Democrat Talk Radio
Angry e-mail prompts Secret Service visit to 58-year old mother of 5
Posted Saturday, May 5, 2001 by skolniks
http://www.tampatribune.com/FloridaMetro/MGAQGWQ1NLC.html
Angry e-mail prompts Secret Service visit
DAVID WASSON and BEN FELLER
of The Tampa Tribune
Angered by a Florida legislator's antigay comments, Pensacola seamstress Margaret Richards decided to give him a piece of her mind.
She dashed off a blunt e-mail message to state Rep. Allen Trovillion, suggesting a "firing squad" would be too good for the Winter Park Republican and blaming him for helping "appoint a dictator to the White House." She sent electronic copies to President Bush and to Gov. Jeb Bush.
Then came a knock at the door.
Two U.S. Secret Service agents wanted to know if the 58-year-old mother of five belonged to any terrorist organizations, was stockpiling firearms or had spent any time in a mental institution.
"I was floored," Richards said of the hourlong encounter Saturday afternoon. "When they showed up at the door, the first thing I thought was, 'This must be a joke.' "
The agents weren't laughing.
Richards said they took her picture, persuaded her to sign a waiver giving them access to her medical records and asked to search her small, two-bedroom home.
That's when Richards put her foot down.
"My God," she said Monday. "I've written worse letters to Jeb Bush. "I've been writing letters to presidents and my elected representatives ever since Nixon - and I called Nixon some pretty choice things and never had something like this happen."
Richards said she told the agents she has never been in a mental institution. She doesn't own a gun, she told them, and wouldn't know how to load one, much less use it. Further, she was simply expressing her opinion as a voter when she dashed off the e-mail.
Now, the weekend encounter is fast becoming an Internet rallying cry for those who fear the government is seeking to stifle political comment.
Linda Miklowitz, a Tallahassee lawyer and president of the local chapter of the National Organization for Women, said she understands why Richards' e-mail raised eyebrows but believes agents went too far.
"There were maybe some red flags there, but I think they overreacted," Miklowitz said. "She doesn't fit the profile of an assassin, so I'm surprised they were that concerned."
The Secret Service confirmed Monday that two agents from its Mobile, Ala., field office were dispatched to Pensacola over the weekend to question Richards about the note.
Agent Gail Linkins, who supervises the Mobile office, described it as "very, very routine."
Among other things, the agency is responsible for protecting the president. Linkins refused to disclose how Richards' e-mail message came to the attention of the Secret Service.
Richards' e-mail to Trovillion was among thousands the state lawmaker has received - an estimated 5,000 cyber messages on Monday alone - either supporting or criticizing him.
Trovillion said Monday he hadn't seen the message, nor did he ask anyone to investigate it. But he said he supports the decision of Secret Service agents to pursue it.
Trovillion said his computer has become so clogged with e-mail he can't even count on it for necessary legislative correspondence.
"I'm not reading any of their e- mail, so they might as well stop it," he said. I'm not wasting my time."
Trovillion, 74, said he also was forced to unplug his office fax machine rather than "use up all my paper on their faxes."
Meanwhile, he remains in disbelief over how a 10-minute afternoon meeting with students who asked for a few minutes of his time last week could become national news.
In his meeting with the gay students, who were seeking his support for broadening Florida's antidiscrimination laws, Trovillion told the youths they were "going to cause the downfall of this country." He added that God had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and would destroy them and that they would "suffer the consequences" of their actions.
Trovillion acknowledges telling the gay activists that, based on the Bible, they will have to pay for the sins of their lifestyle. But he said he felt the meeting was cordial and productive, not confrontational and hurtful.
"I am not prejudiced against anybody. I'm a very compassionate person. I care about people. In fact, that's the reason I'm here," said Trovillion, a four-term legislator.
"Hopefully, what I do will contribute for good and not for evil."
But that's exactly what Richards worries about.
She said she has become concerned over the push in the Florida Legislature for everything from school prayer to increasing the role of religious groups in delivering government-financed social services.
Richards, who is Catholic, said she suspects lawmakers are pushing a Christian agenda rather than embracing many different religions. She said that's why she reacted so strongly after reading about Trovillion's comments to the gay students.
"It's this religion thing,'' she said, ``that everybody is trying to shove down our throats."
David Wasson and Ben Feller cover state government and can be reached at (850)222-8382.
Nepotism at the FCC
Posted Wednesday, April 25, 2001 by skolniks
I am sending this on from Dem news/SFO because it is very important and it also reflects what happens when people are put in positions of power that do not understand, or do not believe in, the mission of the agency they are in charge of. In this case the new Chair of the Federal Communications Commission is the son of Colin Powell. What qualifications he possessed to take on such a role other than his father's coattails I do not know.
From the way he talks he obviously does not know history or the reason for the very agency he is in charge of. When the Chairman of the FCC does not have a clear definition of what is the "public interest" (as he has admitted to), we have a problem. When he refers to the media corporations as "our clients" he does not get it that the FCC is supposed to watch out for the public's interest. Under his reasoning we could have the day where Channels 3, 10, and 13 are all owned by the owner of the Sacramento Bee. Under the new rules emanating from the FCC that will be permissable.
Jody
ACTION ALERT: FCC Moves to Intensify Media Consolidation
April 20, 2001
The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) is moving to weaken or eliminate two of the few remaining broadcasting rules that protect some degree of media diversity.
On April 19, the FCC voted 3-1 in favor of eliminating the "dual network" rule, which had prevented one television network from buying another. This rule change will immediately benefit Viacom, which will be allowed to own CBS and part of the UPN network.
The other rule, expected to be lifted or amended in a matter of weeks, is the "cross ownership" rule, which prohibits a company that owns a local newspaper from owning a television station in the same market. Waivers have been granted in the past (Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. owns New York television station WNYW and the New York Post, for example), but watering down or eliminating the rule altogether has long been a goal of industry lobbyists.
This continues an intensely pro-business trend at the FCC, the government agency responsible for managing the broadcast spectrum and regulating the telecommunications industry. Under the impetus of the deregulatory Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has overseen a period of intense corporate mergers. Since the Telecom Act, the number of television station owners in the U.S. has dropped by half (Los Angeles Times, 4/19/01), while more than half of the 11,000 commercial radio stations have been sold (Silicon Alley Reporter, 3/01).
The move to deregulate the media industry continued three years later, as the FCC in August 1999 changed its rules to allow networks to own two television stations in a given market. And last month, FCC chair Michael Powell approved a number of radio mergers that had been marked for public comment by previous Chairman William Kennard (Broadcasting & Cable, 3/19/01). The mergers given the green light by Powell would create local monopolies, where one company would control 50 percent of a given market's ad revenue, or two companies would control about 70 percent of total ad revenue.
Powell has indicated (New York Times, 4/16/01) that the cross ownership rule will fall as well: "I don't know why there's something inherent about a newspaper and something inherent about a broadcaster that means they can't be combined." Given that U.S. newspapers are overwhelmingly local monopolies, of course, mergers between the newspaper industry and the increasingly concentrated broadcast media would mean a dramatic reduction in media diversity at the local level.
Guarding and protecting the public interest is supposed to be central to the FCC's mission, but Powell has expressed some confusion about the very concept. When asked in February what he thought the term "public interest" meant (press conference, 2/6/01), he responsed: "I have no idea. The public interest at its core is the same thing as my oath of office: a commitment to making sure the American consumer is benefited.... I try to make the best judgment I can in ways I think will benefit consumers. Beyond that I don't know. I'm still trying to
figure it out."
Powell is not always so confused about whose interests he represents: Appearing before the House subcommittee on telecommunications (Washington Post, 3/30/01), Powell referred to broadcast corporations as "our clients." Powell has also mocked the concept of unequal access to technology, often referred to as the digital divide: "I think there is a Mercedes divide," he said (New York Times, 2/7/01). "I'd like to have one; I can't afford one."
The FCC's actions under Powell are discouraging for those who advocate for media diversity. "Powell has been very clear about his intentions to turn over more and more of the publicly owned broadcast spectrum to already huge media corporations. These moves reaffirm those corporate-friendly principles," said Jim Naureckas of FAIR. "The FCC's total lack of interest in protecting Americans as citizens or consumers is shocking and disgraceful."
ACTION: Please contact Michael Powell and let him know that media diversity should be a top priority for the FCC, and that media concentration is not in the public interest. Urge the FCC to preserve -- and refrain from weakening -- the rule prohibiting cross ownership of newspapers and television stations in the same market.
CONTACT: Michael Powell, FCC Chair, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St. S.W., Washington, DC 20554; mpowell@fcc.gov Phone: 1-888-225-5322 Fax: 1-202-418-0232
As always, please remember that your comments will be more effective if you maintain a polite tone. Please cc fair@fair.org with your correspondence.
News managed by NewsPro.
Angry e-mail prompts Secret Service visit to 58-year old mother of 5
Posted Saturday, May 5, 2001 by skolniks
http://www.tampatribune.com/FloridaMetro/MGAQGWQ1NLC.html
Angry e-mail prompts Secret Service visit
DAVID WASSON and BEN FELLER
of The Tampa Tribune
Angered by a Florida legislator's antigay comments, Pensacola seamstress Margaret Richards decided to give him a piece of her mind.
She dashed off a blunt e-mail message to state Rep. Allen Trovillion, suggesting a "firing squad" would be too good for the Winter Park Republican and blaming him for helping "appoint a dictator to the White House." She sent electronic copies to President Bush and to Gov. Jeb Bush.
Then came a knock at the door.
Two U.S. Secret Service agents wanted to know if the 58-year-old mother of five belonged to any terrorist organizations, was stockpiling firearms or had spent any time in a mental institution.
"I was floored," Richards said of the hourlong encounter Saturday afternoon. "When they showed up at the door, the first thing I thought was, 'This must be a joke.' "
The agents weren't laughing.
Richards said they took her picture, persuaded her to sign a waiver giving them access to her medical records and asked to search her small, two-bedroom home.
That's when Richards put her foot down.
"My God," she said Monday. "I've written worse letters to Jeb Bush. "I've been writing letters to presidents and my elected representatives ever since Nixon - and I called Nixon some pretty choice things and never had something like this happen."
Richards said she told the agents she has never been in a mental institution. She doesn't own a gun, she told them, and wouldn't know how to load one, much less use it. Further, she was simply expressing her opinion as a voter when she dashed off the e-mail.
Now, the weekend encounter is fast becoming an Internet rallying cry for those who fear the government is seeking to stifle political comment.
Linda Miklowitz, a Tallahassee lawyer and president of the local chapter of the National Organization for Women, said she understands why Richards' e-mail raised eyebrows but believes agents went too far.
"There were maybe some red flags there, but I think they overreacted," Miklowitz said. "She doesn't fit the profile of an assassin, so I'm surprised they were that concerned."
The Secret Service confirmed Monday that two agents from its Mobile, Ala., field office were dispatched to Pensacola over the weekend to question Richards about the note.
Agent Gail Linkins, who supervises the Mobile office, described it as "very, very routine."
Among other things, the agency is responsible for protecting the president. Linkins refused to disclose how Richards' e-mail message came to the attention of the Secret Service.
Richards' e-mail to Trovillion was among thousands the state lawmaker has received - an estimated 5,000 cyber messages on Monday alone - either supporting or criticizing him.
Trovillion said Monday he hadn't seen the message, nor did he ask anyone to investigate it. But he said he supports the decision of Secret Service agents to pursue it.
Trovillion said his computer has become so clogged with e-mail he can't even count on it for necessary legislative correspondence.
"I'm not reading any of their e- mail, so they might as well stop it," he said. I'm not wasting my time."
Trovillion, 74, said he also was forced to unplug his office fax machine rather than "use up all my paper on their faxes."
Meanwhile, he remains in disbelief over how a 10-minute afternoon meeting with students who asked for a few minutes of his time last week could become national news.
In his meeting with the gay students, who were seeking his support for broadening Florida's antidiscrimination laws, Trovillion told the youths they were "going to cause the downfall of this country." He added that God had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and would destroy them and that they would "suffer the consequences" of their actions.
Trovillion acknowledges telling the gay activists that, based on the Bible, they will have to pay for the sins of their lifestyle. But he said he felt the meeting was cordial and productive, not confrontational and hurtful.
"I am not prejudiced against anybody. I'm a very compassionate person. I care about people. In fact, that's the reason I'm here," said Trovillion, a four-term legislator.
"Hopefully, what I do will contribute for good and not for evil."
But that's exactly what Richards worries about.
She said she has become concerned over the push in the Florida Legislature for everything from school prayer to increasing the role of religious groups in delivering government-financed social services.
Richards, who is Catholic, said she suspects lawmakers are pushing a Christian agenda rather than embracing many different religions. She said that's why she reacted so strongly after reading about Trovillion's comments to the gay students.
"It's this religion thing,'' she said, ``that everybody is trying to shove down our throats."
David Wasson and Ben Feller cover state government and can be reached at (850)222-8382.
Nepotism at the FCC
Posted Wednesday, April 25, 2001 by skolniks
I am sending this on from Dem news/SFO because it is very important and it also reflects what happens when people are put in positions of power that do not understand, or do not believe in, the mission of the agency they are in charge of. In this case the new Chair of the Federal Communications Commission is the son of Colin Powell. What qualifications he possessed to take on such a role other than his father's coattails I do not know.
From the way he talks he obviously does not know history or the reason for the very agency he is in charge of. When the Chairman of the FCC does not have a clear definition of what is the "public interest" (as he has admitted to), we have a problem. When he refers to the media corporations as "our clients" he does not get it that the FCC is supposed to watch out for the public's interest. Under his reasoning we could have the day where Channels 3, 10, and 13 are all owned by the owner of the Sacramento Bee. Under the new rules emanating from the FCC that will be permissable.
Jody
ACTION ALERT: FCC Moves to Intensify Media Consolidation
April 20, 2001
The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) is moving to weaken or eliminate two of the few remaining broadcasting rules that protect some degree of media diversity.
On April 19, the FCC voted 3-1 in favor of eliminating the "dual network" rule, which had prevented one television network from buying another. This rule change will immediately benefit Viacom, which will be allowed to own CBS and part of the UPN network.
The other rule, expected to be lifted or amended in a matter of weeks, is the "cross ownership" rule, which prohibits a company that owns a local newspaper from owning a television station in the same market. Waivers have been granted in the past (Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. owns New York television station WNYW and the New York Post, for example), but watering down or eliminating the rule altogether has long been a goal of industry lobbyists.
This continues an intensely pro-business trend at the FCC, the government agency responsible for managing the broadcast spectrum and regulating the telecommunications industry. Under the impetus of the deregulatory Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has overseen a period of intense corporate mergers. Since the Telecom Act, the number of television station owners in the U.S. has dropped by half (Los Angeles Times, 4/19/01), while more than half of the 11,000 commercial radio stations have been sold (Silicon Alley Reporter, 3/01).
The move to deregulate the media industry continued three years later, as the FCC in August 1999 changed its rules to allow networks to own two television stations in a given market. And last month, FCC chair Michael Powell approved a number of radio mergers that had been marked for public comment by previous Chairman William Kennard (Broadcasting & Cable, 3/19/01). The mergers given the green light by Powell would create local monopolies, where one company would control 50 percent of a given market's ad revenue, or two companies would control about 70 percent of total ad revenue.
Powell has indicated (New York Times, 4/16/01) that the cross ownership rule will fall as well: "I don't know why there's something inherent about a newspaper and something inherent about a broadcaster that means they can't be combined." Given that U.S. newspapers are overwhelmingly local monopolies, of course, mergers between the newspaper industry and the increasingly concentrated broadcast media would mean a dramatic reduction in media diversity at the local level.
Guarding and protecting the public interest is supposed to be central to the FCC's mission, but Powell has expressed some confusion about the very concept. When asked in February what he thought the term "public interest" meant (press conference, 2/6/01), he responsed: "I have no idea. The public interest at its core is the same thing as my oath of office: a commitment to making sure the American consumer is benefited.... I try to make the best judgment I can in ways I think will benefit consumers. Beyond that I don't know. I'm still trying to
figure it out."
Powell is not always so confused about whose interests he represents: Appearing before the House subcommittee on telecommunications (Washington Post, 3/30/01), Powell referred to broadcast corporations as "our clients." Powell has also mocked the concept of unequal access to technology, often referred to as the digital divide: "I think there is a Mercedes divide," he said (New York Times, 2/7/01). "I'd like to have one; I can't afford one."
The FCC's actions under Powell are discouraging for those who advocate for media diversity. "Powell has been very clear about his intentions to turn over more and more of the publicly owned broadcast spectrum to already huge media corporations. These moves reaffirm those corporate-friendly principles," said Jim Naureckas of FAIR. "The FCC's total lack of interest in protecting Americans as citizens or consumers is shocking and disgraceful."
ACTION: Please contact Michael Powell and let him know that media diversity should be a top priority for the FCC, and that media concentration is not in the public interest. Urge the FCC to preserve -- and refrain from weakening -- the rule prohibiting cross ownership of newspapers and television stations in the same market.
CONTACT: Michael Powell, FCC Chair, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St. S.W., Washington, DC 20554; mpowell@fcc.gov Phone: 1-888-225-5322 Fax: 1-202-418-0232
As always, please remember that your comments will be more effective if you maintain a polite tone. Please cc fair@fair.org with your correspondence.
News managed by NewsPro.
