SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
August, 22 2014, 02:45pm EDT
Contact:
Josh Golin (617-896-9369; josh@commercialfreechildhood.org)
Creator of Controversial Your Baby Can Read! Series Settles FTC Charges
3-year CCFC campaign against false and deceptive marketing ends with a decisive victory for families
BOSTON
Today, the Federal Trade Commission announced a settlement with Dr. Robert Titzer, creator of the controversial Your Baby Can Read!, a $200 video series that encouraged parents to put infants as young as three months in front of screens. The settlement is the final chapter in Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood's long effort to hold the makers of Your Baby Can Read! accountable for its false and deceptive advertising.
In 2011, CCFC and its attorneys at Georgetown University's Institute for Public Representation filed a FTC complaint documenting how the marketing of Your Baby Can Read! was rife with false and unsubstantiated claims about infant learning. In 2012, the FTC filed false advertising charges against Your Baby Can LLC and Dr. Titzer. Your Baby Can and former CEO Hugh Penton agreed to settle the FTC's charges, but Dr. Titzer formed a new company, The Infant Learning Company, and continued to claim Your Baby Can Read! could teach babies as young as nine months to read. As part of the new settlement, Dr. Titzer and The Infant Learning Company are now barred from using the phrase "Your Baby Can Read." Both defendants are prohibited from making any unsubstantiated claims about the performance of any product that teaches reading and Dr. Titzer is barred from endorsing any product unless he has a reasonable basis for its marketing claims.
"Today's landmark settlement with the creator of Your Baby Can Read! is a huge victory for families and a great ending to our three-year campaign," said CCFC's Executive Director Dr. Susan Linn. "We commend the FTC for their unwavering determination to hold the makers Your Baby Can Read! accountable for deceiving parents. We are particularly pleased that the insidious brand name 'Your Baby Can Read!' has been retired for good. The Commission's actions should serve as a needed wake-up call to media marketers who falsely hype the educational benefits of their products and exploit parents' natural tendency to want the best for their babies."
Fairplay, formerly known as Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, educates the public about commercialism's impact on kids' wellbeing and advocates for the end of child-targeted marketing. Fairplay organizes parents to hold corporations accountable for their marketing practices, advocates for policies to protect kids, and works with parents and professionals to reduce children's screen time.
LATEST NEWS
'Ultimate Corporate Corruption': Trump Announces Musk-Led Department to Gut Regulations
"If anyone had any doubts whether the Trump government aims to serve regular people or the billionaires, they should now be resolved," said one watchdog.
Nov 13, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump announced Tuesday that Elon Musk—the world's richest man, a megadonor to the Republican's campaign, and a beneficiary of government contracts—will co-lead a not-yet-created department tasked with gutting federal regulations and slashing spending.
Musk, who leads several companies that are under federal scrutiny, will head the so-called Department of Government Efficiency alongside Vivek Ramaswamy, a biotech billionaire.
"Together, these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies," Trump declared in a statement, without explaining the funding structure of the commission or how it would achieve those sweeping objectives. Congress, which is likely to be under full Republican control come January, has authority over federal spending.
Trump said the commission "will provide advice and guidance from outside of Government, and will partner with the White House and Office of Management & Budget to drive large-scale structural reform, and create an entrepreneurial approach to Government never seen before."
During the presidential race—into which Musk pumped more than $100 million to boost Trump—the Tesla CEO claimed a government efficiency commission would seek out $2 trillion in spending to eliminate. That sum, as The Washington Postobserved, far exceeds the combined budgets of the Pentagon and the Departments of Education and Homeland Security.
Musk acknowledged during a virtual town hall event in late October that the massive cuts he hopes to enact would bring "temporary hardship" to ordinary Americans.
He has also cast his push to gut federal regulations as an "existential" issue, claiming that "humanity will never reach Mars" unless "we get rid of the mountain of smothering regulations."
"This will send shockwaves through the system, and anyone involved in Government waste, which is a lot of people!" Musk said in the Trump team's statement announcing the commission.
"Musk not only knows nothing about government efficiency and regulation, his own businesses have regularly run afoul of the very rules he will be in position to attack."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said it is "laughable" to put "the ultimate corporate tycoon" in charge of a commission on government spending and regulations.
"The purpose of government regulations is to protect the American people," said Gilbert. "We all depend on these regulations to protect our air, water, workers, children's safety, and so much more. 'Cutting red tape' is shorthand for getting rid of the safeguards that protect us in order to benefit corporate interests. Our problem is corporate capture of so much of our public policy, not this lie that corporations are held back by too many rules."
