August, 29 2008, 01:21pm EDT
![Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012677/origin.jpg)
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Aaron Huertas
Press Secretary Landline: 202-331-5458
Cell: 202-236-8495
www.ucsusa.org
At RNC, Clear Channel OKs Pro-Coal Ad, Removes UCS's
Northwest Airlines and Clear Channel Selectively Apply Advertising Policy
MINNEAPOLIS
Last
week Northwest Airlines and Clear Channel Outdoor took down the Union
of Concerned Scientists' (UCS) anti-nuclear-weapons billboards in the Minneapolis and Denver
airports ostensibly because they did not meet airport advertisement
policies. But given that both the airline and Clear Channel have not
objected to a pro-coal billboard on the same concourse in the Minneapolis
airport where UCS's billboard appeared, it is apparent that both the
airline and Clear Channel apply their no-politics policies
selectively. (UCS can provide pictures of both advertisements.)
NORTHWEST REJECTS UCS AD, BUT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT COAL INDUSTRY AD
When
asked why Northwest Airlines objected to the Union of Concerned
Scientists' anti-nuclear billboard in the Minneapolis airport,
Northwest spokesperson Tammy Lee told reporters that the airline does
not "allow controversial or political advertising in our concourse, and
this one [UCS's billboard] was both." She added that Clear Channel's
contract with the airport authority states: "Under no circumstances
shall displays embody controversial, social, moral, political or
ethical issues." (In one story she also characterized UCS's billboards
as political "attack ads," even though both presidential candidates
largely agree with UCS's position on ridding the world of nuclear
weapons.)
So why isn't the airline objecting to a coal industry billboard that is now posted in the same Minneapolis airport concourse where ours was located? (See attached photo below.)
We
found out about this coal billboard, which is located between gates G13
and G14, from emails between Northwest officials and Clear Channel
regarding our billboard. Northwest's director of customer service and
airport operations, Rick Feltner, complained in the email exchange that
someone had placed a sticker with "an opposing point of view" on the
billboard. Note that he was not objecting to the billboard itself.
The
coal billboard touts "clean coal." Clean coal is an oxymoron. It's akin
to saying "safe cigarette." Coal is not clean. Coal-fired power plants
in the United States produce one-third of America's carbon dioxide
emissions -- about the same amount as all our cars, SUVs, trucks,
buses, ships and planes combined (for more about coal, see UCS's 2006
report, "Gambling with Coal," at www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/clean_energy/gambling_with_coal_final_report_sept_06.pdf).
The
coal billboard violates Clear Channel's contract with the airport
authority as well as Northwest's policy. It is clearly controversial.
And given that there is a raging policy debate over the future of coal,
any ad promoting coal is political. Why hasn't Northwest asked Clear
Channel to take down this billboard?
The email exchange is reproduced below:
-----Original Message----- From: Nelson, Kathleen J (Reg Director)
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 2:44 PM To: HARDIE, PEGGY Subject: Re: www.reducethethreat.org
I just took a look and I can see how this would be offensive/scary to some (the concept of our city in the crosshairs of a nuclear bomb) and the strong anti-McCain message. Can we remove it?
The coal ad with the sticker is between G13 and G14 along the moving walkway.
Thanks!
------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Nelson, Kathleen J (Reg Director)
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 1:17 PM To: HARDIE, PEGGY Subject: www.reducethethreat.org
Peggy - we've had several complaints about an ad near G16-G17 by this group and the fact that it is political and evidently has a picture of Mpls in crosshairs and talks about nuclear bombs and is anti-McCain. I'll go down and look at it in a bit, but wondered what you knew. Also see note below re: another ad.
------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry
----- Original Message ----- From: Feltner, Rick To: Nelson, Kathleen J (Reg Director) Sent: Mon Aug 18 13:12:33 2008 Subject: Re: VM
Ok. On your way down take a look at the coal ad as well. Looks like someone put a sticker on it with an opposing point of view.
Rick Feltner
----- Original Message ----- From: Nelson, Kathleen J (Reg Director) To: Feltner, Rick Sent: Mon Aug 18 13:07:40 2008 Subject: VM
Got your voicemail. I am actually over here in a MAC mtg and will take a look at it and talk to clear channel.
I'll get back to you later.
------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry
Based
on this email exchange, it is clear that Northwest officials object to
ads that do not reflect their political views but apparently have no
problem with ads that advance views they support.
