Author Norman Solomon editorializes that "Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House, and Harry Reid is majority leader of the Senate. But neither speaks for, much less leads, the antiwar movement that we need. When you look at the practicalities of the situation, Pelosi and Reid could be more accurately described as speaker and leader for the war-management movement." Solomon notes that the powerful liberal advocacy group "MoveOn seems to have wrapped itself around the political sensibilities of Reid, Pelosi and others at the top of Capitol Hill leadership. ... Last week, while MoveOn was sending out a mass e-mail to its 3.2 million members offering free bumper stickers urging 'End This War,' the MoveOn leadership was continuing its failure to back the efforts of the Congressional Progressive Caucus for 'a fully funded, and systematic, withdrawal of U.S. soldiers and military contractors from Iraq.' ... It's good to see MoveOn churning out bumper stickers that advocate an end to the Iraq war -- but sad to see its handful of decision-makers failing to support a measure to fund an orderly and prompt withdrawal from the war."

In its current issue, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition acknowledges that a review of soft drinks and obesity (which challenges links between the one and the other) was funded by the American Beverage Association. But the journal excludes information that one of the authors personally and professionally has had close ties to the beverage industry. "(T)he Associated Press reported last year that [Researcher Adam] Drewnowski owns stock in beverage companies and much of his prior research has been financed by the beverage industry," reports the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Another study by Drewnowski was funded by the Corn Refiners Association and American Beverage Institute. The journal article's co-author, France Bellisle, for his part, sits on an advisory board for McDonald's. Researchers, including CSPI staff, have written that industry-financed studies predictably reach conclusions favorable to the beverage companies.

WYTV-33 airs a VNR from Stiefel Laboratories (from CMD's April 2006 report)

As a result of "hospitals' desperate need to compete for lucrative lines of business" and "TV's hunger for cheap and easy stories," healthcare companies are increasingly getting into the (fake) news business. Sometimes "the hospitals pay for airtime"; sometimes "they don't but still provide expertise and story ideas" -- or prepackaged video news releases. "Viewers who think they are getting news are really getting a form of advertising," reports Trudy Lieberman. One healthcare company, Cleveland Clinic, "sends out prepackaged stories" every day, including to "Fox News Edge, a service for Fox affiliates that in turn distributes the pieces to 140 Fox stations." And, "since TV news operations are finding that they can get this kind of health 'news' supplied to them -- and might even make money on the deal -- they are tempted not to invest in a legitimate health reporter who would ask harder questions and look at the larger picture." Not surprisingly, Lieberman finds that "too often the full nature of the arrangements is not disclosed, or inadequately disclosed."

After billionaire insurance mogul Maurice "Hank" Greenberg was charged with fraud and insurance and securities violations, he hired the eSapience PR firm — whose executives include the dean of MIT's Sloan School of Management — to buff up his image. Now eSapience is suing Greenberg for unpaid bills. The lawsuit states that eSapience executives "set up a new think tank, the Barbon Institute, specifically to provide a credible-sounding new platform for Greenberg" to give an "image-rehabilitating speech." Greenberg is disputing $2 million in charges racked up by eSapience executives who billed him $400 to $1,000 hourly — rates that they said "reflected the level of detail, sophistication, and status necessary to present Greenberg in the best light and to assure the presence and participation of key intellectual and public figures."

While fleeing an ambush in Afghanistan, U.S. soldiers reportedly opened fire on civilian cars and pedestrians and then destroyed photos and video taken at the scene by freelance journalists. Destroying the evidence was necessary, a military official explained later, to protect "investigative integrity" because photos or video taken by "untrained people" might "capture visual details that are not as they originally were." He added, "We are completely committed to a free and independent press, and we hope that we can help encourage this tradition in places where new and free governments are taking root." Associated Press Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll remained unconvinced. "In democratic societies," she noted, "legitimate journalists are allowed to work without having their equipment seized and their images deleted."