US banks made a $1tn windfall from the Federal Reserve’s two-and-a-half-year era of high interest rates, an analysis of official data by the Financial Times has found.

Lenders got higher yields for their deposits at the Fed but kept rates lower for many savers, the review of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation data showed. The boost to the US’s more than 4,000 banks has helped pad out profit margins.

While rates on some savings accounts were raised in line with the Fed’s target of more than 5 per cent, the vast majority of depositors, especially those at the largest banks, such as JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, got far less.

At the end of the second quarter, the average US bank was paying its depositors interest at the annual rate of just 2.2 per cent, according to regulatory data that includes accounts that do not pay interest at all. This is higher than the 0.2 per cent they paid two years ago but far lower than the Fed’s 5.5 per cent overnight rate that the banks themselves can get.

At JPMorgan and Bank of America, annual deposit costs were 1.5 per cent and 1.7 per cent, respectively, according to this data.

Those lower payments to depositors generated $1.1tn in excess interest revenue for the banks, or about half of the total dollars banks brought in during that time, according to the FT’s calculations.

This is in sharp contrast to Europe, where some governments imposed windfall taxes on banks which benefited from higher interest rates.

The Fed tightened its main policy rate this week, cutting by half a percentage point. Some US banks sought to pass the cuts on to depositors as quickly as possible, a move that would shore up their margins.

Hours before the Fed rate cut on Wednesday, Citi told its employees at its private bank, whose wealthy clients typically receive preferential rates, that if the US central bank were to cut rates by half a percentage point the bank would do the same to its rate on accounts paying 5 per cent or more, according to a person familiar with the matter.

At JPMorgan, bankers have been told that clients with $10mn in cash or above would see their savings rates cut by 50bp and future cuts would move in lockstep with the Fed’s actions, people familiar with the matter said.

Because of the Fed’s rate cut, banks will “certainly” have “the ability to reduce deposit costs”, said Chris McGratty, head of US bank research at KBW. “The degree of aggressiveness will, I think, vary bank to bank.”

JPMorgan said the bank aimed to ensure a fair and competitive rate. Citi declined to comment. Bank of America declined to comment.

A report earlier this year from the Risk Management Association compared banks to petrol stations, which are typically quick to raise prices and slow to cut them. Banks, by contrast, are slow to raise the rates they offer on deposits and savings accounts but quick to cut them.

When the Fed began to tighten monetary policy in March 2022 many analysts predicted that competition from new financial technology companies and the growing ease with which consumers can move cash would force banks to dole out a greater share of the higher rates to their depositors.

But the FT’s calculations show that they were able to hold on to much of the benefit — although slightly less than in previous Fed tightening cycles.

The failure of Silicon Valley Bank and others in early 2023 forced many mid-sized and smaller banks to raise their rates in order to keep depositors from fleeing. Larger banks saw an influx of cash during the flight for safety, allowing them to delay the need to match higher rates elsewhere.

Overall US banks captured about two-thirds of the benefit of the Fed’s higher interest rates from March 2022 until the middle of this year, according to the FT’s calculations based on the latest data available. They paid depositors nearly $600bn in interest.

The last time the Fed raised interest rates, from early 2016 to until early 2019, US banks captured 77 per cent of the benefit.

Although the Fed has now begun to loosen monetary policy, bank stocks reacted positively on Thursday as investors bet that lower rates and a relatively healthy economy would create more demand for borrowing and boost investment banking dealmaking activity.

Nonetheless, the highest interest rates in more than a generation have pushed more money than ever, nearly $3tn, into certificates of deposit, which typically pay the highest rate of any bank deposits and also cannot be changed overnight.

As that money becomes unlocked, banks will be able to adjust their rates down, but not before, analysts said.

“It will be a slow grind down,” said Scott Hildenbrand, chief balance sheet strategist at Piper Sandler.

964

According to a March 15th report from Reporters Without Borders (RSF), the Russian government has introduced strict laws aimed at tightening its grip on the internet by outlawing VPN promotion and increasing censorship of Western social media. These policies come in the wake of Russia’s 2024 presidential election and have raised fears of a rise in digital censorship, drawing parallels to China’s approach to controlling the internet.

Since the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the Russian government has progressively increased censorship on Western social media platforms and thousands of websites, ostensibly to safeguard its digital space from external influences. However, this crackdown inadvertently led to a surge in VPN usage among citizens seeking to bypass these restrictions. To strengthen control, Roskomnadzor, the Russian media regulator, adopted blocking techniques similar to those employed by China. For example, on February 27, several permitted platforms like YouTube and WhatsApp suddenly became inaccessible, while banned platforms such as Facebook and Instagram briefly became accessible without the need for VPNs.

RSF sheds light on the Kremlin’s deliberate maneuvers to throttle the flow of information in Russia, particularly in the lead-up to the presidential election. It unveils the intricate workings of online censorship, showcasing strategies ranging from prosecuting VPN-related content to deploying blocking techniques modeled after those used by the Chinese government.

A notable example is the recent enactment of laws criminalizing VPN marketing and related information, underscoring the Russian government’s steadfast resolve to tighten its grip on internet freedom. This legislative tactic mirrors a broader trend observed in authoritarian regimes worldwide, where legal frameworks are wielded to silence dissent and mold digital narratives for political gain.

Moreover, the passage of a new bill by the Duma, Russia’s lower parliament, aims at Russian citizens and companies by prohibiting them from advertising on websites and media     

outlets labeled as “foreign agents.” The bill also extends its reach to forbid advertising information resources associated with foreign agencies. What few independent journalistic voices remain in Russia have seen their YouTube channels closed down.

Through initiatives such as deploying mirror sites (Operation Collateral Freedom), RSF ensures that vital information remains accessible to individuals within Russia despite governmental attempts to suppress it. In this regard, RSF is at the forefront of combating censorship and promoting press freedom globally.

Their proactive approach not only works to circumvent censorship but also underscores the resilience of civil society in the face of authoritarian repression. By leveraging technology to uphold the principles of democracy, RSF and similar organizations demonstrate that the fight for freedom of expression transcends borders and empowers individuals to access unbiased information, fostering a more informed and resilient society.

Corporate media coverage of this story has been rather limited, with only a few major outlets providing reports. The New York Times covered the story in early March, and Yahoo News reported on the upcoming legislative changes in February. However, there has been little coverage beyond these initial reports, and neither source addressed the recent bill prohibiting Russian citizens from engaging in financial interactions with “foreign agents.” 

This lack of extensive coverage raises concerns about the accessibility of information regarding significant legislative developments in Russia. Without broader media attention, important aspects of these measures and their implications may remain overlooked or underreported, potentially hindering public understanding of key governance and civil liberties issues.

Source: RSF, “Kremlin Steps up Online Censorship in Order to Silence Last Opposition Voices Ahead of Presidential Election,” Reporters Without Borders, March 15, 2024.

Student Researcher: Colton Boone (Diablo Valley College)

Faculty Evaluators: Nolan Higdon and Mickey Huff (Diablo Valley College)

Journalists working for foreign media in Gaza have participated in Hamas’ “Day of Loyalty to the Palestinian Journalist,” an annual event hosted by the terror group’s Government Media Office with the stated aim of aligning the media with Hamas’ agenda, an HonestReporting investigation revealed.

The exposure unveils the disturbing relationship between Gaza’s rulers and the journalists tasked with covering them, calling into question their objectivity and the ethical standards of their media outlets — the Associated Press, AFP and Reuters.

Here are the highlights:

• AP’s staff photographer Hatem Moussa delivered a video address at Hamas’ 2014 Loyalty Day event. It appears that his message was displayed on the same screen as the message of Abu Ubaida, the terror group’s military wing spokesperson. It was also published in propaganda style by Hamas’ official news agency.

• AP’s photographer Fatima Shbair and AFP’s Mohammed Baba spoke in a promotional video for the 2021 event, in which they were also honored by Hamas for receiving international awards.

• Two journalists were honored in the 2021 event as Hamas media office’s “work partners:” Yasser Qudih, who infiltrated into Israel on October 7 and recently won the Pulitzer Prize with Reuters’ photography staff, and The New York Times’s photographer Samar abu Elouf, who recently won the prestigious Polk Award.

• At the 2022 event, two journalists were honored for serving on the judging panel of the Government Media Office’s media contest: Reuters cameraman Fadi Shanaa and AP’s Adel Hana, whom we exposed for teaching Hamas’ media courses.

• Other journalists were honored in 2021 and 2022 for winning international awards. These included Reuters photographer Ibraheem Abu Mustafa, who recently also won the 2024 Staff Photography Pulitzer, and AP photographer Khalil Hamra.

• In 2022, the terror group also gave monetary awards to two journalists who were exposed by HonestReporting for their infiltration into Israel and their links to Hamas — Hassan Eslaiah, who worked for AP and CNN, and Ashraf Amra who worked for Reuters.

The following details were compiled based on a review of Palestinian social and mainstream media. HonestReporting has reached out to the relevant media agencies for comment.

Message For Hamas

AP’s award-winning photographer Hatem Moussa, who has been working for the agency since 1998, delivered a recorded video message at Hamas’ Day of Loyalty event on December 31, 2014.