It
also is clear from the email exchange that Northwest's objections to
our billboard were because, according to Northwest Regional Director
Kathleen J. Nelson, it could be seen as "offensive/scary" and because
of its "very strong anti-McCain message." Note that the airline told
reporters that its objection to the billboard was not motivated by
partisan considerations.
It
also should be noted that Northwest is the official airline of the
Republican National Convention. Northwest Airlines' CEO, Doug
Steenland, is on the Republican National Convention host committee
board (see https://www.msp2008.com/committee).
Was
Northwest's request to Clear Channel to remove UCS's billboard
politically motivated? We think so - even though, as we have previously
pointed out, Sen. McCain largely agrees with our goal of ridding the
world of nuclear weapons (see Sen. McCain's official campaign site: www.johnmccain.com/involving/petition.aspx?guid=46fc9952-ebb3-49ea-bdc7-6537fee1399f).
CLEAR CHANNEL ALSO APPLIES ITS NO-POLITICS POLICY SELECTIVELY
Clear
Channel apparently has a history of rejecting political advertisements
that do not reflect its corporate views while accepting other political
advertisements that do. (For more information on Clear Channel's track
record of rejecting advertising, go to: https://wweek.com/editorial/3440/11375/ and https://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0712-01.htm. For an overview of Clear Channel from Sourcewatch, go to https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clear_Channel.)
In our case, Clear Channel accepted our billboards and posted them. The Minneapolis billboard went up on August 13 and the Denver billboard went up on August 15. It wasn't until the following week that the company decided to take them down.
WHY DID CLEAR CHANNEL REMOVE THE DENVER AD WHEN NOBODY COMPLAINED?
Clear Channel caved to Northwest's request to take down the Minneapolis
airport billboard ostensibly because the airline has the right to
reject advertisements on its concourses. But why did Clear Channel
remove the version of the billboard in Denver addressing Sen. Obama? Chuck Cannon, director of public affairs at the Denver International Airport,
told reporters that the airport had no problem with the ad. As reported
in Advertising Age, Cannon said, "While no one has complained yet, my
first response would not be to take it down."
UCS BILLBOARDS A PART OF A LARGER CAMPAIGN
The
billboards are a part of a larger UCS media campaign that includes
smaller versions in bars and restaurants around the convention sites.
The group also bought Web ads on Minnesota and Colorado political blog sites. (For more on UCS's ad campaign, go to www.reducethethreat.org.)
The
UCS campaign builds on the organization's multiyear effort promoting a
fundamental reassessment of the role, purpose and future of U.S. nuclear weapons. Earlier this year, UCS released "Toward True Security: Ten Steps the Next President Should Take to Transform U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy" and a scientists statement on nuclear weapons signed by 21 Nobel laureates. In December 2007, the organization conducted a public opinion poll in South Carolina that found more than two-thirds of likely Republican and Democratic primary voters in that state want the United States
to spearhead an international effort to reduce the number of nuclear
weapons globally and believe that those reductions would make the United States safer.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
LATEST NEWS
'Tragic Outcome' for Gig Workers as California Supreme Court Hands Win to Uber, DoorDash
"Today's ruling only strengthens our demand for the right to join together in a union so that we can begin improving the gig economy for workers and our customers," the case plaintiff said.
Jul 25, 2024
Labor advocates on Thursday decried a ruling by the California Supreme Court upholding a lower court's affirmation of a state ballot measure allowing app-based ride and delivery companies to classify their drivers as independent contractors, limiting their worker rights.
The court's seven justices ruled unanimously in Castellanos v. State of California that Proposition 22, which was approved by 58% of California voters in 2020, complies with the state constitution. Prop 22—which was overturned in 2021 by an Alameda County Superior Court judge in 2021—was upheld in March 2023 by the state's 1st District Court of Appeals.
The business models of app-based companies including DoorDash, Instacart, Lyft, and Uber rely upon minimizing frontline worker compensation by categorizing drivers as independent contractors instead of employees. Independent contractors are not entitled to unemployment insurance, health insurance, or compensation for business expenses.
There are approximately 1.4 million app-based gig workers in California, according to industry estimates.
While DoorDash hailed Thursday's ruling as "not only a victory for Dashers, but also for democracy itself," gig worker advocates condemned the decision.
"Over the last three years, gig workers across California have experienced firsthand that Prop 22 is nothing more than a bait-and-switch meant to enrich global corporations at the expense of the Black, brown, and immigrant workers who power their earnings," plaintiff Hector Castellanos, who drives for Uber and Lyft, said in a statement.
"Prop 22 has allowed gig companies like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash to deprive us of a living wage, access to workers compensation, paid sick leave, and meaningful healthcare coverage," Castellanos added. "Today's ruling only strengthens our demand for the right to join together in a union so that we can begin improving the gig economy for workers and our customers."
Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, AFL-CIO, said that "we are deeply disappointed that the state Supreme Court has allowed tech corporations to buy their way out of basic labor laws despite Proposition 22's inconsistencies with our state constitution."
"These companies have upended our social contract, forcing workers and the public to take on the inherent risk created by this work, while they profit," she continued. "A.B. 5 granted virtually all California workers the right to be paid for all hours worked, health and safety standards, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, and the right to organize."
"Rideshare and delivery drivers deserve those rights as well," Gonzalez stressed.
The Gig Workers Rising campaign said on social media that "Uber and other app corporations spent $220 million to buy this law, and they did it by tricking Californians."
Prop 22's passage in November 2020 with nearly 59% of the vote was the culmination of what was by far the most expensive ballot measure in California history. App-based companies and their backers outspent labor and progressive groups by more than 10 to 1, with proponents pouring a staggering $204.5 million into the "yes" campaign's coffers against just $19 million for the "no" side.
"Voters were told the initiative would provide us with 'historic new benefits' and guaranteed earnings," said Gig Workers Rising. "But since it went into effect, drivers have seen our pay go down, learned the benefits are a sham, and have to accept unsafe rides because of the constant threat of being 'deactivated,' kicked off the app with little explanation or warning."
"If Uber really cared about good benefits and fair wages, it could make that happen tomorrow," the campaign added. "Instead, it has shown it would rather slash pay, bamboozle voters, and put drivers' lives and livelihoods in danger—all while promising $7 billion in stock buybacks to banks and billionaires."
Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine who focuses on labor and inequality, toldCalMatters that Thursday's ruling was "a really tragic outcome," but "it's not the end of the road."
Dubal's sentiment was echoed by some California state legislators, who said the ruling presents an opportunity to act.
"While this decision is frustrating, it must also be motivating," said state Senate Labor Committee Chair Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (D-28). "I'm more determined than ever to ensure that all workers—including our diverse and Black, Indigenous, and people of color-led gig workforce—have the basic protections of workers compensation, paid sick leave, family leave, disability insurance, and the right to form a union."
Prop 22 has served as a template for lawmakers in other states seeking to deny or limit basic worker rights, benefits, and protections.
In Massachusetts, app-based companies have been fighting for years to get a measure to classify drivers as contractors on the state ballot. In 2022, Lyft made the largest political donation in state history—$14.4 million—to a coalition funding one such proposal.
Last month, Uber and Lyft reached an agreement with the office of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, a Democrat, to pay $175 million to settle a lawsuit filed in 2020. As part of the deal, the companies also agreed to increase driver pay and provide paid sick leave, accident insurance, and some health benefits. The agreement does not address how app-based gig workers should be classified.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Young Voters Tell Kamala Harris to 'Fight for Our Future'
"This is your chance to energize young people and our communities to vote, mount one of the greatest political comebacks in decades, and deliver a resounding defeat to the far-right agenda of Trump and Vance."
Jul 25, 2024
Four youth-led groups on Thursday urged Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, to "fight for our future" by pursuing a policy agenda the coalition unveiled in a March letter to U.S. President Joe Biden.
It's been less than a week since Biden left the race and endorsed Harris, who is expected to face former Republican Donald Trump and his running mate, U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), in the November election. Since then, she's racked up endorsements from Democratic members of Congress and progressive groups focused on issues including climate, labor, and reproductive rights.
March for Our Lives, which was launched after the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, honored Harris with the group's first-ever endorsement on Wednesday, calling her "the right person to stand up for us and fight for the country we deserve."
"To defeat Trump, you must rebuild support and enthusiasm among young voters."
The gun violence prevention organization is part of the youth-led coalition behind the new letter, which also includes the climate-focused Sunrise Movement; Gen-Z for Change, which advocates on a range of issues; and the national immigrant network United We Dream Action.
"You have an urgent and important task. To defeat Trump, you must rebuild support and enthusiasm among young voters," the coalition told Harris on Thursday, noting that she sought the Democratic nomination during the last cycle. "You should build on your 2020 campaign platform where you put forward a strong vision to make the economy work for everyday people and ensure a livable future for us all."
The groups urged Harris to support the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and the Reverse Mass Incarceration Act. They pushed her to expand pathways to citizenship, keep families together, end fossil fuel subsidies, and create good, union jobs. They also called on her to prioritize gun violence prevention and investments in public health solutions and green, affordable housing.
"Democrats are at a critical crossroads with young people," the coalition wrote to Harris on Thursday. "Polls showed Biden and Trump neck-and-neck among young voters."
ANew York Times/Siena College poll conducted July 22-24 shows Trump leading Harris 48% to 47% among likely voters and 48% to 46% among registered voters—differences that fall within the margin of error.
Forbesnoted Thursday that "Democrats are far more enthusiastic about Harris than they were Biden, the Times/Siena survey found, with nearly 80% of voters who lean Democrat saying they would like Harris to be the nominee, compared to 48% of Democrats who said the same about Biden three weeks ago."
The outlet also pointed to two other polls conducted by Morning Consult and Reuters/Ipsos since Biden dropped out, which both show Harris with a narrow lead over Trump.
"You have an opportunity to win the youth vote by turning the page and differentiating yourself from Biden policies that are deeply unpopular with us, such as approving new oil and gas projects, denying people their right to seek refuge and asylum, and funding the Israeli government's killing of civilians in Gaza," the youth coalition highlighted Thursday. "You must speak to the economic pain young people are facing from crushing student debt and skyrocketing housing and food prices."
Looking beyond November, the groups told Harris—who could be the first Black woman and person of Asian descent elected to the country's highest office—that "you could be a historic president. Not just because of who you are, but what you can accomplish."
"Young people are energized and ready to organize against fascism and for the future we deserve," they concluded. "This is your chance to energize young people and our communities to vote, mount one of the greatest political comebacks in decades, and deliver a resounding defeat to the far-right agenda of Trump and Vance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Video Game Actors Strike for AI Protections
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said one union leader. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games."
Jul 25, 2024
After nearly two years of negotiations with video game giants and no deal that would protect performers from artificial intelligence, unionized voice and motion capture actors who work in video game development announced Thursday that they will go on strike starting at 12:01 am on Friday, July 26.
The performers are represented by Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), which last year won a contract for TV and film actors that included "unprecedented provisions for consent and compensation that will protect members from the threat of AI," after the union went on strike for four months.
The union has been negotiating on behalf of video game actors with major production companies including Disney Character Voices Inc., Activision Productions Inc., and WB Games Inc., and has won concessions over wages and job safety—but "AI protections remain the sticking point," said SAG-AFTRA on Thursday as the impending strike was announced.
Unionized actors want protections that would stop video game companies from training AI to replicate actors' voices or likeness without their consent and without compensating them.
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director and chief negotiator for SAG-AFTRA. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games. That includes the SAG-AFTRA members who bring memorable and beloved game characters to life, and they deserve and demand the same fundamental protections as performers in film, television, streaming, and music: fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the AI use of their faces, voices, and bodies."
"Frankly, it's stunning that these video game studios haven't learned anything from the lessons of last year—that our members can and will stand up and demand fair and equitable treatment with respect to AI, and the public supports us in that," he added.
Sarah Elmaleh, negotiating committee chair for the union's interactive media agreement, said the negotiations have shown the companies "are not interested in fair, reasonable AI protections, but rather flagrant exploitation."
"We look forward to collaborating with teams on our interim and independent contracts, which provide AI transparency, consent, and compensation to all performers, and to continuing to negotiate in good faith with this bargaining group when they are ready to join us in the world we all deserve," said Elmaleh.
The unionized actors voted in favor of the strike authorization with a 98.32% yes vote, said SAG-AFTRA.
The strike was announced as more than 500 workers who help develop the popular World of Warcraft video game franchise voted to join the Communications Workers of America (CWA), with the games publisher, Blizzard Entertainment, recognizing the bargaining unit.
CWA noted that the workers' journey to union representation began with a walkout in 2021 at Activision Blizzard, which was later bought by Microsoft, over sexual harassment and discrimination.
"What we've accomplished at World of Warcraft is just the beginning," Eric Lanham, a World of Warcraft test analyst, said in a statement. "We know that when workers have a protected voice, it's a win-win for employee standards, the studio, and World of Warcraft fans looking for the best gaming experience."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular