View this email in your browser Sharon Lerner on Plastic Recycling MP3 Link (cc photo: Matthewdikmans) This week on CounterSpin: In case you missed it: November 15 was America Recycles Day, in which, Newsweek explained, "thousands of communities participate by promoting environmental citizenship and taking action to increase and improve recycling."  If your skepticism were piqued by the day's enthusiastic promotion by Trump EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler and Trump himself, perhaps you'd be assuaged by the fact that the group behind America Recycles Day is the veteran nonprofit Keep America Beautiful. Until you realize, that is, that that group is backed by beverage and packaging companies like Coca-Cola, Nestlé and Altria (formerly Phillip Morris), all eager to persuade the public that recycling is an adequate response to the devastating environmental impact of plastic waste, of which they are fixing to create a great deal more. Plastics producers like Coke and Nestlé are huge media sponsors, and no-holds-barred reporting about their behind-the-scenes efforts isn't exactly thick on the ground, but it needs to be. We talk this week to one reporter keeping an eye on these things: Sharon Lerner, health and environment reporter at the Intercept and a reporting fellow at Type Investigations—about plastic recycling, and what it does and doesn't have to do with you. MP3 Link Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look back at recent coverage of charter schools and the election. MP3 Link © 2018 Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. All rights reserved. Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting Our mailing address is: FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING 124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201 New York, NY 10001 FAIR's Website FAIR counts on your support to do this work — please donate today.

Warren Called Anti-Poor Child... Selective Protest Coverage... NAFTA's 'Success'

View this email in your browser Weekly Alert: November 30, 2019 FAIR's year-end fundraising drive has begun--please donate today if you can! Here are the stories FAIR has been working on this week. Please help us spread the word by forwarding this email to friends and by sharing our stories on social media like Facebook and Twitter. How Media Turn Support for Public Schools Into Opposition to Children of Color With People in the Streets Worldwide, Media Focus Uniquely on Hong Kong Moving Jobs to Mexico Was a Feature, Not a Bug, of NAFTA This week's episode of FAIR's radio show CounterSpin: Julie Hollar on Election 2020 Coverage Newly posted CounterSpin transcripts: 'It's This Culture of Secrecy That's Pervading the Courts'' Giuliani Did All the Wrong Things on That Day' FAIR Cites: The Faux Generosity of the Super-Wealthy: Why Bill Gates Is a Menace to Society Andrew Yang Seems Invisible to the Mainstream Media — Just Like Most Asian Americans US Again Complicit in an Illegal Coup, This Time in Bolivia FAIR’s ad-free, content-rich site is supported by contributions from our loyal band of media activists. Please donate today! FAIR's Website

Our mailing address is: FAIR 124 W 30th St Rm 201 New York, NY 10001-4009

View this email in your browser How Media Turn Support for Public Schools Into Opposition to Children of Color by Julie Hollar Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and other Democratic presidential candidates are rejecting the Obama administration's embrace of charter schools, and media observers aren't taking kindly to it. "Minority Voters Chafe as Democratic Candidates Abandon Charter Schools," blared a recent New York Times headline (11/26/19). "The front-runners for the presidential nomination are moving away from the charter school movement, and black and Latino families ask why their concerns are lost," read the subhead. The "minority voters" who the New York Times (11/26/19) claims "chafe" at Democratic candidates' criticism of charter schools do not include the NAACP or Black Lives Matter, both of which call for a moratorium on new charters. The article itself was slightly more nuanced, reporting that the shift away from charters has left "some black and Latino families feeling betrayed"; buried deep within, the reporters note that "there is no consensus on charter schools among families of color." (Black and Latino voters support charter schools at higher rates than do whites, but less than 50% view them positively; the NAACP and Black Lives Matter have called for a moratorium on new charter schools.) But the article also relied heavily on uncontested quotes from charter school founders and leaders, who accuse Democrats who would stop funding new charters of having "a lack of respect for black voters in the party" and "writing off years, if not generations, of kids." The pro-charter side was also given the floor a week earlier when the Times published an op-ed by Cory Booker (11/18/19) headlined, "Stop Being Dogmatic About Public Charter Schools." (We could find no recent evidence of any pro-public school op-ed published in the paper in support of this “dogma.”) Warren's plan in particular has come under media fire, as the most recent education plan to be released (Sanders released a similar plan in May), and coming shortly after her brief surge to the top of the polls. In addition to a quadrupling of funding for Title I schools that serve primarily low-income families, tackling segregation, and increasing funding for schools serving students with disabilities, Warren is proposing an end to federal funding for new charters, a ban on for-profit charters, and holding charters to the same transparency and accountability standards as public schools. It's this smaller charter-focused piece of her plan that has gotten the most attention. US News & World Report  (10/29/19) helpfully framed the plan for readers: "Warren Embraces Teachers Unions Over Charter Schools." The natural counterpart to "charter schools" here, of course, would be "public schools," but the right likes to cast teachers' unions as a "special interest" scapegoat for the failures of the country's underfunded education system, and journalists have long been happy (or lazy) enough to adopt the rhetoric (Extra!, 9/10). The opening paragraph likewise took on pro-charter catch phrases, pitting "school choice supporters" against "teachers unions"—as if teachers are against educational opportunity. In the Washington Post, which published three opinion pieces attacking Warren's plan, the editorial board (10/28/19) vilified teachers' unions repeatedly: Warren "took a page from the union playbook"; she put forth a "union-pleasing plan"; the plan "seems aimed more at winning the support of the powerful teachers unions than in advancing policies that would help improve student learning"; Warren did this because "the teachers unions wield outsize influence in the Democratic Party, and they revile the mostly non-unionized charter sector." The Washington Post (10/28/19) says "children are the losers" in Elizabeth Warren's plan that would greatly increase funding to schools serving disadvantaged students. Claiming to simply be defending poor parents and children is a hallmark of such pieces; "Children Are the Losers in Elizabeth Warren's Plan for Charter Schools" was the headline of that Post editorial. When Sanders released his plan back in May, the Post was similarly on high alert (5/27/19), accusing him of "the most enduring—and unforgivable—civil rights offense in our country today": "the consigning of so many poor, often minority children to failing schools." Washington Post education columnist (and longtime charter booster) Jay Mathews (11/2/19) used a single mother of four and school voucher supporter, Nikia, to frame his objection to Warren's education plan. ("Vouchers?" you ask, scratching your head? Bizarrely, Mathews couldn't seem to find a more recent or relevant example—he interviewed Nikia in 2005, before charters had become the school privatization vehicle of choice.) He patronizingly counseled Warren to "ask parents like Nikia" about her charter proposal. "I lack the space to discuss the many issues in Warren’s new education plan, but I think its charter school provisions overlook the needs of low-income parents," he opined. Likewise, according to a Wall Street Journal op-ed (11/15/19), Warren’s "plan would trap low-income minority students in unsafe, poor-performing schools, denying them the opportunity to learn." But it's precisely the rest of the plan that gives the lie to the idea that Warren is the one overlooking low-income families' educational needs. Mathews—unlike the Post editorial board or the Journal—does acknowledge Warren's bigger investment plan, but he dismisses it as impractical: Unfortunately, it is likely to take many years, if ever, for Congress to provide such record sums. Children of parents such as Nikia need good schools now. The best charter organizations appear to be supplying some of those schools. Why should their growth be curtailed? The Times piece struck a similar note, quoting a self-described "single mom with two jobs and five hustles" who says of her children: "They're brilliant; they're curious. It's not fair. Why shouldn't I have a choice?" It's a classic charter (and voucher) argument that manages to paint the policy as having only the best interests of the poor at heart, as it promotes inequality by offering access to a few lifeboats rather than repairing the ship. US News (10/29/19) pits "charter schools" against "teachers unions"—rather than "public schools," the obvious juxtaposition. Problematic charter-funded data peppers these articles; the Times piece claimed the waitlists for charter schools are "swelling into the hundreds of thousands," linking without comment to a charter-funded study from 2014 that critics have pointed out suffers from an abundance of methodological problems. The Post and Journal both point to a "Stanford University study" (by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes) that finds urban charters outperform public schools in math and reading, which likewise uses flawed and biased methods. (Neither note that CREDO is housed in the right-wing Hoover Institute, and funded by pro-charter organizations like the Walton Foundation.) In fact, overall, charters have proved to offer no better education than public schools; some charters do quite well, and many do quite poorly, just like public schools. Nor do they provide any special benefit for students of color; a 2003 study from the US Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics found that "for students from the same racial/ethnic backgrounds, reading and mathematics performance in charter schools did not differ from that in other public schools." But charters, which are exempted from most oversight and regulations governing public schools, have proved to be excellent vehicles for fraud, waste and abuse. A 2014 report by the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education found charter operators using public funds for personal gain, mismanaging public funds and schools, illegally inflating enrollment to boost revenue, and putting children in danger, among other things. The Network for Public Education found in 2019 that "hundreds of millions of dollars of federal funds have been awarded to charter schools that never opened or opened and then shut down." As Washington Post education reporter Valerie Strauss (6/24/19)—who provides a rare space for criticism of charters in the paper—noted a few months after her initial coverage of the report, that may have been an underestimation of the waste, which could exceed $1 billion. And Juan Gonzalez in the New York Daily News (5/6/10) documented how charter schools have become a favorite investment vehicle for hedge funds—thanks to a federal tax break that allows them to double their money in seven years. In the Journal op-ed, the writers argue that despite an "avalanche of cash" poured into Madison, Wisconsin, public schools, racial disparities are the worst in the state, while the villainous "teachers union is thriving" and working to "limit school choice." The piece neglected to note that white Madison students do quite well—it's just the 6.5% of the population that's black that suffers—and not just in the schools, but in the criminal justice system, housing, employment and healthcare. So the problem isn't the funding, the unions, or the limits on school choice: It's the systemic racism, which the education plans released by both Warren and Sanders explicitly attempt to remedy. © 2018 Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. All rights reserved. Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting Our mailing address is: FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING 124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201 New York, NY 10001 FAIR's Website FAIR counts on your support to do this work — please donate today.

Paul Krugman | Trump Gives US Business the Ukraine Treatment

29 November 19

---

2 Days Left in November, We’re in Serious Trouble

The November funding-drive is nowhere close to where it should be and we are running out of time. We need a boost here any way we can get it, as soon as we can get it.

With significant urgency.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

Update My Monthly Donation

---

If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611

29 November 19

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

SWITCHING TO EMERGENCY MODE ON DONATIONS - Due to a total lack of donations for November the organization’s funding situation has become critical. We are going to have to stop the train and focus solely on bringing in the relatively few donations we need to function. The show will not go on without funding. Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

Paul Krugman | Trump Gives US Business the Ukraine Treatment

Paul Krugman, The New York Times

Krugman writes: "The story that has emerged in the impeachment hearings is one of extortion and bribery."

EXCERPTS:

Cook’s incentive to play along was obvious. Apple assembles many of its products in China; it’s seeking exemptions from Trump’s China tariffs. And there’s every reason to believe that the allocation of such exemptions is driven by politics, not the national interest.

For example, in 2018 a company owned by Oleg Deripaska — an oligarch close to Vladimir Putin, who is supposed to be under U.S. sanctions for activities that include interference in foreign elections — received a waiver from aluminum tariffs. The waiver was withdrawn only after Democrats in Congress noticed it, with the Commerce Department claiming that it had been granted as a result of a “clerical error.” Uh-huh.

Put it this way: By using his political power to punish businesses that don’t support him while rewarding those that do, Trump is taking us along the same path already followed by countries like Hungary, which remains a democracy on paper but has become a one-party authoritarian state in practice. And we’re already much further down that road than many people realize.

READ MORE

Ambassador Sondland. (photo: Getty)

Trump's "No Quid Pro Quo" Statements Are Clear Evidence of His Ukraine Motives
William Saletan, Slate
Saletan writes: "A new report shows the president was launching his cover story, not telling the truth."
READ MORE

ICE officer. (photo: AP)

ICE Arrests 90 More Students at Fake University in Michigan
Niraj Warikoo, Detroit Free Press
Warikoo writes: "About 90 additional foreign students of a fake university in metro Detroit created by the Department of Homeland Security have been arrested in recent months."
READ MORE

Sen. Warren and Rep. Ayanna Pressley. (photo: ABC News)

Billionaire-Funded Protest Is Rearing Its Head in America
Hamilton Nolan, Guardian UK
Nolan writes: "The most straightforward way to avoid this creeping problem, of course, is to have everyone personally flog a billionaire before being granted admission to a protest."

Recently a crowd of protesters disrupted a speech by Elizabeth Warren. The activists might have seemed grassroots, but they weren’t

ast week, Elizabeth Warren went to Atlanta to give a major speech about issues of concern to black women. Her speech touched on knotty, existential topics such as the legacy of slavery, institutional racism, voter suppression, mass incarceration and reparations. But the next day’s headlines overwhelmingly focused on the fact that the speech was interrupted by a loud group of pro-charter school protesters.

We were supposed to be talking about challenging centuries of institutional racism, but now we’re talking about charter schools. How did that happen? If you suspect that some sort of nefarious action that can be traced back to plutocratic billionaires is involved – well, of course.

The protesters themselves were, by all accounts and appearances, a group of concerned people who passionately oppose Warren’s plan to bolster public education and crack down on the charter school industry. But they did not all materialize in the crowd together in matching shirts by chance. Their existence was orchestrated by pro-charter school groups that are funded by an array of billionaires, including Netflix founder Reed Hastings, art and philanthropy titan Eli Broad and, most prominently, the Walton Foundation, controlled by the staggeringly wealthy family that owns Walmart. Thus we are all forced to deal with the spectacle of classic tactics of grassroots protest being coopted and fueled by a tiny group of the very sort of people that such tactics were developed to target in the first place.

Of course, astroturfing is nothing new – the suburbs of Washington DC are strewn with post office boxes that serve as the headquarters address for zillions of groups that all have names like Working Americans for Freedom and Reduced Taxation on Pass-Through Business Structures. And charter schools, in particular, have long been an issue that seems created in a lab to entice billionaires to pour money into groups that have as their public faces working parents or former union leaders. (A book could be written on why the ultrarich are so drawn to the charter school movement, but the short answer is that it combines the fiction that education rather than capitalism is responsible for our nation’s ills and the ability to privatize a longstanding public good, all in one.)

It would be a mistake, though, to think that this little propaganda incident is about a single issue. The real lesson of this is how well even transparently corrupt tactics like this work. One of the emotional backbones of Warren’s speech was the story of the 1881 Atlanta washerwomen strike – a relatively little known incident in labor history that she was no doubt inspired to cite by the union leader Sara Nelson’s recent speech on the same topic in front of the Democratic Socialists of America convention. Yet what should be a shining example of radical ideas rising to mainstream prominence in a presidential campaign has been pushed to the bottom of most news stories in favor of the charter school ruckus. This points to the fact that astroturf campaigns don’t have to be very sophisticated, or even very secret; they just need to make enough noise to weasel their way into a 30-second TV hit to get the job done.

And so we are all left to gaze in dread at our dystopian very near future, when an increasingly small and savvy pool of billionaires is responsible for not only the majority of businesses, political connections and wealth, but also protests. If you thought that misleading stories on Facebook were bad, imagine a horde of angry activists, staging classic protests around the country, whose existence is entirely facilitated by the richest and most powerful people on earth.

The one thing that rich people forever lust for is authenticity, that elusive quality that tends to disappear the more that your influence is bought rather than organically developed. (A huge portion of the public relations industry exists to sell rich people the illusion of authenticity, with the assumption that the rich are too insulated from reality to realize that they are being ripped off.) Nothing is perceived as more authentic than real live chanting, sign-waving demonstrators. It is a trivial matter to find people who genuinely believe in a cause. Plutocrats can supply them with organizers and resources while still maintaining plausible deniability of actually controlling them. As a side benefit, in the same way that Fox News has undermined the public’s belief in factual journalism, billionaire-funded protests will inevitably make everyone more cynical about the integrity of real protests.

There’s really no downside, from the perspective of billionaires.

The most straightforward way to avoid this creeping problem, of course, is to have everyone personally flog a billionaire before being granted admission to a protest. Until we sort out a few minor logistical problems with that system, we will have to settle for something even simpler: keeping private money out of politics, by law. The Walton family’s net worth is nearly $200bn. If they are so concerned about education, they can pick up the tab for the entire US Department of Education for the next three years and still have a few billion left over.

Perhaps ironically, getting money out of politics is one of the big ideas at the center of Warren’s campaign. But a lot of people may not have heard about it, over the shouting of all of those grassroots protesters.

READ MORE

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York has launched an opioid inquiry focusing on six companies. (photo: Carlo Allegro/Reuters)

US Prosecutors Open Criminal Probe of Opioid Makers, Distributors

Al Jazeera

Excerpt: "Federal prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation into whether pharmaceutical companies intentionally allowed opioid painkillers to flood US communities."

Opioids have contributed to more than 400,000 deaths in the US since 1997, according to government statistics.

READ MORE

Egyptian police officer. (photo: Getty)

Egypt's Security Forces Raid Last Major Independent Newspaper's Office
Democracy Now!
Excerpt: "Egyptian security forces raided the office of Mada Masr, the country's last independent media outlet, and arrested three of its journalists this weekend."







READ MORE

Recycling bins. (photo: Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Recycling Isn't Working - Here Are 15 Ways to Shrink Your Plastic Footprint
Emily Holden, Guardian UK
Holden writes: "As plastics corporations ramp up production, they are also promoting a failing recycling system. Just 9% of plastics get recycled. Traditional plastics are made from extracted oil and gas, and they contribute to the rising temperatures behind the climate crisis."

Only 9% of plastics get recycled, and significant reductions will require systemic change – but there are easy tips for individuals to cut back

s plastics corporations ramp up production, they are also promoting a failing recycling system.

Just 9% of plastics get recycled. Traditional plastics are made from extracted oil and gas, and they contribute to the rising temperatures behind the climate crisis.

Environment experts are increasingly calling for a reduction in plastic use, as the waste accumulates in the oceans, poor countries and even human bodies. Plastics are also burned, as China – which once accepted the bulk of America’s waste – has begun to refuse it. And more than a million Americans lived next to polluting incinerators.

Significant reductions will require systemic change, researchers say. But there are also some easy tips for individuals who want to cut back on plastics.

(If this list is overwhelming and you’re not sure where to start, collect your plastic waste for a month and conduct an audit. Cut back on what you find the most of.)

1. Carry a reusable bottle, fork/spoon and bag

Be sure to use these items as many times as possible so they are worth the resources they take to create.

2. Refuse the lid on your coffee cup

Take a few sips before you leave the shop so you can avoid spilling. (Some coffee shops will say they are required to give you a lid, citing possible liability for burns.)

3. Choose products in glass or cans if they are an option. Recycle those materials

Plastics recycling is largely failing, but you should still try to recycle your waste plastics if they are accepted in your community. Make sure you are recycling correctly with this guide.

Glass and aluminum cans are much more likely to be recycled. Glass is most efficient when reused (ie with returnable milk bottles).

4. When possible, eat in the restaurant instead of taking it to go

Unless you have a physical disability, let your server know in advance that you won’t need a straw.

5. If you order takeout or delivery, tell the restaurant you don’t want plastic utensils or straws

This is an option on some food delivery apps.

6. Opt for products with less packaging. Say no to bagged lemons, apples, onions and garlic, and tea that comes in plastic packets

Choose more fresh produce for snacks to avoid individual plastic wrappers.

7. Shop from the bulk section and use your own containers

Some grocery stores will let you use pretty much any container, as long as you verify the weight of the empty container in advance.

8. Use bars of soap (also available for shampoo and shaving) instead of bottles and skip the plastic loofah

Find bars that are wrapped in paper, and for an extra environmental benefit, avoid palm oil.

9. Use a razor that requires replacing only the individual blades

The upfront expense may be daunting, but if you can afford it, you will save money over time. Note that TSA does not allow passengers to fly with individual blades.

10. Use a bamboo toothbrush or one with a replaceable head

The market for these products is growing rapidly. Most bristles will still have synthetic fibers, but you can at least avoid throwing away the brush’s plastic arm every few months.

11. Buy concentrated cleaners that can be mixed with water in a reusable container.

You can find these in powder, gel and liquid form.

12. Choose frozen, concentrated juice that comes in cardboard tubes instead of the plastic jugs

Some of them taste good, and they are lighter to carry home.

13. Don’t buy bottled water. Filter your own

“Bottled water is no safer than filtered tap water, but the industry doesn’t have to disclose the results of its testing,” according to the Environmental Working Group. The advocacy organization’s Tap Water Database can help you select the best filter for your local water source.

14. Buy fewer clothes, or shop secondhand. Wash your clothes less so they last longer. Hang them to dry

Most clothing contains synthetic fibers made of plastic. These fibers shed in the wash and end up in waterways. Synthetic materials may have some advantages over natural ones, however, because they may last longer.

15. When shopping online, group as many items together as possible, so you can receive fewer plastic envelopes

You can also choose slower shipping times, which could reduce the climate footprint of your purchase.

READ MORE

---

Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation