Wouldn't it be interesting to read FEMA's self-investigation of its fake news conference. Don't hold your breath. From [http://www.prweekus.com/FEMA-wraps-briefing-review/article/96302/ PR Week]:
"In the field, almost all the external affairs officers have journalism backgrounds, but at [FEMA] HQ, I don't think anybody does," [William "Russ" Knocke, FEMA's acting head of external communications,] said. "You're dealing in ethics and journalistic practices, and we have a staff where a number don't have that training in journalism."
The agency is now exploring professional development partnerships with groups such as PRSA [the Public Relations Society of America].
The review will "not necessarily" be made public, but its findings will be used to help strengthen internal communications practices, Knocke said.
This article is about a State Dep't / FBI investigation into what happened. The legal immunity currently enjoyed by Blackwater and other private military contractors is a separate issue. But it's important to point out that the U.S. interim government in Iraq granted that immunity (which Iraqi legislators and some U.S. officials are trying to remove).
The U.S. entry process has created a climate of fear and frustration that is turning away foreign business and leisure travelers from visiting the United States – and damaging America’s image abroad. But, according to a new global study conducted by the Discover America Partnership, minor improvements in welcoming travelers could yield substantial diplomatic and economic gains.
The study, conducted by independent polling firm RT Strategies and based upon a survey of more than 2,000 travelers worldwide, sought to gauge traveler perceptions of the U.S. visa and entry process, and how opinions of America differ among those that have and have not visited the U.S. The study revealed that, by deterring visitors, the U.S. is missing an enormous economic and diplomatic opportunity. Those that have visited the U.S. and interacted with the American people are 74 percent more likely to have an extremely favorable opinion of the U.S.
“This study should be a wake-up call for the U.S. government,” said Geoff Freeman, Executive Director of the Discover America Partnership. “Visiting the United States and interacting with the American people can have a powerful, positive effect on how non-U.S. residents see our country. Unfortunately, perceptions of a ‘rude’ and ‘arrogant’ entry process are turning away travelers and harming America’s image.
The U.S. entry process is considered the “world’s worst” by travelers
Travelers rate America’s entry process as the “world’s worst” by greater than a 2:1 margin over the next-worst destination area.
The U.S. ranks with Africa and the Middle East when it comes to traveler-friendly paperwork and officials.
54 percent of international travelers say that immigration officials are rude.
Travelers to the U.S. are more afraid of U.S. government officials than the threat of terrorism or crime.
Two-thirds of travelers surveyed fear they will be detained at the border because of a simple mistake or misstatement.
By deterring visitors, the U.S. is missing an enormous diplomatic and economic opportunity
Those with experience visiting America are 74 percent more likely to have an extremely favorable opinion of the country versus those who have not visited recently.
63 percent of travelers feel more favorable towards the U.S. as a result of their visit.
61 percent agree that, once a person visits the U.S., they become friendlier towards the country and its policies.
Negative attitudes about U.S. treatment of visitors are having a much larger effect on keeping travelers away from the U.S. than negative attitudes about U.S. policies in the world. o Nearly nine in 10 travelers tell their friends, relatives about their travel experiences most or all of the time.
Minor changes in the U.S. treatment of foreign business and leisure travelers would yield substantial gains
In every destination criteria but the point of entry experience, international travelers rank America in the top three. Travelers want to come to the U.S.
Travelers are willing to wait an average of 46.5 days to get a visa to visit the U.S – 15 days beyond U.S. State Department standards, but far less than current wait times in many countries.
Travelers expectations include clear communications, respect and courteous treatment
“Foreign travelers are in agreement: the U.S. entry process is unpredictable and unfriendly to foreign visitors, it is hurting America’s image abroad and deterring many from visiting the U.S.,” said Thomas Riehle, partner, RT Strategies. “These survey results help to explain the 17 percent decline in overseas travel to the U.S. over the past five years and the 10 percent decline in business travel to the U.S. over the past year.”
The Discover America Partnership was launched in September, 2006 by some of America’s foremost business leaders. These business leaders recognize travel to the U.S. as an integral aspect of the public diplomacy process and have challenged the U.S. to welcome an additional 10 million more visitors annually. This initiative is undertaking an aggressive, ongoing campaign to draw national attention to the issue, and to push for solutions.
The Partnership is pursuing a variety of initiatives to help the U.S. better compete for international travelers, including:
A detailed assessment of the U.S entry process, and how the nation balances security and economic prosperity. The study will look at the impact of current point-of-entry policies on the U.S. economy, and what we can learn from other countries.
An ongoing effort to tap into the travel industry’s expertise in hospitality to develop new, creative and better ways to welcome visitors to our country.
A worldwide study of how other countries compete for international travelers and how the U.S. can demonstrate its commitment to welcoming more visitors.
I used to to think it was funny when I was 15 years old and Alan Funt was doing it. This is simply a more mean-spirited version of that genre masquerading as news. How can they call it "news" when the intention is to provoke, not report?
But come to think of it, it doesn't have anything to do with prosperity theology either.
Here's what Michelle Malkin is talking about: ABC News has been doing a series now for two years called "[http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Health/story?id=1150515&page=1 What Would You Do?]" in which they stage some ethically challenging situation, film people's behavior, and then ask they why they did it. Apparently Malkin didn't find this worthy of comment when the staged situations involved potentially abusive situations between heterosexual couples or shoplifting in a convenience store, but her rant-about-bias trigger goes off when the situation involves same-sex couples kissing.
Here are links to the Fox News stories that Malkin mentioned (but didn't bother to link to):
You'll notice that nothing in the original story has anything about Dan Rather, the National Guard, George W. Bush, or conservatives for that matter. Those parts are all embellishments by Malkin so she can sandwich this into her own ideological frame and make this a story about how "the liberal media persecutes conservatives."
As for whether any bigots bit, the stories quote a local police officer who says he got a few complaints from people who were disgusted by seeing men kissing, but the officer himself said the behavior was legal, and he didn't have a problem with it.
FYI, the southside of Birmingham has a significant gay and lesbian community, which is probably one of the reasons why ABC chose it as a location to set up their operation.
As for whether this is "news," I'd say it isn't, but I wouldn't call it "fake news" either. ABC isn't pretending that it isn't staging these situations. The situations themselves may be faked, but ABC's actual reporting isn't. I don't know what to call this -- some form of "reality TV"?
Whatever you call it, I think it's a fair critique to say it blurs the boundaries between news, commentary and entertainment.
Wouldn't it be interesting to read FEMA's self-investigation of its fake news conference. Don't hold your breath. From [http://www.prweekus.com/FEMA-wraps-briefing-review/article/96302/ PR Week]:
This article is about a State Dep't / FBI investigation into what happened. The legal immunity currently enjoyed by Blackwater and other private military contractors is a separate issue. But it's important to point out that the U.S. interim government in Iraq granted that immunity (which Iraqi legislators and some U.S. officials are trying to remove).
The U.S. entry process has created a climate of fear and frustration that is turning away foreign business and leisure travelers from visiting the United States – and damaging America’s image abroad. But, according to a new global study conducted by the Discover America Partnership, minor improvements in welcoming travelers could yield substantial diplomatic and economic gains.
The study, conducted by independent polling firm RT Strategies and based upon a survey of more than 2,000 travelers worldwide, sought to gauge traveler perceptions of the U.S. visa and entry process, and how opinions of America differ among those that have and have not visited the U.S. The study revealed that, by deterring visitors, the U.S. is missing an enormous economic and diplomatic opportunity. Those that have visited the U.S. and interacted with the American people are 74 percent more likely to have an extremely favorable opinion of the U.S.
“This study should be a wake-up call for the U.S. government,” said Geoff Freeman, Executive Director of the Discover America Partnership. “Visiting the United States and interacting with the American people can have a powerful, positive effect on how non-U.S. residents see our country. Unfortunately, perceptions of a ‘rude’ and ‘arrogant’ entry process are turning away travelers and harming America’s image.
The U.S. entry process is considered the “world’s worst” by travelers
Travelers rate America’s entry process as the “world’s worst” by greater than a 2:1 margin over the next-worst destination area.
The U.S. ranks with Africa and the Middle East when it comes to traveler-friendly paperwork and officials.
54 percent of international travelers say that immigration officials are rude.
Travelers to the U.S. are more afraid of U.S. government officials than the threat of terrorism or crime.
Two-thirds of travelers surveyed fear they will be detained at the border because of a simple mistake or misstatement.
By deterring visitors, the U.S. is missing an enormous diplomatic and economic opportunity
Those with experience visiting America are 74 percent more likely to have an extremely favorable opinion of the country versus those who have not visited recently.
63 percent of travelers feel more favorable towards the U.S. as a result of their visit.
61 percent agree that, once a person visits the U.S., they become friendlier towards the country and its policies.
Negative attitudes about U.S. treatment of visitors are having a much larger effect on keeping travelers away from the U.S. than negative attitudes about U.S. policies in the world. o Nearly nine in 10 travelers tell their friends, relatives about their travel experiences most or all of the time.
Minor changes in the U.S. treatment of foreign business and leisure travelers would yield substantial gains
In every destination criteria but the point of entry experience, international travelers rank America in the top three. Travelers want to come to the U.S.
Travelers are willing to wait an average of 46.5 days to get a visa to visit the U.S – 15 days beyond U.S. State Department standards, but far less than current wait times in many countries.
Travelers expectations include clear communications, respect and courteous treatment
“Foreign travelers are in agreement: the U.S. entry process is unpredictable and unfriendly to foreign visitors, it is hurting America’s image abroad and deterring many from visiting the U.S.,” said Thomas Riehle, partner, RT Strategies. “These survey results help to explain the 17 percent decline in overseas travel to the U.S. over the past five years and the 10 percent decline in business travel to the U.S. over the past year.”
The Discover America Partnership was launched in September, 2006 by some of America’s foremost business leaders. These business leaders recognize travel to the U.S. as an integral aspect of the public diplomacy process and have challenged the U.S. to welcome an additional 10 million more visitors annually. This initiative is undertaking an aggressive, ongoing campaign to draw national attention to the issue, and to push for solutions.
The Partnership is pursuing a variety of initiatives to help the U.S. better compete for international travelers, including:
A detailed assessment of the U.S entry process, and how the nation balances security and economic prosperity. The study will look at the impact of current point-of-entry policies on the U.S. economy, and what we can learn from other countries.
An ongoing effort to tap into the travel industry’s expertise in hospitality to develop new, creative and better ways to welcome visitors to our country.
A worldwide study of how other countries compete for international travelers and how the U.S. can demonstrate its commitment to welcoming more visitors.
_______________________
Caballos
I used to to think it was funny when I was 15 years old and Alan Funt was doing it. This is simply a more mean-spirited version of that genre masquerading as news. How can they call it "news" when the intention is to provoke, not report?
But come to think of it, it doesn't have anything to do with prosperity theology either.
Here's what Michelle Malkin is talking about: ABC News has been doing a series now for two years called "[http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Health/story?id=1150515&page=1 What Would You Do?]" in which they stage some ethically challenging situation, film people's behavior, and then ask they why they did it. Apparently Malkin didn't find this worthy of comment when the staged situations involved potentially abusive situations between heterosexual couples or shoplifting in a convenience store, but her rant-about-bias trigger goes off when the situation involves same-sex couples kissing.
Here are links to the Fox News stories that Malkin mentioned (but didn't bother to link to):
http://www.myfoxal.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4821767&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.2.1
http://www.myfoxal.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4816176&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1
You'll notice that nothing in the original story has anything about Dan Rather, the National Guard, George W. Bush, or conservatives for that matter. Those parts are all embellishments by Malkin so she can sandwich this into her own ideological frame and make this a story about how "the liberal media persecutes conservatives."
As for whether any bigots bit, the stories quote a local police officer who says he got a few complaints from people who were disgusted by seeing men kissing, but the officer himself said the behavior was legal, and he didn't have a problem with it.
FYI, the southside of Birmingham has a significant gay and lesbian community, which is probably one of the reasons why ABC chose it as a location to set up their operation.
As for whether this is "news," I'd say it isn't, but I wouldn't call it "fake news" either. ABC isn't pretending that it isn't staging these situations. The situations themselves may be faked, but ABC's actual reporting isn't. I don't know what to call this -- some form of "reality TV"?
Whatever you call it, I think it's a fair critique to say it blurs the boundaries between news, commentary and entertainment.
Pages