"Musk not only knows nothing about government efficiency and regulation, his own businesses have regularly run afoul of the very rules he will be in position to attack in his new 'czar' position," Gilbert added. "This is the ultimate corporate corruption. If anyone had any doubts whether the Trump government aims to serve regular people or the billionaires, they should now be resolved."
In a report published in October, Public Citizen found that "at least three of Musk's businesses are currently under scrutiny for alleged misconduct by at least nine federal agencies."
Since endorsing Trump over the summer, Musk has exerted significant influence over the Republican leader's political operations, impacting his choice of running mate and injecting his views on candidates for key posts in the incoming administration. The New York Timesreported Wednesday that Musk "has sat in on nearly every job interview with the Trump team" and is "trying to install his Silicon Valley friends in plum positions in the next administration."
Musk, whose wealth has surged by tens of billions of dollars since Trump's victory in last week's election, has also relentlessly boosted the president-elect on X, the social media platform he purchased in 2022 and transformed into a right-wing disinformation machine.
"Get ready this January for chaos, revenge, greed, rampant abuses of power, and the unbridled control of corrupt plutocrats and oligarchs," legendary consumer advocate Ralph Nader warned over the weekend. "With Elon Musk in the lead."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Big Day... for Justice': US Jury Finds Contractor CACI Liable for Abu Ghraib Torture
"This victory is a shining light for everyone who has been oppressed and a strong warning to any company or contractor practicing different forms of torture and abuse," said one of the Iraqi plaintiffs.
Nov 12, 2024
In a landmark verdict cheered by human rights defenders around the world, a federal jury in Virginia found a U.S. military contractor liable for the torture of three prisoners at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison during the invasion and occupation of Iraq in the early 2000s.
The jury ordered CACI Premier Technology to pay each of the three Iraqi plaintiffs $3 million in compensatory damages and $11 million in punitive damages, for a total of $42 million. It is the first time that a civilian contractor has been found legally responsible for abusing Abu Ghraib detainees.
The lawsuit against CACI—filed in 2008 by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of Suhail Al Shimari, Asa'ad Al Zuba'e, and Salah Al-Ejaili—alleged that company officials conspired with U.S. military personnel in subjecting the plaintiffs to torture and other crimes.
As CCR noted Tuesday:
The plaintiffs brought their case under the Alien Tort Statute, a 1789 federal law that allows foreign nationals to seek redress in U.S. courts for certain violations of international law. This historic outcome follows 16 years of litigation, more than 20 attempts by CACI to have the case dismissed, and a previous trial in which the jury was unable to reach a verdict. Never before this case had survivors of U.S. post-9/11 torture testified in a U.S. courtroom. It also featured testimony from U.S. generals, CACI employees, and former [military police officers] involved in the torture.
"Today is a big day for me and for justice," said Al-Ejaili. "I've waited a long time for this day."
"This victory isn't only for the three plaintiffs in this case against a corporation," he added. "This victory is a shining light for everyone who has been oppressed and a strong warning to any company or contractor practicing different forms of torture and abuse."
CCR legal director Baher Azmy said that "our clients have fought bravely for 16 years in search of justice for the horrors they endured at Abu Ghraib, against all of the challenges this massive private military contractor threw in their way over the years to avoid basic accountability for its role in this shameful episode in American history."
"We are awed by our clients' courage and by the power of their testimony in court, and we are grateful that this jury knew enough to credit their story over the deflections of CACI," Azmy added. "We thank the jury for affording our clients the measure of justice they came to a United States court to seek."
Like Guantánamo Bay, Abu Ghraib became a byword for U.S. torture during the Bush administration as it waged a worldwide war on terrorism following the September 11, 2001 attacks. The prison's worldwide notoriety stems from the leak and publication in 2004 of photos showing U.S. troops torturing and abusing Abu Ghraib detainees, both living and dead, often with smiles on their faces.
A 2004 investigation by U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Anthony Jones and Maj. Gen. George Fay found that CACI employees participated in and encouraged the torture of Abu Ghraib prisoners.
Investigators found that employees of CACI and Titan Corporation (now L3 Technologies) tortured Abu Ghraib detainees and encouraged U.S. troops to do likewise. Dozens of Abu Ghraib detainees died in U.S. custody, some of them as a result of being tortured to death. Abu Ghraib prisoners endured torture ranging from rape and being attacked with dogs to being forced to eat pork and renounce Islam.
