<?xml version='1.0' encoding='ISO-8859-1' ?>
<rss version='2.0'>
<channel>
<title>CPBF</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk</link>
<description>Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom News Feed</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008, CPBF</copyright>
<managingEditor>gherman@KeywordsAssociates.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>webmaster@cpbf.org.uk</webMaster>

<content>News Feed from the CPBF</content>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Wikileaks: Time to celebrate, Time to mourn
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2385</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;28/7/10 Itand#39;s time to celebrate. Itand#39;s a big win for Internet-based indy media that WikiLeaks.org posted its andquot;Afghan War Diaryandquot; based on 90,000 leaked U.S. military records detailing a failing war in which U.S. and allied forces have repeatedly killed innocent civilians. This on-the-ground material is vaster than the Daniel Ellsberg-leaked Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War, and was much faster in reaching the public.        andnbsp;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Fears for Bradley Manning after Wikileaks 'dump'
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2384</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;27/7/10 What happens now to the US soldier who - it is widely assumed - supplied the Wikileaks material? As journalists at the Guardian and the New York Times will attest after spending three weeks going through the material, the unloading of US secret military documents via Wikileaks was more of a andquot;dumpandquot; than a andquot;leakandquot;. A staggering 90,000 documents were given to Wikileaks and passed on to the two newspapers and the German magazine Der Spiegel in an effort to give the material maximum exposure. </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Net censorship finds a new expression
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2383</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;27/7/10 A recent item on the NUJ London Freelance branch web site http://www.londonfreelance.org/fl/1007spin.html rehearses the recent history of the Spinprofiles affair (sometimes called and#39;Spinprofilesgateand#39;), in which a website was rendered inaccessible after an individual complained about it to the registrar for the siteand#39;s domain name. This represents a potentially worrying new form of censorship. </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Embedded with the Bankers
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2382</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;22/7/10 Banner Theatre has been working with the Campaign for Press andamp; Broadcasting Freedom and the National Union of Journalists to develop Embedded with the Bankers, a new 25-minute live music and video performance, which asks the question: Why didnand#39;t the UK media warn the British public about the impending banking collapse and recession?</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Licence fee for 'wasteful' BBC will be cut
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2381</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;19/7/10 The broadcaster has been responsible for andquot;extraordinary and outrageousandquot; waste in recent years and needs to recognise the andquot;very constrained financial situationandquot; the country is now in, Mr Hunt says. In an interview in todayand#39;s Daily Telegraph, Mr Hunt says the broadcaster needs to change andquot;huge numbersandquot; of things that it does, warning the management that they should not interpret his silence on the issue of the licence fee since the election as a sign that he is happy with it.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Why Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) matters
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2380</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;14/7/10 We all know what comes from rampant and unrestrained commercial activity: a worship of Mammon to the exclusion of everything except the feeding of company directorsand#39; and financiers egos and greed. In broadcasting, unrestrained commerce equals a low grade, populist cultural diet heavily polluted with advertising. Many supporters of PSB think that is a case of and#39;nuff saidand#39;.andnbsp; Were it only that easy.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Communication via the web 'came of age' in 2010 general election
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2379</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;13/7/10 Campaigning on the internet during the 2010 general election did not achieve the breakthrough which the political parties were hoping for but communication via the web and#39;came of ageand#39; for both the public and the news media.andnbsp; Speakers at a London conference agreed that voting intentions were influenced by the rise in social networking and the emergence of Twitter as a significant source of information for journalists.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Ministry of Justice announces draft defamation bill
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2378</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;11/7/10 The coalition government has unveiled plans for a major review of libel  law in a bid to better protect freedom of speech and expression in the  media and the research sector, and to cut down on andquot;libel tourismandquot;. Today  (9 July) the Ministry of Justice announced it is to publish a draft  defamation bill that will be put out for consultation and  pre-legislative scrutiny in the new year.        </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CPBF]
Rules on stop and search changed
</title>
<link>http://www.cpbf.org.uk/body.php?id=2377</link>
<description> DATELINE:andnbsp;8/7/10 Stricter tests for stop and search powers have been announced by the home secretary after being ruled unlawful by the European Court of Human Rights. Police will now not be allowed to use the powers unless they andquot;reasonably suspectandquot; a person of being a terrorist.The court ruled on the power to search without suspicion under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 last month. </description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>