Archives par mot-clé : video ads

Trump delays release of some JFK assassination documents, bowing to national security concerns

President Trump delayed on Thursday evening the release of thousands of pages of classified documents related to the John F. Kennedy assassination, bowing to pressure from the CIA, FBI and other federal agencies still seeking to keep some final secrets about the nearly 54-year-old investigation.

The president allowed the immediate release of 2,800 records by the National Archives, following a last-minute scramble to meet a 25-year legal deadline. After lobbying by national security officials, the remaining documents will be reviewed during a 180-day period.

In a memo released by the White House, Trump said: “I am ordering today that the veil finally be lifted. At the same time, executive departments and agencies have proposed to me that certain information should continue to be redacted because of national security, law enforcement, and foreign affairs concerns. I have no choice — today — but to accept those redactions rather than allow potentially irreversible harm to our nation’s security.”

Early Friday morning, the president, who has trafficked in conspiracy theories himself, tweeted assurances that he wants to disclose as much as possible: JFK Files are being carefully released. In the end there will be great transparency. It is my hope to get just about every thing to the public!”

What happened when JFK was killed View Graphic What happened when JFK was killed

The records were put online at 7:30 p.m. The thousands of field reports, cables and interview summaries from dozens of FBI, CIA and congressional investigators reveal the minutiae of a chase for information that spanned decades and covered continents. Usually typed, stamped “Secret” and often annotated by hand, the files are a paper trail of detective grunt work, leads exhausted, dead-ends encountered, sources checked and rechecked.

Many of the files highlight the desperate search for Lee Harvey Oswald’s possible connections to communists, Cubans, or both in the months before he shot Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963.

Several show the FBI’s often extraordinary efforts to identify suspected communists in the United States. Dozens of them amount to brief records on individuals whose names were drawn from the mailing list of a publication called “The Worker.”

Some documents summarize internal discussions within Communist Party meetings after the assassination, discussing whether Oswald was innocent and whether communists would be blamed for Kennedy’s death. Agents ran down rumors from prisoners and poets.

One FBI memo from April 1964 details Director J. Edgar Hoover’s interest in connecting key players. He tells the New York field office to check out a tip that, prior to the assassination, “a meeting took place at Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club in Dallas,” attended by Ruby, a man whose name is illegible, and Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit, who was shot by Oswald as he fled from the scene of the Kennedy shooting.

Oswald, a troubled former Marine who had temporarily defected to the Soviet Union at one point, was killed by Ruby at Dallas police headquarters on live television — a stunning turn that fueled decades of conspiracy theories.

Latest release from the JFK assassination records View Graphic Latest release from the JFK assassination records

The government was facing a Thursday deadline for disclosing the records, and Trump had tweeted twice that the documents would be made public.

“The long anticipated release of the #JFKFiles will take place tomorrow,” he promised Wednesday. “So interesting!”

Given Trump’s enthusiasm, legions of assassination scholars, professionals and hobbyists had been waiting throughout the day to begin a reading frenzy. Any delay or limitations of the release could only be ordered by the president.

In his memo Thursday night, Trump said that any agency wanting to continue withholding documents after April 26 “should be extremely circumspect in recommending any further postponement of full disclosure of records.”

Some of the material that assassination experts had been most eager to review was not included in the documents released Thursday. The missing records include a 338-page file on J. Walton Moore, the head of the CIA office in Dallas at the time of the killing, and an 18-page dossier on Gordon McClendon, a Dallas businessman who conferred with Ruby just before he shot Oswald. Several files on notorious anti-Castro Cuban exiles were apparently withheld, including those focusing on Luis Posada and Orlando Bosch, who had been accused of a 1976 airline bombing that killed 73 people.

Researchers had hoped the release would shed new light on Oswald’s movements and contacts in the months before he shot Kennedy. Historians were particularly eager for new details of Oswald’s six-day trip to Mexico City, where he met with Cubans and Soviets two months before the assassination.

None of those documents appeared to be in the batch released Thursday. Nor were there revelations on Watergate burglars E. Howard Hunt and James McCord, both of whom were longtime CIA operatives of interest to assassination theorists.

If the cache of material did not deal a blow to the Warren Commission’s conclusion that Oswald acted as the lone gunman in Dealey Plaza, it did contain fascinating historical nuggets, big and small. Among them was a price list that Cuban exiles agreed they would pay to kill Cuba’s revolutionary leaders: $100,000 for Fidel Castro and $20,000 each for Che Guevera and Raul Castro. A 1963 CIA cable from Mexico City describes Oswald visiting the Soviet embassy, where he insisted on speaking what was described as “terrible hardly recognizable Russian.”

A long draft report by the House Select Committee on Assassinations concludes that the theory that Cuba ordered the killing in response to CIA attempts to kill Fidel Castro was unlikely.

“The Committee does not believe Castro would have assassinated President Kennedy, because such an act, if discovered, would have afforded the United States the excuse to destroy Cuba,” the draft states.

The release of the documents was mandated by a 1992 act of Congress meant to finally clear the official cupboards of classified material that had been shrouded in controversy and hearsay for decades.

The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Act, signed by President George H.W. Bush on Oct. 26, 1992, required that “each assassination record shall be publicly disclosed in full . . . no later than the date that is 25 years after the date” of its enactment.

But there was an out: The president would have the right to withhold some records that, if revealed, would harm national security and outweigh “the public interest in disclosure.” The law also requires the administration to publish an unclassified explanation for the postponement in the Federal Register.

David L. Boren, the former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee who co-
sponsored the records release law, said in a statement Thursday to The Post: “It was my intention that all documents be released in unredacted form except for in the most rare, exceptional circumstances involving current and continuing national security concerns.”

Trump had been lobbied to withhold some of the files by CIA Director Mike Pompeo, according to Trump confidant Roger Stone.

Stone, a political consultant who wrote a book alleging that Lyndon B. Johnson had Kennedy murdered, pushed Trump to release everything and hailed the president’s decision as a victory on Twitter.

But in an interview Wednesday, Stone said he worried that the intelligence community might still persuade his friend not to release all the papers, or that the files might be heavily redacted. He cited a previous release of classified material that left researchers disappointed.

“If the data dump that the National Archives did in July of a small amount of JFK-related material is any indication, the fallback of the intelligence agencies appears to be redact and withhold as much of this information as possible,” Stone said. “They’ll use the broad rubric of national security. If the censorship is so great to make the president’s order meaningless, it’ll get litigated in the courts.”