A separate U.S. Army report concluded that most Abu Ghraib prisoners were innocent, with the Red Cross estimating that between 70-90% of inmates there were wrongfully detained. These include women who were held as bargaining chips to induce suspected militants to surrender.
Eleven low-ranking U.S. soldiers were convicted and jailed for their roles in Abu Ghraib torture. Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the prison's commanding officer, was demoted. No other high-ranking military officer faced accountability for the abuse. Senior Bush administration officials—who had authorized many of the "enhanced interrogation techniques" used at prisons including Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay—lied about their knowledge of the torture. None of them were ever held accountable.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No Excuses': Tlaib Says Every House Dem Should Vote to Defend Nonprofits
The Michigan Democrat warned that the bill "gives Trump and his incoming administration dictatorial powers to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies without due process."
Nov 12, 2024
U.S. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib on Tuesday was among multiple progressives and other Democrats who forcefully spoke out against legislation that would empower President-elect Donald Trump to strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status.
Highlighting a letter that a diverse coalition led by the ACLU sent to Congress in September, Tlaib (D-Mich.) took aim at H.R. 9495, or the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, on social media.
"No excuses," she said. "Every single one of my Democratic colleagues should be voting against this bill that gives Trump and his incoming administration dictatorial powers to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies without due process."
Tlaib, the only Palestinian American in Congress, has been a leading critic of U.S. support for the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip. H.R. 9495 is widely seen as an effort to further crack down on protests against the ongoing assault, though opponents of the proposal warn it could also be used to target groups advocating for issues including the environment and reproductive freedom.
The bill would let the Treasury secretary designate an organization as "terrorist-supporting" without any explanation or proof, and then end its 501(c)(3) status. That language is paired with legislation to provide tax relief for people detained or held hostage abroad and their spouses, a decision that critics say was made to force through the nonprofit policy.
Multiple members of Congress spoke out against the proposed attack on nonprofits both online and on the House floor, where the bill was debated and then a recorded vote was requested and postponed on Tuesday evening.
"H.R. 9495 is a giant threat to free speech," declared progressive Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.). "It gives Trump unchecked power to label any nonprofit as 'terrorist-supporting' without evidence or due process—opening the door to crush his opposition and silence dissent."
Tlaib and Lee's fellow "Squad" member Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) similarly warned that "this is a dangerous threat to free speech. No one person should have the authority to silence organizations that dare to challenge government policies or speak uncomfortable truths."
Congresswoman Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) stressed that "dissent is a fundamental part of democracy."
"Emboldened by the possibility of an unchallenged campaign of retaliation and persecution, Republicans are bringing H.R. 9495 to the floor AGAIN to give Trump the power to brand any organization that opposes him or his administration as a 'terrorist,'" she said. "I voted no once, and I will be voting NO again!"
A version of the policy targeting nonprofits previously passed the Republican-held House in April but stalled in the Democrat-controlled Senate. In addition to a White House victory in last week's election, the GOP won both chambers of Congress—meaning that even if H.R. 9495 fails now, it could be revived again next year.
Two outgoing House progressives who lost primaries to candidates backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—Reps. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.)—also blasted H.R. 9495 on Tuesday.
"H.R. 9495 would give Donald Trump unprecedented power to shut down any nonprofit or group that he disagrees with," said Bush. "This is a dangerous threat to our democracy. Congress must vote NO and stop it in its tracks."
Bowman argued that it "will sink us further into authoritarianism. It is an extremely dangerous bill that would give the government unlimited power to stop the work of humanitarian groups and target political enemies. All without transparency or evidence."
"This bill puts organizations like American Muslims for Palestine, American Immigration Council, and ColorOfChange at risk along with so many others doing the critical work of advocating for human rights and making sure starving children are fed and cared for," he continued. "The effects of H.R. 9495 aren't limited to just those organizations. Any nonprofit that crosses the executive branch could be targeted."
"This is authoritarianism and no Democrat should support this bill," Bowman added. "The unchecked powers granted by H.R. 9495 are ripe for abuse and any member of Congress who votes yes on it cannot honestly claim to support peace, justice, and freedom of speech."
Advocacy groups also continued to sound the alarm about the legislation ahead of the anticipated House vote.
"In any other context, this legislation would be seen for what it is, a play from the authoritarian leader's playbook," Paul O'Brien, executive director at Amnesty International USA, said in a Tuesday statement. "Members of Congress must recognize the danger posed and vote down this bill that could shrink civic space and silence civil society organizations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular