US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Be Prepared for Success...and CPD Counter-Propaganda!
03 Oct 2000
If we succeed in making a large number of Americans aware of the corruption we are fighting here, we must prepare for an inevitable campaign of counter-propaganda from the Democratic and Republican parties' puppet, the CPD. This article provides a press release that we used to effectively to innoculate somemedia outlets in advance of forthcoming propaganda by the Commission. It could serve well on other places.

If we are successful in elevating the corruption of the debates nationally, we must be ready for the inevitable counter-propaganda campaign from the CPD and immediately debunk their PR. The following is a press release that used to effectively squelch Commission propaganda from reaching publication in at least two newspapers. Feel free to use it again. See our site for more detailed accounts of the CPD's fraud and targets for action.

Responding to Growing Public Awareness of Commission on Presidential Debates' Bias, CPD Launches PR Campaign Rife With Misinformation

In recent months, an extraordinary grassroots education effort has raised the awareness of millions of Americans that the most widely televised presidential debates are controlled by a private corporation -- one created by the two major parties to serve their interests.

The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) has responded with a PR campaign attempting to shift public perceptions and disguise the origins and nature of the Commission. Its op-eds and press releases have been rife with misinformation throughout the year, but have grown more inaccurate recently. Examples below are from a recent op-ed published in the Seattle Post- Intelligencer, signed by CPD general counsel Lewis Loss.

CPD statement: "In the six elections after the Kennedy-Nixon debates of 1960, there were either no debates or debates made possible only by last minute agreements. The CPD was formed in 1987 in response to these events."

Fact: The League of Women Voters had presented debates in three consecutive presidential elections, 1976 through 1984, prior to the Commission's creation. Democratic Party national chair Paul Kirk Jr. and Republican national chair Frank Fahrenkopf Jr. agreed in 1985 to establish the Commission to present ``nationally televised joint appearances conducted between (presidential) nominees of the two major political parties.'' In 1988, the CPD took total control over the debates after the League withdrew, refusing to let the Republican and Democratic campaigns dictate every aspect of the debate, down to hand-picking the audience: "The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American people" (LWV news release,10/3/88). The CPD offered no such objections.

CPD statement: "CPD is a private, non-partisan, non-profit organizationů and has no relationship with any political party."

Fact: CPD is still co-chaired Kirk and Farenkopf. No other parties are represented on its nine member board. Its non-profit status has been the subject of ongoing legal challenge, based on the difference between the required non-partisan status and the very different bipartisan status of the CPD.

CPD statement: "History demonstrates that CPD's 15 percent standard is reasonable. George Wallace and John Anderson's support reached this level, as did Ross Perot's (who participated in CPD's 1992 debates)."

Fact: CPD's participation criteria change with every election cycle. Since the CPD took over, only one candidate from outside the two dominant parties has participated in presidential debates -- Ross Perot in 1992 (both parties calculated his presence would benefit them). Perot would have been banned from the debates under the current 15 percent standard; he polled at between seven and nine percent immediately prior to the first debate, and received 19 percent of the vote after taking part in all three debates. The 15 percent threshold would also have barred Jesse Ventura from Minnesota's gubernatorial debates in 1998. At 10 percent in polls before the debates, Ventura won the election with 37 percent of the vote.
See also:
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.