November, 11 2009, 03:20pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Brandon Hersh (202) 471-3205,bhersh@mediamatters.org
Town Halls Making a Comeback?
To:
Interested Parties
From:
Ari Rabin-Havt, Media
Matters for America
Re:
Town halls making a comeback?
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009
WASHINGTON
To:
Interested Parties
From:
Ari Rabin-Havt, Media
Matters for America
Re:
Town halls making a comeback?
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009
It looks like the extreme anti-reform town hall protests from August
could be making a return during the November congressional recess. Politico recently reported
that "Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander said
Republicans are 'quietly' planning some 50 in-person and telephone
town hall gatherings over the next three weeks to drum up opposition to
Democratic health care bills."
Media Matters has put together background
information on the media's coverage of the August town halls, which includes following
observations:
- The town hall protests were characterized as
"organic," "real," and "genuine"
despite the fact that conservative groups were actively encouraging
members to attend. - The media often gave a distorted view of the town
hall meetings. - Fox News featured extreme anti-reform rhetoric
and ignored substantive,
pro-reform questions from town halls.
More
details on those observations (included below) could be useful, should you
decide to cover any of the upcoming events.
IN AUGUST, the protests were
characterized as "organic," "real," and
"genuine" despite the fact that conservative groups were actively
encouraging members to attend town halls:
- Several conservative groups engaged in efforts to
encourage their members to attend town halls. Conservative
organizations opposed to health care reform -- including FreedomWorks,
Americans for Prosperity, and Conservatives for Patients' Rights -- conducted
a campaign to turn out their supporters to attend those events. CPR reportedly
"confirmed that it has undertaken a concerted effort to get people out to
the town hall meetings to protest reform," while FreedomWorks and
Americans for Prosperity reportedly "organized" the town hall protesters and were "harnessing
social networking Web sites to organize their supporters in much the same way
Mr. Obama did during his election campaign." [Greg Sargent, The Plum Line,
8/4/09;
The New York Times, 8/3/09]
- America's Health Insurance Plans reportedly deployed employees
to "track[] where local lawmakers hold town-hall meetings,"
"rebut" Democrats. On July 30, The Wall Street Journal reported:
"[I]nsurers continue to wage an aggressive campaign against Democrats'
proposals to create a public health-insurance plan. America's Health Insurance Plans
has stationed employees in 30 states who are tracking where local lawmakers
hold town-hall meetings." And on August 5, the paper reported: "The
health-insurance industry said Tuesday it is launching an effort to send insurance-company
employees to public meetings nationwide this month to rebut increasing
criticism of the industry from the White House and top Democrats." [The Wall Street Journal; 7/30/09,
8/5/09]
IN
AUGUST, the media often gave a distorted view of the town hall meetings:
- Dionne: Media
"went out of their way to cover the noise" at town halls,
highlighted "fringe right-wing view." Washington Post columnist E.J.
Dionne wrote: "There is an overwhelming case that the electronic
media went out of their way to cover the noise and ignored the calmer (and
from television's point of view 'boring') encounters between elected
representatives and their constituents. It's also clear that the anger
that got so much attention largely reflects a fringe right-wing view
opposed to all sorts of government programs most Americans support."
[The Washington Post, 9/3/09]
- Kurtz: "[A]nger
at town-hall meetings ... became an endless loop on television."
Washington Post media
critic Howard Kurtz wrote: "The eruption of anger at town-hall
meetings on health care, while real and palpable, became an endless loop
on television. The louder the voices, the fiercer the confrontation, the
more it became video wallpaper, obscuring the substantive arguments in
favor of what producers love most: conflict." Kurtz added:
"Twenty members of Congress might have held calm and collected town
meetings on any given day, but only the one with raucous exchanges would
make it on the air." [The Washington Post,
8/24/09]
- Fox News only
interested in covering "yelling" and "contentious
questions." As Kurtz reported: "In
fact, after the president convened a low-key town hall in New Hampshire,
press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters: 'I think some of you were
disappointed yesterday that the president didn't get yelled at.' There was
a grain of truth in that. As Fox broke away from the meeting, anchor Trace
Gallagher said, 'Any contentious questions, anybody yelling, we'll bring
it to you.' " [The Washington Post,
8/24/09]
IN AUGUST, Fox News featured extreme
anti-reform rhetoric and ignored substantive, pro-reform questions from town
halls:
- Fox News aired 22
clips of attendees opposed to reform, none of supporters.
During the week of August 24, Fox News aired 22 clips in which town hall
attendees expressed an opinion against health care reform, but no clips of
attendees expressing support. CNN aired three clips of attendees
expressing support and five voicing opposition to reform; MSNBC aired one
clip against and none in support.
- Incendiary town hall
rhetoric highlighted by Fox. During that week, Fox News
provided a platform for incendiary statements about progressive reform
efforts. For example, on five separate occasions, Fox aired a clip of an
attendee who said at an August 25 town hall for Sen. John McCain: "No
compromises! Senator, nuke it now."
- Substantive, pro-reform
questions passed over. Despite providing a
platform for incendiary anti-reform claims, Fox News repeatedly passed
over substantive and pro-reform questions and comments from the town hall
meetings that they covered. While those questions could be heard and read
in unedited footage of the town halls online or in local coverage of the
events, they were not aired on Fox -- even when the network featured
footage critical of reform from the same meetings.
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
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