Listen to this week's edition of the "Weekly Radio Spin," the Center for Media and Democracy's audio report on the stories behind the news. This week, we look at Santas flacking for the coal industry, how charitable it is to buy stuff, and a hot and heavy anti-smoking campaign. In "Six Degrees of Spin and Fakin'," we tell you how many steps there are between Jolly Old Saint Nick and parentless kids. The Weekly Radio Spin is freely available for personal and broadcast use. Podcasters can subscribe to the XML feed on www.prwatch.org/audio or via iTunes. If you air the Weekly Radio Spin on your radio station, please email us at editor@prwatch.org to let us know. Thanks!

From the musical "Walmartopia"In 2005, the Edelman PR firm created the front group Working Families for Wal-Mart on behalf of their client, the retail giant. With Wal-Mart funding, Edelman ran the faux citizens' group to counter union critics like WakeUpWalMart.com, founded by the United Food and Commercial Workers and Wal-Mart Watch, founded by the Service Employees International Union. Edelman has been removed from the project due to Wal-Mart's decision to bring the front group in-house. Wal-Mart spokesperson David Tovar said the plan is to "retool the group and its website as a platform for employees and consumers to speak out in favor of the world's largest retailer, rather than the outside supporters it has featured so far. 'We believe the best way to tell our story is to bring Working Families for Wal-Mart 'in-house' and operate it as an internal program. We're at a point where we no longer need a separate entity.'" It doesn't appear that Wal-Mart has any qualms about publicizing the change in direct management of the Working Families organization. A visit to the group's website, www.forwalmart.com, produces this message: "Please check back soon for a new site brought to you by Wal-Mart. For now, please visit Wal-Mart Facts." Wal-Mart Facts is a site that has the heading "Get the facts and latest news about Wal-Mart from Wal-Mart."

Language plays a powerful role in shaping political decisions, argues Brent Cunningham. As an example, he points to the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, "when the choice of words -- by the press and government officials -- played a crucial role in setting America on a course that led, ultimately, to our military action in Iraq. ... The decision to describe the attacks in the language of 'war,' rather than as a criminal act, emerged swiftly and organically in the earliest press accounts, and was quickly solidified and extended by President Bush and other administration officials." If the attacks had been defined using other language, such as "mass murder," this might also have defined the "terms of the response" differently, "within the domain of police investigation, criminal justice and the safeguards of law." Cunningham thinks that "journalism needs a rhetoric beat" focused on studying the uses and abuses of language, which "has emerged as a central issue in our political culture."

The League of Conservation Voters has launched a campaign that challenges U.S. political reporters to discuss the issue of global warming. During 2007, they point out, political talk show hosts on the top Sunday public affairs programs have asked 2,275 questions of U.S. presidential candidates, on questions ranging from baseball to UFOs. However, they have only mentioned global warming three times.