In a statement, the CIA said its redactions were meant to protect national security interests — the names of CIA assets and current and former CIA officers, intelligence-gathering methods and sensitive partnerships that remain viable today.

But the agency also vowed to release all of its Kennedy assassination records. “Every single one of the approximately 18,000 remaining CIA records in the collection will ultimately be released, with no document withheld in full,” the statement said. Those CIA documents, come April, could still retain redactions. The statement said the redacted information in the 18,000 pages represents less than 1 percent of all CIA information in the collection.

Many of the documents were created in the 1990s, making some of the information more sensitive and recent than older documents from decades ago.

The National Archives has had custody of the records since the Warren Commission published its investigative findings in 1964.

In 1991, Oliver Stone released his movie, “JFK,” which suggested that Kennedy was killed in a grand conspiracy involving the CIA, the FBI and the military. At the end of the film, audiences were informed that many of the investigative documents would not be released until 2029. Soon, protests erupted, and Congress passed the assassination records act that was signed into law a year later.

By the early 1990s, only a sliver of the Warren Commission’s papers — just 2­ percent — had been concealed, either partially or in full, according to the National Archives. Since then, the archives has made periodic releases of its repository, which totals more than 5 million pages. In a recent article on its website, the archives said that 88 percent of its documents are fully open; 11 percent have been released but with redactions; and 1 percent has been fully withheld.

In early 2016, the website GovernmentAttic.org obtained through the Freedom of Information Act the list of what was then more than 3,600 records that had been entirely withheld. Titles of the documents included “Personality File on Lee Harvey Oswald” and “Tape of Mr. William K. Harvey’s Interview, 4/10/75,” a reference to the legendary CIA officer who oversaw the agency’s plots to kill Fidel Castro.

A majority of Americans believe others besides Oswald were involved in the shooting, according to repeated Gallup polls conducted over the past 50 years. Since the Warren Commission concluded its investigation, historians and journalists have written extensively about how the CIA deliberately concealed information about Oswald’s interactions with Cubans or Soviets in Mexico City before the killing.

Conspiracy theories have dogged the investigation in part because of the Warren Commission’s marching orders. President Lyndon B. Johnson told the members of his handpicked investigative board that he wanted to squash the raging public fears that a foreign power or communist operatives had killed Kennedy. He told Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren that the country was “confronted with threatening divisions and suspicions” and that it was the commission’s “patriotic mission” to squelch “dangerous rumors.”

Warren was a close and loyal ally of Kennedy’s. He short-circuited some areas of investigation that could embarrass the president. He personally — and privately — interviewed former first lady Jackie Kennedy, a key witness, rather than allow his staff to pose their own questions.

Johnson himself had worried that a foreign power may have been involved, according to a 1969 interview with Walter Cronkite.

“I can’t honestly say that I’ve ever been completely relieved of the fact that there might have been international connections,” Johnson told the television newsman.

Johnson later asked that this portion of the interview be deleted from the public broadcast.

Philip Shenon, author of a 2013 book on the Warren Commission, interviewed one of the commission’s chief investigators, David Slawson, for Politico two years ago and showed him documents that had been declassified in the 1990s but that Slawson had never seen. Slawson’s conclusion: The CIA tampered with surveillance evidence of Oswald in Mexico City that would have revealed the agency knew of Oswald’s threat well before the assassination.

Even the CIA publicly acknowledged in 2014 that ­John McCone, its director at the time of the assassination, participated in a “benign cover-up,” according to a paper by agency historian David Robarge. His article said McCone was “complicit in keeping incendiary and diversionary issues off the commission’s agenda.”

The agency historian wrote that McCone purposely did not tell the commission about CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro, some of which had been planned at the Mexico City station.

“Without this information,” Shenon concluded in a 2015 Politico story, “the commission never even knew to ask the question of whether Oswald had accomplices in Cuba or elsewhere who wanted Kennedy dead in retaliation for the Castro plots.”

During a White House conference call with reporters Thursday, CNN reporter Jim Acosta asked whether the documents would contain information on any role the father of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) might have played in the assassination — a false charge Trump had raised during the 2016 presidential campaign.

“Honestly, we’re not going to comment on the content of the files,” a National Archives official replied.

carol.leonnig@washpost.com

Greg Miller, Michael E. Miller, Michael E. Ruane, Rachel Weiner, Tom Jackman, Devlin Barrett, Matt Zapotosky, Jenna Johnson, Michael S. Rosenwald and Greg Jaffe contributed to this report.

Read more:

Zapruder captured JFK’s assassination in riveting detail. ‘It brought him nothing but heartbreak.’

JFK’s assassin: Lee Harvey Oswald’s eerie calm the day before he pulled the trigger

JFK assassination conspiracy theories: The grassy knoll, Umbrella Man, LBJ and Ted Cruz’s dad

JFK’s last birthday: Gifts, champagne and wandering hands on the presidential yacht

‘Foul traitor’: JFK assassination records reveal KGB defector’s 3-year interrogation

Spain Dismisses Catalonia Government After Region Declares Independence

At the end of what he called “a sad day” for Spaniards, Mr. Rajoy assured them that he had the means to end a secessionist threat that, he said, was based on “lies, frauds and impositions.”

He removed the Catalan leader, Carles Puigdemont, and his cabinet, as well the director general of the autonomous police force. He also closed down Catalonia’s representative offices overseas.

In ordering the Catalan Parliament to dissolve, Mr. Rajoy said new regional elections would be held Dec. 21.

Photo

Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy of Spain spoke after the Senate voted on Friday to grant him powers to take direct administrative control over the Catalan region.

Credit
Juanjo Martin/European Pressphoto Agency

Pending the elections and formation of a new regional government, Mr. Rajoy said, Catalonia’s administration would be run from Madrid.

Fueled by a distinct language and culture as well as economic grievances, aspirations for a separate state have percolated for generations in Catalonia before boiling over this month.

The events on Friday, coming in the chaotic aftermath of an Oct. 1 independence referendum in Catalonia, were greeted variously with anger, concern and elation on both sides, with the prospect of even more volatile confrontations in days ahead as the Spanish government moves to put the steps in place.

Spain’s attorney general may now seek to detain Catalan leaders on grounds of rebellion.

Such moves were likely to turn the boisterous separatist street celebrations that greeted the independence declaration on Friday into mass protests, with one Catalan labor union already calling on workers to stage a general strike on Monday.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

During the debate in the regional parliament that preceded their vote for independence, Catalan lawmakers traded accusations and in turn described the occasion as “historic” and “happy,” or else “tragic” and a violation of Spain’s Constitution, perhaps the only thing on which both sides agreed.

