign the online petition to free Alan Johnston here.