His address, in which he mainly thanked fellow journalists, was recorded after his injury in the 2014 Gaza war and posted by a colleague on Facebook. 

But according to Hamas’ news agency, al-Rai, which seems to have added “context” to his words, his message was to expose “the occupation’s practices and crimes against Palestinians.”

And what’s most disturbing is that the report includes a picture of another speaker at the event, whose message was apparently displayed on the same screen: Abu Ubaida, Hamas’ military wing spokesperson who threatened to kill Israeli hostages at the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war:

It goes without saying that a journalist working for one of the world’s top media outlets cannot participate in an official Hamas event, nor deliver any message there while apparently sharing a stage with an armed terrorist. It compromises his objectivity and exposes disturbing ties to a proscribed terror group.

Moreover, it directly aids Hamas, which used Moussa’s appearance for its own propagandist goals.

Related Reading: Broken Borders: AP & Reuters Pictures of Hamas Atrocities Raise Ethical Questions

Serving Hamas

Moussa’s colleague, AP’s photographer Fatima Shbair, followed suit. Her message, as well as that of AFP’s photographer Mohammed Baba, was included in a promotional video featuring award-winning journalists honored by Hamas in the December 31, 2021 Loyalty Day event.

Both Shbair and Baba thanked the Hamas Media Office in a gushing display of emotion, with Shbair calling its efforts “incredible” and Baba voicing hope the office will “adhere to its pledge.”

Here are the translated relevant clips from the full promo, which was shared on the Office’s Facebook page:

As long as the battle continues, we must continue conveying the truth, and getting this picture out to the world. What the Government Press Office does every year to honor Palestinian journalists and their efforts on the ground is incredible. It encourages all of the journalists to carry on with the mission.

To the Government Press Office, which every year celebrates and honors journalists and photographers, I say this: This demonstrates your connection to the journalists, and I hope you will always adhere to your pledge.

When journalists from the world’s leading news agencies appear in a propaganda video for Hamas, their journalistic integrity is as good as gone. They practically voice support and allegiance to the terror group’s agenda.

But they’re not alone.

In the 2021 and 2022 Loyalty Day events, several journalists working for international media were honored by Hamas for working with the Government Media Office, serving as judges in the Office’s media contest, or winning international awards.

In 2021, according to a Facebook Live posted on the Office’s page, those honored as its “work partners” were photographers Yasser Qudih and Samar Abu Elouf.

Qudih infiltrated into Israel on October 7 and recently won the Pulitzer Prize with Reuters Photography Staff, and Elouf — who was also honored at the event for winning an international award — is a New York Times photographer, who recently won the prestigious Polk Award.

In 2022, as seen in another Facebook Live of the annual event, Hamas honored AP’s veteran photographer Adel Hana and Reuters cameraman Fadi Shanaa, for serving on a judging panel for one of its media contests. Both donned an official scarf of the Hamas Government Media Office:

Elouf’s and Hana’s commendation by Hamas is hardly surprising — Elouf had also spoken at a Hamas event she was honored at in 2012, as revealed by media analyst Eitan Fischberger.

And Hana was exposed by HonesReporting last July as having instructed media training courses supervised by the Hamas-run Information Ministry.

But the fact that they and other foreign media journalists in Gaza have actively served the Hamas government as “work partners” or official judges paints an even darker picture, equivalent to serving the Nazi propaganda ministry of Joseph Goebbels. Because those chosen for such positions are most likely those who abide by the standards that serve the propagandist terrorists, not the standards of ethical journalism.

Other journalists in the 2021 and 2022 events played a more passive yet unethical role by receiving honors for winning international awards. These included Reuters photographer Ibraheem Abu Mustafa, who recently also won the 2024 Staff Photography Pulitzer, and AP photographer Khalil Hamra.

How objective can their coverage of Hamas be after receiving such honors from them?

Lastly, Hamas has also given monetary awards to show its “loyalty” to Gazan journalists — making it clear that the equation is in fact the opposite.

Among those receiving the de-facto bribery in 2022 were two journalists exposed by HonestReporting last year: Hassan Eslaiah, who infiltrated into Israel on October 7 and was fired from CNN and AP after the exposure of his cozy photo with Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. And Ashraf Amra, who worked for Reuters and shared a call on social media to infiltrate into the Jewish state.

No Transparency

The fact that the “Loyalty Day for the Palestinian Journalist” is organized by a so-called “government” body (as opposed to a military one) shouldn’t confuse anyone — the media office is de-facto run by Hamas.

And the office’s head, Salama Maarouf, is a Hamas official who shares podiums with figures like Ghazi Hamad, who vowed to repeat the October 7 massacre in which 1,200 people were slaughtered in Israel:

Because these figures are in power, the extravagant show of “loyalty” to journalists in Gaza is in fact a show of deterrence to anyone who is not loyal to Hamas’ agenda. For example, here is what Maarouf said back in 2015 about the purpose of the Loyalty Day:

Marouf explained that the “Day of Loyalty to the Palestinian Journalist” has been firmly established as part of the Palestinian national agenda, not just the media’s, emphasizing that the compass of the resistance should also be the compass of the Palestinian journalist.

The conclusion is clear: Whether they willingly cooperated with Hamas or not, these Gaza journalists cannot be objective. The give-and-take relationship with the terror group is too deep and official to detach from.

International media outlets must be transparent about the fact that their news from Gaza is one-sided.

They should also look into their journalists’ official and personal relations with Hamas, and discipline those who actively cooperate with the terrorists.

News consumers deserve nothing less.

Liked this article? Follow HonestReporting on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to see even more posts and videos debunking news bias and smears, as well as other content explaining what’s really going on in Israel and the region.

Do you ever find yourself thinking that you’ve always wanted to learn that one skill but somehow haven’t — and now time seems to be passing you by? Like learning how to play chess. Like learning how to dance the swing. Like learning how to speak — I mean really speak — French.

I feel that way about so many things, but one in particular stares me in the face every day. Early in the morning, I go to the gym in my apartment complex; since it’s so close, I have no excuse. Invariably, I get thirsty during my workout. Fortunately, there’s a water fountain in the gym. It’s the kind you see in many public places in North America. And therein lies the problem. 

I’ve never learned how to drink from a water fountain. Not as a child at school. Not as a youth in university. Not as a working adult when I was travelling through airports. And not even now, as I near my golden age, at my gym. 

I know how to turn it on. I know how to bend over it to reach the water. But then, the trouble hits. I can do no more than wet my lips. Hardly a teaspoon of water actually gets into my mouth; most of it goes down the drain. This experience was no doubt what drove Samuel Taylor Coleridge to write his famous poem; the ancient mariner must have felt my frustration when he said, “Water, water everywhere; nor any drop to drink.”

In my ineptness with water fountains, I find I’m not alone. A post related to this on Reddit’s “No Stupid Questions” has received a gazillion reactions. Also, there are at least five how-to YouTube videos on the topic.

Of course, during the COVID-19 pandemic years, drinking from a water fountain became fraught with risk. Many fountains were turned off and, in a way, I was relieved not to face my nemesis. But now, with mixed emotions, I find they’re back on again.

What’s worse, this skill of being able to drink from a water fountain seems to get only more important with age. As we get older, we need to drink more water for various reasons — including chronic conditions like diabetes or medications like diuretics. Ironically, we also lose our sense of thirst, and therefore we need to consciously drink more water. While we may forget to drink water at home, when we’re out and see a water fountain, we’re rudely reminded that we should be hydrating.

Water is so fundamental that religions have integrated it into their scriptures. The Christian Bible say “the river of God is full of water” (Psalm 65:9). The Hindu Vedas say “O! Water stream come near me; you are the elixir of immortality” (Atharvaveda 3:13:6). The Islamic Quran says that God “made every living thing from water” (Quran 21:30).

Water is such an essential part of our lives that people have waxed eloquent about it. The poet Wystan Hugh Auden said, “Thousands have lived without love, not one without water.” St. Francis of Assisi sang, “Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Water, who is very useful and humble and precious and chaste.” Martial artist Bruce Lee was so inspired by its “formless, shapeless” nature that he urged a complete submission: “Be water, my friend.” 

Writers know that water is so basic that it’s a metaphor for many things. Water can represent challenges, as in Ernest Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea. It can represent a passage into hell — like the rivers in Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and Francis Coppola’s Apocalypse Now. In some stories — like F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby and William Shakespeare’s Hamlet — water represents purification. In Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, water symbolizes freedom; the Mississippi River carries Jim away from slavery and Huck away from his abusive father. 

Water can also be a metaphor for flexibility and rejuvenation and hope. And drinking water can, by association, signify imbibing all those good things. Bolstered by the inspiring quotes from spiritual leaders, enlightened by works from great authors, and armed with practical advice from YouTube videos and Reddit comments from the proletariat, I enter the gym. It is empty, so there are no judging eyes.

I walk up to the water fountain. I do a couple of head rolls and shrugs to loosen up the neck and shoulders. I do my own inimitable version of the Tai Chi ball exercise to stretch my entire body and reach a meditative state. I try not to think of the end goal; I know that a thousand-mile journey begins with a single sip. I recall “…the Master’s warning that we should not practice anything except self-detaching immersion.”

I slowly bend over the water fountain. I firmly press the button. I calmly watch the parabolic arc of water coming from the spout. And, taking a deep breath, I deftly thrust a water bottle into the flow. Mission sort-of accomplished.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Spain has been heavily criticised for allegedly facilitating the exile of Venezuela’s main opposition presidential candidate, who under Spanish diplomatic protection was pressured into signing a document recognising President Nicolás Maduro’s victory.

Edmundo González, a former Venezuelan diplomat who the opposition says won the July election, left Caracas on September 7 to seek political asylum in Spain after spending weeks in hiding to dodge arrest. His departure dealt a major blow to the opposition, which had vowed to install González as president when Maduro’s current term ends in January.

Maduro has launched a sweeping crackdown since the election, in which he claimed to have won a third term in a result recognised by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea but not the west. The opposition has produced copies of about 80 per cent of the official tally sheets to prove that González trounced Maduro and the US has backed the claim.

González, who is 75 and has health problems, said this week that he was forced to sign under duress a letter recognising Maduro’s victory as a condition for being allowed to leave Venezuela.

Maduro’s government later published what it said were photographs of González signing the document inside Spain’s embassy residence in Caracas during a meeting with Maduro’s top political fixer Jorge Rodríguez and his sister Delcy, who is vice-president. The Spanish ambassador to Venezuela, Ramón Santos, was also present.

Spain’s conservative opposition leader Alberto Nuñez Feijóo has called for the resignation of Spanish foreign minister José Manuel Albares and the ambassador over the affair, saying Spanish diplomacy “cannot be at the service of a dictatorial regime”.

A senior Brazilian government official told the Financial Times that the Rodríguez siblings visited the residence to put pressure on González, which was something that “never should have been allowed”.

“Maduro pushed [González] out of the country through intimidation and . . . the Spanish state was the main facilitator,” the official said. “They have to explain what they did and be held accountable.”

The Spanish government rejects allegations that it had a role in forcing González out of the country and insists it had sought to ensure the opposition leader’s security and had been responding to his asylum request.

González had sheltered safely for almost five weeks in the Dutch embassy residence after the election but was only visited by the Rodríguez duo after moving to the Spanish residence.

González became depressed when he realised, about three weeks after the election, that the Maduro government was not going to collapse, and that he would either have to remain indefinitely under diplomatic protection in Venezuela or seek asylum abroad, according to a person close to the opposition.

Around this time he spoke to José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, a socialist former Spanish premier close to Maduro’s government, who was a key figure in brokering the agreement that led to González’s departure, the person told the FT.

The Brazilian official said he understood that Zapatero had discussed the plan to exile González to Spain with the Rodríguez pair “and helped implement it”. Zapatero could not be reached for comment.

González was transferred to the Spanish embassy residence on September 5 believing that he would receive asylum in Spain, with the final details to be worked out with the ambassador. In the event, two days of negotiations ensued, during which the Rodríguez pair appeared in person with a document for González to sign.

Albares told reporters in Brussels on Thursday that his government had not invited anyone to visit González at the ambassador’s residence and “did not take part in any negotiation of any document”. The ambassador was present during the talks and appeared in the photographs because the residence only had one reception room, he added.

Christopher Sabatini, a Latin America expert at Chatham House, said the signature under such circumstances “violates the very notion of diplomatic asylum, making the Spanish government complicit in the Maduro government’s electoral theft and repression”.

In a statement on Thursday that was intended to calm the storm, González thanked Spain for its support and said: “I was not coerced either by the Spanish government or by the Spanish ambassador to Venezuela, Ramón Santos.” A Venezuelan opposition source in contact with González said he made the statement after an urgent request by Albares.

Venezuela’s government has attempted to exploit González’s departure as a propaganda coup, painting him as weak and cowardly. Jorge Rodríguez brandished a copy of the González document at a news conference on Thursday, describing it as “nothing other than a capitulation”.

Mocking González’s claim that he signed under duress, Rodríguez played excerpts of an audio recording that he said showed a convivial atmosphere with discussions lubricated by whisky. González said the meeting had been photographed and recorded without his permission.

“They showed up with a document that I would have to sign to allow my departure from the country,” González said. “In other words, either I signed or I would face consequences. There were some very tense hours of coercion, blackmail and pressure.”

Ryan Berg, director of the Americas programme at Washington think-tank CSIS, said: “The available evidence appears to suggest Spain played a role in enabling Edmundo González’s forced exile by the regime — a huge blow to Venezuelans who have hoped for change and voted for him.”