Within an hour of the Catalan vote, the Spanish Senate in Madrid voted 214 to 47 to invoke Article 155 of Spain’s Constitution, granting Mr. Rajoy extraordinary powers to take direct administrative control over the region and remove secessionist politicians, including Mr. Puigdemont, the Catalan leader.

In a speech on Friday before the vote, Mr. Rajoy had said he had “no alternative” because Mr. Puigdemont and his separatist government had pursued an illegal and unilateral path that was “contrary to the normal behavior in any democratic country like ours.”

Undeterred by the government’s threat, and after a bitter debate, separatists in the Catalan Parliament passed a resolution to create “a Catalan republic as an independent state.” Most of the lawmakers opposed to independence walked out of the chamber in protest before the vote.

Since the region’s referendum on Oct. 1, Mr. Puigdemont had been squeezed in a tightening vise of his own creation, and seemed at times to contradict his own declarations as he squirmed for a way out.

Photo

Separatist lawmakers in the Catalan Parliament applauded after the resolution passed. Those opposed to independence walked out in protest before the vote.

Credit
David Ramos/Getty Images

Mr. Puigdemont, a former small city mayor, was trapped between the demands from Catalan hard-liners to declare independence on one side, and, on the other side, the stiffening response from a Rajoy government determined to preserve the nation’s Constitution and territorial integrity.

Despite pleas for mediation, he and his region’s independence bid were shunned and condemned, not only by the Madrid central government but also by European Union officials wary of encouraging similarly minded secessionist movements around the Continent.

European leaders made clear on Friday that they would not be recognizing Catalan independence and would support Mr. Rajoy, as leader of one of the bloc’s most important member states. Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, wrote in a Twitter post that “nothing changes” and “Spain remains our only interlocutor.”

Searching for a compromise, Mr. Puigdemont came close on Thursday to calling early regional elections in hopes of forestalling the drastic measures approved by the Spanish Senate on Friday and preserving Catalonia’s autonomy.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

But Madrid would offer no guarantee that it would not clamp down on the region, Mr. Puigdemont said, as he immediately faced a revolt in his own ranks from secessionist hard-liners who called him a traitor.

After hours of wavering on Thursday, he relented and threw the decision on independence to Catalan lawmakers, who took the fateful plunge on Friday.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Addressing the Catalan Parliament in Spanish, Carlos Carrizosa, a lawmaker from Ciudadanos, a party that opposes secession, told Mr. Puigdemont and separatist lawmakers that, far from creating a new Catalan republic, “you will go down in history for having fractured Catalonia and for sinking the institutions of Catalonia.”

In front of the assembly, he tore apart a copy of the independence resolution. “Your job is not to promise unrealizable dreams but to improve the daily lives of people,” he said.

Before the independence vote, Marta Rovira, a separatist lawmaker, told the assembly that “today we start on a new path” to build “a better country.” She added, “We are creating a country free of repression.”

Catalan lawmakers who voted for independence could face prosecution for sedition, or even rebellion.

Marta Ribas, a Catalan lawmaker, said that Madrid’s use of Article 155 was unjustified, but also argued that “it’s a mistake to respond to one outrageous act with another outrageous act.”

She added, “A declaration of independence won’t protect us from the 155, quite the contrary.”

In the streets outside the Catalan Parliament in Barcelona, not far from a boisterous pro-independence rally, a few Catalans quietly expressed similar frustrations.

The Oct. 1 referendum did not give the Catalan government the legitimacy to vote to secede, said Federico Escolar, 53, a cafe owner.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“Most of the people who would have voted no did not participate,” Mr. Escolar said, while smoking a cigarette outside his cafe. “It was not a proper referendum. It was illegal.”

Walking into a nearby subway station, Christina Juana, a 38-year-old social worker, agreed.

“Neither Puigdemont nor the Catalan government knows exactly what the Catalan people’s opinion is,” Ms. Juana said.

Before the Catalan Parliament’s vote for independence on Friday, large crowds had gathered outside in anticipation of what they hoped would be a historic day for Catalonia.

Many were draped in flags as they watched the parliamentary debate on two large screens, cheering during speeches by pro-independence lawmakers and hissing those of their opponents. When proceedings hit a lull, the crowds cycled through a series of pro-independence chants.

“Spanish occupiers!” was one, a reference to the national police officers who tried to stop the Oct. 1 referendum by force. “Leave Catalonia!”

David Meseguer contributed reporting.


Continue reading the main story

Trump Declares Opioid Crisis a ‘Health Emergency’ but Requests No Funds

“This was an idea that I had, where if we can teach young people not to take drugs,” Mr. Trump said, “it’s really, really easy not to take them.” He shared the story of his brother Fred, who he said had struggled with alcohol addiction throughout his life and implored Mr. Trump never to take a drink — advice the president said he had heeded.

“We are going to overcome addiction in America,” the president said.

The designation of a public health crisis, formally made by Eric D. Hargan, the acting health secretary, would allow for some grant money to be used to combat opioid abuse, permit the hiring of specialists to tackle the crisis, and expand the use of telemedicine services to treat people in rural areas ravaged by opioid use, where doctors are often in short supply.

Mr. Trump said his plan would include a requirement that federally employed prescribers be trained in safe practices for opioid prescriptions, and a new federal initiative to develop nonaddictive painkillers, as well as intensified efforts to block shipments of fentanyl, a cheap and extremely potent synthetic opioid manufactured in China, into the United States.

Photo

President Trump declaring a public health emergency at the White House East Room on Thursday. The move falls short of Mr. Trump’s sweeping promise to declare a national emergency on opioids.

Credit
Doug Mills/The New York Times

He also said he would act to suspend a rule that currently prevents Medicaid from funding many drug rehabilitation facilities.

“We cannot allow this to continue,” Mr. Trump said. “It is time to liberate our communities from this scourge of drug addiction.”

Congressional Republicans as well as law enforcement and physicians’ groups said the president’s announcement was a crucial first step in building awareness about the opioid crisis and confronting its causes and devastating effects.

In a statement, Patrice A. Harris, the chairwoman of the American Medical Association’s opioid task force, described it as “a move that will offer needed flexibility and help direct attention to opioid-ravaged communities.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“There is plenty of work ahead,” Dr. Harris added, “and the emergency declaration adds further urgency to this epidemic.”

But Democrats criticized Mr. Trump for what they characterized as a tepid response to an urgent calamity, arguing that his failure to request funding for the effort revealed a lack of seriousness about addressing the issue.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

“America is hemorrhaging lives by the day because of the opioid epidemic, but President Trump offered the country a Band-Aid when we need a tourniquet,” said Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts. “Instead of a commitment to emergency funding for our states and communities, President Trump offered empty words and half-measures.”

Andrew Kolodny, the co-director of opioid policy research at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University, said that no emergency declaration would do much to alleviate the impact of opioids without a substantial commitment of federal money and a clear strategy for overhauling the way the country treats addiction.

“What we need is for the president to seek an appropriation from Congress, I believe in the billions, so that we can rapidly expand access for effective outpatient opioid addiction treatments,” Dr. Kolodny said in an interview. “Until those treatments are easier to access than heroin or fentanyl, overdose deaths will remain at record-high levels.”

Graphic

How the Epidemic of Drug Overdose Deaths Rippled Across America

Drug deaths have surged in nearly every U.S. county.


Mr. Trump’s campaign promise to focus on the opioid crisis helped propel him to a crucial victory in New Hampshire’s primary last year. As president, he appointed an opioid commission in March, installing Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, a rival for the Republican nomination who had championed the issue during the 2016 race, as chairman.

In July, the commission recommended that the president declare a national emergency — either under the Stafford Act, which would have allowed the allocation of Federal Emergency Management Agency funds, or the Public Health Service Act, the option Mr. Trump chose.

Although Mr. Trump called the opioid crisis a national emergency over the next month, he did not sign a formal declaration of the designation, and the idea ran into stiff resistance in his administration to making an open-ended commitment of federal funds to deal with an issue that has shown no signs of abating.

Administration officials argued that a national emergency declaration was not necessary or helpful in the case of the opioid crisis, and that the powers associated with a public health emergency were better suited to address the issue. They said the White House would soon send Congress a request for money to combat opioids, with the goal of including it in a year-end spending package.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Mr. Christie praised the president on Thursday for what he called “bold action” to address the opioid crisis, and said the commission would put forth a comprehensive plan next week.

Beyond the lack of funding, it is unclear how much impact the public health declaration will have in the short term, given that Mr. Trump has yet to name central players who would carry it out. That includes a “drug czar” to steer a broader strategy on opioids and a secretary of health and human services who would tailor policies and identify sources of funding.

Among the questions left unanswered by the president’s announcement is whether the Department of Health and Human Services will use its authority under the public health declaration to negotiate lower prices for naloxone, a drug that quickly counteracts the effects of opioid overdoses. Lawmakers and public health and anti-addiction organizations have argued that such a measure is crucial to expand access to the drug.

Jim Hood, a founder and the chief executive of Facing Addiction, who lost his 20-year-old son, Austin, to an accidental overdose five years to the day before Mr. Trump’s announcement, said he was grateful that the president took the time to talk about a crisis that had too often been ignored, but worried that his message missed the mark.

“That undercurrent that if all of you just decided not to do this, we’d be in a better place — I can tell you, my son did not decide that he wanted to become addicted, much less die,” Mr. Hood said. “We might have been much better served by framing this as a very serious illness, a very serious health issue.”

Continue reading the main story

CVS makes more than $66 billion bid for Aetna: sources

(Reuters) – U.S. pharmacy operator CVS Health Corp has made an offer to acquire No. 3 U.S. health insurer Aetna Inc for more than $200 per share, or over $66 billion, people familiar with the matter said on Thursday.

A deal would merge one of the nation’s largest pharmacy benefits managers and pharmacy operators with one of its oldest health insurers, whose far-reaching business ranges from employer healthcare to government plans nationwide.

Aetna shares rose more than 11 percent, or $18.48, to $178.60, while CVS shares fell 3 percent, or $2.22, to $73.31, after the Wall Street Journal first reported on the talks earlier on Thursday.

Healthcare consolidation has been a popular route for insurers and pharmacies, under pressure from the government and large corporations to lower soaring medical costs.

Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) such as CVS negotiate drug benefits for health insurance plans and employers, and have in recent years taken an increasingly aggressive stance in price negotiations with drugmakers.

They often extract discounts and after-market rebates from drugmakers in exchange for including their medicines in PBM formularies with low co-payments.

A tie-up with Aetna could give CVS more leverage in its price negotiations with drug makers. But it would also subject it to more antitrust scrutiny.

The deal could also help counter pressure on CVS’s stock following speculation that Amazon.com Inc is preparing to enter the drug prescription market, using its vast e-commerce platform to take market share from traditional pharmacies.

CVS made the offer earlier this month, although the two companies have been in discussions about a potential deal for several months, the sources said.

These talks were carried out primarily between CVS Chief Executive Officer Larry Merlo and Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini, and were aimed at making executives comfortable with the idea of a merger, the sources said.

CVS and Aetna started discussing terms only recently, and a deal is not expected for a few weeks, one of the sources added, cautioning that the pace of the talks could accelerate given the publication of the negotiations.

The sources did not specify how much of CVS’ bid is cash versus stock, but given CVS’s and Aetna’s market capitalizations of $77 billion and $54 billion, respectively, a substantial stock component is likely in any deal.

Aetna and CVS declined to comment.

Aetna earlier this year closed the door on a deal with rival insurer Humana Inc after antitrust regulators said that combination and a rival deal between Anthem Inc and Cigna Corp were anti-competitive.

UNCERTAIN TIMES AHEAD

The deal comes after years of major changes to the U.S. health insurance industry under former President Barack Obama, whose 2010 Affordable Care Act created new ground rules for how insurers operate and expanded insurance to 20 million more Americans.

Republican President Donald Trump has promised to turn back many of the Affordable Care Act’s facets, but Congress has not been able to agree on a repeal or a replacement. The lack of progress – as well as Trump’s executive order to bring down healthcare costs – has created uncertainty for insurers as they head into 2018.

After the deal with Humana fell apart, Bertolini has said that he did not believe large deals were possible in the insurance industry.

But analysts have speculated about a tighter partnership between Aetna and CVS since early in the year. CVS and Aetna have a long-term contract in which CVS has provided pharmacy benefits for Aetna customers.

“Aetna really makes the best sense” said Jeff Jonas, a portfolio manager at Gabelli Funds. “It’s their largest client on the PBM side. They really have similar views as to where healthcare should go, which is to the retail setting.”

Jonas, who owns both Aetna and CVS shares, noted the two companies were already talking about working together on Minute Clinic, on home infusion and other services.

“To go from that to a full merger is a big step but it’s not huge,” he said.

Last week No. 2 insurer Anthem Inc. announced plans to manage its own pharmacy benefits with the help of CVS, a move that would give it a set-up similar to UnitedHealth Group Inc. and its Optum unit. Insurers want more control over the pharmaceutical component of care as they implement pricing schemes with doctors and hospitals that are based on health outcomes, not just procedures.

They also want to work on driving down costs, and as a pharmacy benefit manager, would negotiate directly with drugmakers.

Reporting by Carl O’Donnell, Greg Roumeliotis, Caroline Humer and Bill Berkrot in New York; Editing by Dan Grebler and Diane Craft

JFK Files, Though Incomplete, Are a Treasure Trove for Answer Seekers


Video

The J.F.K. Assassination: A Cast of Characters

As a new trove of documents about the killing of President John F. Kennedy is released, The Times’s Peter Baker walks us through who’s who in this American tragedy.


By NATALIE RENEAU and PETER BAKER on Publish Date October 25, 2017.


.

Watch in Times Video »

WASHINGTON — President Trump ordered the long-awaited release on Thursday of more than 2,800 documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, but bowed to pressure from the C.I.A. and F.B.I. by withholding thousands of additional papers pending six more months of review.

While incomplete, the documents represented a treasure trove for investigators, historians and conspiracy theorists who have spent half a century searching for clues to what really happened in Dallas on that fateful day in 1963. They included tantalizing talk of mobsters and Cubans and spies, Kremlin suspicions that Lyndon B. Johnson was behind the killing and fear among authorities that the public would not accept the official version of events.

Paging through the documents online on Thursday night was a little like exploring a box of random documents found in an attic. There were fuzzy images of C.I.A. surveillance photos from the early 1960s; a log from December 1963 of visitors, including a C.I.A. officer, coming and going from President Johnson’s ranch in Texas; and reports that Lee Harvey Oswald obtained ammunition from a right-wing militia group.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Some of the documents convey some of the drama and chaos of the days immediately following the murder of the president. Among them is a memo apparently dictated by J. Edgar Hoover, the F.B.I. director, on Nov. 24, 1963, shortly after Jack Ruby shot and killed Oswald as he was being moved from police headquarters to a local jail.

Continue reading the main story


Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“There is nothing further on the Oswald case except that he is dead,” the memo begins laconically, before reciting the day’s events.

Have You Read the Kennedy Documents? Tell Us What You See

Have you done any research into President Kennedy’s family history, assassination, or its aftermath? If not, is there anything else we should know about you and why you are interested in reading these documents?

First and last preferred, please.

By submitting to us, you are promising that the content is original, does not plagiarize from anyone or infringe a copyright or trademark, does not violate anyone’s rights and is not libelous or otherwise unlawful or misleading. You are agreeing that we can use your submission in all manner and media of The New York Times and that we shall have the right to authorize third parties to do so. And you agree to our Terms of Service.

Thank you for your submission.

<!–

(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i[‘GoogleAnalyticsObject’]=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){
(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),
m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)
})(window,document,’script’,’//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js’,’ga’);

ga(‘create’, ‘UA-7885722-38’, {‘alwaysSendReferrer’: true});
ga(‘send’, ‘pageview’);
ga(‘send’, ‘event’, ‘viewed_formacist’, ‘Yes’);

–>

Mr. Trump, who has indulged in his own wild speculation about the sensational killing, had expressed eagerness to finally open the last of the government files, only to run into a last-minute campaign by intelligence agencies to redact certain documents. Grudgingly, he gave the agencies until April 26 to go through the remaining papers again and make their case.

“I am ordering today that the veil finally be lifted,” Mr. Trump said in a memo to the agencies. Given their objections, he said, “I have no choice — today — but to accept those redactions rather than allow potentially irreversible harm to our nation’s security.” But he ordered the agencies to “be extremely circumspect,” noting that the rationale for secrecy has only “grown weaker with the passage of time.”

For conspiracy theorists, the Kennedy assassination has been the holy grail, one that has produced an endless string of books, reports, lectures, articles, websites, documentaries and big-screen Hollywood movies. It was the first murder of an American president in the television age, touching off a wave of global grief for a charismatic young leader while also spawning a cottage industry of skeptical questioning of the official version of events.

Every government authority that has examined the investigation of his death, from the Warren Commission to congressional investigators, concluded that Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, who fired three shots with a mail-order rifle from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository when the presidential motorcade passed by on Nov. 22, 1963. But that has never satisfied the doubters, and polls have consistently shown that most Americans still believe that someone other than Oswald must have been involved.

While the Warren Commission concluded that Oswald acted alone, the House Select Committee on Assassinations said in a 1979 report that Kennedy “was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy” but did not identify who those conspirators might have been. It ruled out the Soviet and Cuban governments, organized Cubans opposing Fidel Castro, the Mafia, the F.B.I., C.I.A. and the Secret Service, although it said it could not preclude that individuals affiliated with some of those groups might have been involved.

Among the doubters have been Mr. Trump, who last year alleged that the father of his Republican rival, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, was somehow involved in the assassination. The president’s longtime friend and adviser, Roger J. Stone Jr., authored a book accusing Johnson of being responsible for the shooting that elevated him to the presidency.

Video

Why Do We Love J.F.K. Conspiracy Theories? Blame the Movies

The New York Times chief film critic A.O. Scott analyzes how movies such as Oliver Stone’s “J.F.K.” helped fuel America’s interest in conspiracies.


By AINARA TIEFENTHÄLER and A.O. SCOTT on Publish Date October 26, 2017.


Photo by Warner Bros..

Watch in Times Video »

As it happened, Mr. Trump’s deferral to the C.I.A. and F.B.I. invariably will lead to suspicions that the government is still protecting sensational secrets about the case. Administration officials said there was no cover-up, just an effort to avoid compromising national security, law enforcement or intelligence gathering methods.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

The C.I.A., which has borne the brunt of suspicions from amateur assassination theorists for years, went out of its way on Thursday to try to dispel concerns that it was hiding important evidence.

The agency issued a statement noting that the vast majority of assassination-related records have been released, and that redactions were intended “to protect information in the collection whose disclosure would harm national security — including the names of C.I.A. assets and current and former C.I.A. officers, as well as specific intelligence methods and partnerships that remain viable to protecting the nation today.”

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

The release of the documents owes as much to the moviemaker Oliver Stone as anyone else. After his 1991 conspiracy theory movie, “J.F.K.,” stoked renewed interest, Congress passed the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act, which was signed into law by President George Bush on Oct. 26, 1992. The act mandated that all assassination records be released no later than 25 years from that date, which was Thursday, unless the president authorized further withholding for national security reasons.

In the years since the law was passed, the National Archives and Records Administration has released 88 percent of those documents in full and an additional 11 percent with portions redacted. Until Thursday, just 1 percent had been withheld in full.

Of the 2,891 documents released on Thursday, just 53 had never been disclosed by the archives; the rest had been made public with redactions.

Document

Read J. Edgar Hoover’s Memo on Soviet Reaction to the Assassination

While he was F.B.I. director, J. Edgar Hoover sent the following memo in 1966 to the White House, detailing Russian reaction to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.


The papers range widely and while many are not directly related to the assassination, others add context. One recounted the reaction of the Soviet Union to the killing, reporting that some in Moscow assumed it was a “coup” by the “ultraright” that would be blamed on the Soviet Union. An unnamed informant told American spies that the K.G.B. had proof that “President Johnson was responsible for the assassination.”

An F.B.I. cable from April 1964 reconstructed Oswald’s bus trip to Mexico weeks before the assassination, including the names of the people sitting around him and even what he was wearing: “a short-sleeved light colored sport shirt and no coat.”

In Hoover’s memo two days after the assassination, he expressed anxiety that Oswald’s killing would generate doubts among Americans. “The thing I am concerned about,” he wrote, “is having something issued so that we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin.” The F.B.I. director also fretted that discoveries that Oswald contacted the Cuban embassy in Mexico City and sent a letter to the Soviet Embassy in Washington could “complicate our foreign relations.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

He called the Oswald killing “inexcusable” in light of “our warnings to the Dallas Police Department” and hinted at Ruby’s mob connections, which would soon spawn an industry of research and speculation. “We have no information on Ruby that is firm, although there are some rumors of underworld activity in Chicago,” Hoover wrote.

The documents will not end the debate or speculation — and a few may add to the questions. In a 1975 deposition, for example, Richard Helms, the former C.I.A. director, was asked: “Is there any information involved with the assassination of President Kennedy which in any way shows that Lee Harvey Oswald was in some way a CIA agent or an agen…”

But the document ends there, and Mr. Helms’s answer is missing.


Continue reading the main story

Flake’s exit gives GOP new hope in Arizona

Sen. Jeff FlakeJeffrey (Jeff) Lane FlakeAuthorizing military force is necessary, but insufficient Republicans jockey for position on immigration McCain, Flake warn against ‘politically-motivated penalties’ for Canadian defense firm MORE’s (R-Ariz.) shock decision not to run for reelection has shaken up the GOP primary race, giving Republicans new hope that they can hold onto the critical Senate seat in 2018.

In normal circumstances, an incumbent senator’s retirement would be bad news for the party holding the seat and a general election opportunity for its opponents.

But Flake’s uniquely weak position with voters and the expected general election flaws of his sole primary challenger, former state Sen. Kelli Ward, mean that Flake’s retirement could actually create a more favorable situation for Republicans.

Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon, who endorsed Ward, has taken credit for the Arizona senator’s departure. But the now wide-open race could attract potential Republican candidates who see a new opportunity with the incumbent out of the race, with GOP establishment groups eventually coalescing around a candidate they think will fare better in the general election than Ward.

Republicans feel better about their prospects of keeping the seat in GOP hands, given Flake’s underwater numbers in both the primary and general election.

Flake’s public feud with Trump had weakened his standing with the conservative base and made him vulnerable in a primary. Flake kept up the attacks in his Tuesday speech on the Senate floor, saying he no longer wants to be “complicit.”

“The field as it currently stood was a definitive loser, whether it was Flake or Ward at the top of the ticket. This seat was history and it was hello Sen. Sinema,” an Arizona Republican operative told The Hill, referencing likely Democratic nominee Rep. Kyrsten Sinema. “Now Republicans have a chance to win this race.”

Nearly a dozen names are already being floated, as some potential candidates confirm that they’re considering bids while others are merely rumored to be mulling runs. The potential contenders include members of Congress, state lawmakers and former Trump campaign staffers.

Some of the rumored names include GOP Reps. David SchweikertDavid SchweikertDeficit hawks voice worry over direction of tax plan FreedomWorks: Tax reform failure could be ‘end of GOP as we know it’ Freedom Caucus backs three debt ceiling options MORE and Martha McSally. Republican Rep. Paul GosarPaul GosarHouse conservatives: Rove’s criticism ‘wrong and misguided’ House votes to block funding for EPA methane pollution rule McCain needs to start showing my constituents more respect MORE ruled out a bid on Wednesday.

Other potential candidates include former Rep. Matt SalmonMatt SalmonSchumer tells Sinema he’s backing her in Ariz. Senate race Comey fallout weighs on the GOP Conservative activists want action from Trump MORE, state Attorney General Mark Brnovich and businesswoman Christine Jones.

Even controversial former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was pardoned by Trump in August, said he wouldn’t rule out a bid.

Others have already indicated that they’re taking a look at the race, including two former Trump campaign staffers and GOP Rep. Trent FranksTrent FranksOvernight Health Care: House passes 20-week abortion ban | GOP gives ground over ObamaCare fix | Price exit sets off speculation over replacement House passes 20-week abortion ban Trump administration backs 20-week abortion ban MORE, who said he’s considering a bid, according to the Washington Examiner.

Arizona state treasurer Jeff DeWit, the chief operating officer of Trump’s Arizona campaign, told Fox Business Network that he’s waiting to see how the field shakes out over the coming days. He previously considered a Senate bid and met with the White House multiple times this year.

“I’m curious myself to see where we all stand, and there are a lot of rumored names to be in that race, mine obviously one of them,” DeWit said. “We’re all kind of waiting to do our homework and make the right decision. »

Robert Graham, a former Arizona GOP chairman who also worked on Trump’s state campaign, confirmed to The Hill that he’s taking a look at the race and will likely announce his decision in the next week or so.

Graham plans to travel to Washington, D.C. soon as he considers his bid. Graham had also previously met with the White House earlier this year.

« It definitely raises the bar for me in the sense that I am considering it,” Graham told The Hill. “All options are back on the table, but now it’s more than a casual discussion. »

Schweikert and Salmon are considered top-tier contenders, though some Arizona Republicans suspect that the two wouldn’t run against each other. Schweikert downplayed a potential bid on Wednesday, telling reporters on Capitol Hill “there’s not a burning desire to do it.” A source told The Hill that Salmon is looking at it and is “still digesting everything ».

McSally, who faces a tough reelection race for her House seat, is also seen as a top candidate. But strategists note it’s tough for someone outside of the Phoenix area to mount a statewide bid.

Both DeWit and Graham have the pro-Trump credentials, but some strategists note that they lack the name recognition of some of the other potential contenders.

While potential rivals weigh their bids, Ward has said she’s staying put. But she’ll likely face tough challenges from other conservative candidates who bring both higher name recognition and larger fundraising infrastructures.

Ward has amassed $1 million so far this year, but ended September with under $300,000 in the bank. Bannon recently campaigned with her, but it remains to be seen whether the White House will get involved in the race for her or another candidate.

Groups linked to the establishment have strongly signaled that they want an alternative to Ward. Senate Leadership Fund (SLF), a super PAC allied with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellGun proposal picks up GOP support Children’s health-care bill faces new obstacles Dems see Trump as potential ally on gun reform MORE (R-Ky.), made it clear after Flake’s retirement that they haven’t changed their tune on Ward, who they’ve dubbed “Chemtrail Kelli” in an effort to portray her as on the party’s fringe.

“Her whole entire reason for running in 2016 and now her claim that she was the conservative to the incumbent moderate — that’s gone now,” said a Republican political consultant in Arizona. “The moment one of those others get in the race I think is the moment her campaign begins to die a slow death.”

Sinema is expected to cruise to the Democratic nomination, and is seen as a formidable general election opponent and prolific fundraiser, with more than $4.1 million in her campaign account so far.

One of Cook Political Report’s election handicappers said that, even with Flake’s retirement, the race is still rated a toss-up. Flake’s retirement, according to Cook, “doesn’t immediately improve the GOP’s chances” of keeping the seat. But that could change depending on which candidate emerges from the GOP primary.

“I think we have got to feel good about our current candidate and putting together the resources she needs in running a strong race,” said Andy BarrGarland (Andy) Hale BarrHouse considers harsher rules for banks with North Korean ties Lobbying World Dem who called for ‘new generation’ of leaders endorses three House candidates MORE, who worked for Democrat Richard Carmona, who ran against Flake in 2012. “Before we were going to be running against an unpopular Republican in a cycle that was going to be bad for Republicans, and now we’re just going to be running in a cycle that’s bad for Republicans.”

But Republicans believe that, whoever wins the primary, their candidate will be able to compete with Sinema. Arizona Democrats haven’t won a Senate seat in nearly three decades.

Sinema, who is chairwoman of the moderate Blue Dog PAC, will still need to clear the primary against attorney Deedra Abboud. Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, noted that there’s some buzz around potential progressive candidates who could still jump into the primary.

“I think we have the issue coming up with [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals] and DREAM Act [Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act] and tax reform and the budget,” Grijalva told The Hill, adding that he personally wants to remain in the House. “I think for many she could quell a lot of the rumble, depending what she does on those.”

Brother of Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock charged with child porn possession in LA

A brother of Las Vegas mass shooter Stephen Paddock was arrested in Los Angeles on Wednesday on suspicion of possessing hundreds of images of child pornography, according to authorities.

Bruce Douglas Paddock, 58, was taken into custody at a nursing facility in the 5300 block of Laurel Canyon Boulevard, in the Valley Village neighborhood, and booked at 8 a.m. Television news footage showed Paddock in a wheelchair being loaded into the back of a van by Los Angeles Police Department officers.

Documents filed Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court outlined 20 criminal charges against Paddock, all related to possession of child pornography or the sexual exploitation of children. The felony complaint for the arrest warrant accused Paddock of having more than 600 pornographic images of children or youths, including 10 or more images showing a child younger than 12.

The investigation of Paddock began after evidence was found in a Sun Valley business where he had been squatting, the LAPD said in a statement. The evidence was found after Paddock was evicted, police said.

Paddock was homeless at the time and couldn’t be found, the LAPD said, adding that investigations “recently” tracked him to the North Hollywood facility where he was arrested Wednesday.

The LAPD released a photo of Paddock “in case there may be victims of unreported incidents,” who might see it and contact authorities, the department said.

Josh Rubenstein, an LAPD spokesman, said Paddock’s arrest was the result of an independent investigation by the LAPD and not related to the deadly shooting rampage in Las Vegas. The LAPD’s case began before the shooting, he added.

“There’s no connection,” he said.

On the night of Oct. 1, 64-year-old Stephen Paddock fired on the crowd at a country musical festival from his hotel room in Las Vegas. Paddock killed 58 people in the meticulously planned attack and wounded hundreds more before he shot and killed himself. His motivation remains a mystery, authorities say.

On Wednesday, Sandra Breault, a spokeswoman for the FBI in Las Vegas, declined to comment on Bruce Paddock’s arrest.

Bruce Paddock was apprehended at a nursing home that offers patients long- and short-term medical care. A spokeswoman for the facility confirmed the police activity occurred there but declined to comment on Paddock, citing patient privacy laws.

The suspect is one of four brothers. Their father, Benjamin Hoskins Paddock, was a convicted bank robber who was once placed on the FBI’s Most Wanted list.

Bruce Paddock has had numerous run-ins with local law enforcement over the last 25 years, according to Los Angeles County criminal records.

In 1989, he was charged with assault and battery and criminal contempt of court, although the charges were later dismissed, according to court records.

In 1993, Paddock was charged with annoying a child under 18 but was acquitted, court records show.

Between 1994 and 1995, prosecutors accused Paddock of various property crimes and driving without a license. He twice pleaded no contest to driving on a suspended license and to tampering with a vehicle, according to court documents.

More recently, he was charged with burglary and petty theft while having a previous conviction. He pleaded no contest to petty theft, and the burglary charge was dismissed, records show.

In separate cases in 2005 and 2006, Paddock was charged with making verbal threats, vandalism and arson. He was convicted of making threats and vandalism, but the arson charges were dismissed.

He was convicted of criminal contempt of court in 2007, according to public records.

Paddock pleaded no contest to vandalism in 2014, court records show.

kate.mather@latimes.com

joseph.serna@latimes.com

ALSO

2 killed on Grambling State campus; shooter at large

Cooler, yet still record-setting temperatures expected as L.A. heat wave lingers

Majority of L.A.’s streets are swept infrequently, audit finds


UPDATES:

11:55 a.m.: This article was updated with details on Bruce Paddock’s criminal record.

11:05 a.m.: This article was updated with comments from LAPD spokesman Josh Rubenstein.

10:30 a.m.: This article was updated with details from the felony complaint submitted for the arrest warrant for Douglas Paddock.

10 a.m.: This article was updated with details on where the suspect was taken into custody.

9:20 a.m.: This article was updated with comments from FBI spokeswoman Sandra Breault.

This article was originally published at 8:45 a.m.

George HW Bush Acknowledges Groping Multiple Women

Former President George H.W. Bush arrives for the coin toss for the 2017 Super Bowl in Houston. Two women say he touched them inappropriately.

Patrick Smith/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Patrick Smith/Getty Images

Former President George H.W. Bush arrives for the coin toss for the 2017 Super Bowl in Houston. Two women say he touched them inappropriately.

Patrick Smith/Getty Images

Former President George H.W. Bush has acknowledged touching multiple women inappropriately in what his spokesman called « patt[ing] women’s rears in what he intended to be a good-natured manner. »

Two women have reportedly accused the former president of groping them while posing for photographs with Bush in recent years.

Actress Heather Lind wrote a post on Instagram, which has since been deleted, about an incident from early 2014.

« [W]hen I got the chance to meet George H. W. Bush four years ago to promote a historical television show I was working on, he sexually assaulted me while I was posing for a similar photo, » Lind wrote in a post Tuesday, according to CNN. « He didn’t shake my hand. He touched me from behind from his wheelchair with his wife Barbara Bush by his side. He told me a dirty joke. And then, all the while being photographed, touched me again. »

In The Wake Of Harvey Weinstein Scandal, Women Say #MeToo

Shortly after, New York actress Jordana Grolnick told Deadspin that the former president groped her during a photo op in August 2016 backstage at a Maine theater.

« We all circled around him and Barbara for a photo, and I was right next to him, » Grolnick told the website. « He reached his right hand around to my behind, and as we smiled for the photo he asked the group, ‘Do you want to know who my favorite magician is?’ As I felt his hand dig into my flesh, he said, ‘David Cop-a-Feel!’ « 

Bush’s spokesman Jim McGrath responded to the allegations with a statement — a « non-apology apology » — to multiple news organizations:

« At age 93, President Bush has been confined to a wheelchair for roughly five years, so his arm falls on the lower waist of people with whom he takes pictures. To try to put people at ease, the president routinely tells the same joke — and on occasion, he has patted women’s rears in what he intended to be a good-natured manner. Some have seen it as innocent; others clearly view it as inappropriate. To anyone he has offended, President Bush apologizes most sincerely. »

A flurry of sexual assault and harassment allegations against powerful men have emerged after The New York Times first reported on film mogul Harvey Weinstein paying off sexual harassment accusers. Since then multiple women have come forward and police in Los Angeles, New York and London are investigating allegations that Weinstein sexually assaulted women in those cities.

At least 38 women have accused Hollywood writer and director James Toback of sexual harassment, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Other prominent men in entertainment, media and politics have been accused of harassment as well; the accusations renew attention to the Access Hollywood recording of President Trump bragging about groping women, which was released just over one year ago.

The reports have sparked a resurgence of women posting stories on social media about sexual assault and harassment using the « #metoo » hashtag.

Top video marketing tips: Forget programmatic – think holistic

David Muhle, VP Sales and Channel for EMEA, Ooyala looks at the rise of holistic advertising for more effective video advertising decisions.

The video advertising market has undergone tremendous change looking for the next big thing which solves the issue of managing and maximising sales across direct and programmatic channels simultaneously.

While most advertising purchases are made using automated systems called ‘programmatic trading’ the direct market, often used by publications and on television, is still effective in a challenging market. For advertisers to fully optimise their campaigns, they need a platform that effectively uses both automated and manual purchase.

For publishers, the mechanics of this complex market makes knowing where to sell the advertising to, and how to do so at maximum price, difficult. Using the holistic platform, publishers have a better overall understanding of their channels, allowing them to streamline advertising sales and increase their ROI. A holistic platform creates the conditions necessary to effectively combine direct and programmatic ads, something that had previously been difficult and costly.

How holistic advertising works

In traditional advertising, a buyer is bound to a seller. This means that if the demand for their supply increases over time, the seller can earn more while still holding onto the same space, then sell it on later using programmatic trading. In a programmatic market, where a valuation of an ad impression can be made at any given moment, the seller becomes at risk if they do not sell their full range or their demand decreases.

A platform with a holistic approach to advertising pools together all the benefits of the traditional and programmatic markets, to find the best combination of the two. The result is a higher ROI, more satisfied advertisers, and a better level of overall understanding. Direct and programmatic ads are simply added together in the holistic model, and then strengthened by each other’s characteristics.

The benefits of a holistic platform that combine direct and programmatic adverts are numerous. The ability to optimise sales and see a higher average value (increased CPM) across all video adverts, both programmatic and directly sold ads, allows for more effective forecasting for future campaigns. The platform also increases the control over demand based on advertising rules that publishers enforce across all channels. This results in smarter advertising that reaches the right audiences.
Other benefits include a unified view of stock status and sales channels for publishers which improves data analysis and allows publishers to make objective advertising decisions based on that data. This, in turn, equates to cost savings because you only need to manage one advertising platform.

Are the market players ready?

Several market players are already starting to use the holistic model. In a study for SpotX, Researcher IHS forecast that $2.25 billion, which is over half of all video advertising revenue, will be generated programmatically by 2020, with the UK remaining Europe’s top programmatic market. Here, programmatic digital video currently makes up 32% of digital video net ad revenues which gives operators an enormous opportunity for sales. This opportunity can be acted upon most quickly and effectively via the holistic ad platform.

The same study found that non-traditional media companies offering video ads are also moving their businesses over to the programmatic market. Many of these companies see it as an opportunity to differentiate themselves from traditional TV companies and quickly achieve economies of scale. Using the holistic platform, they can close the gap between traditional, direct and automated marketing to become an even more attractive market player.

Holistic advertising also helps publishers compete with Facebook and other social media platforms, since the holistic ad model gives them more ways to utilize their entire stock by making more money on live videos, more effectively, and creating economies of scale.

The benefits of holistic advertising also apply to mobile marketing, where consumers in the U.S. and U.K. spend the most daily hours watching non-linear, VOD viewing. According to eMarketer in 2016, 69% of U.S. digital video ad spending is forecast to be programmatic this year. Holistic advertising will be a key factor in continued growth for publishers because the demands of the market are so fragmented.

A business’ aim is to create smarter ads based on consumer behavior and viewing patterns on different platforms, and only a holistic platform can do this effectively. A holistic ad platform will lead us into a new and dynamic era for advertising, in which video is the focus.

By David Muhle
VP Sales and Channel for EMEA
Ooyala