14 Responses

1. 

   1)

   Floridiot said on 2/19/2006 @ 1:44pm PT: [Permalink]

   Odd, the cons numbers on the talk shows, almost match Bushies poll numbers

2. 

   2)

   big dan said on 2/19/2006 @ 3:16pm PT: [Permalink]

   Why is this happening? Because 6 corporations own close to 100% of the MSM? And the GOP is pro-Corporate America? News isn’t supposed to be like that. It’s supposed to be unbiased.

3. 

   3)

   big dan said on 2/19/2006 @ 3:34pm PT: [Permalink]

   "According to a study published in the respected British medical journal The Lancet (10/29/04), about 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war."

   CBS says for every American, 11 Iraqi’s die (they don’t even give a figure)
   NBC says 17-20,000 and beyond (what does that mean??? 100,000 is "beyond")
   ABC says "as many as 18,000"

   We’re being taken for a ride by the MSM (well, not US…). We are each individually responsible for finding out the truth.

   F.A.I.R. Fairness And Accuracy In Reporting

4. 

   4)

   Arry said on 2/19/2006 @ 4:24pm PT: [Permalink]

   #2 Big Dan — Here’s a nice little graph illustrating ownership concentration.

5. 

   5)

   big dan said on 2/19/2006 @ 5:04pm PT: [Permalink]

   OK, everyone’s got to click on that graph from Arry.

   We have a choice, though. First you can learn who’s "controlling" our news in the MSM, and then the choice part is to turn the f***ing TV dial. I just discovered LINK TV on Dish satellite ch 9410. They had a Gore lecture on global warming. I don’t think the MSM owners want us citizens to see that!

   Then there’s Democracy NOW! on Dish 9415. Important news to make informed decisions for American citizens.

   The regular MSM is gone, and it’s not coming back. Don’t think because they cover one thing, like Cheney’s shooting, they’re back. They don’t cover anything important. It’s not going to change, change your TV dial. Stop giving them 2nd & 3rd chances, and just stop watching CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS.

   Arry, the flipside is that this graph above is causing things like LINK TV & Democracy NOW! and…well..THE BRAD BLOG! And these things use donations, they don’t take corporate money. That’s why the news on TV is what we see, the donors get to "control" the news, therefore Corporate America controls the MSM news. Bookmark that graph, baby! And click on the media watch links.

6. 

   6)

   Robert Lockwood Mills said on 2/19/2006 @ 5:08pm PT: [Permalink]

   It’s easy to identify newspapers and TV networks as part of corporate oligarchies. It’s less evident that these mega-corporations were created in the last 25 years through mergers, many of which have been poorly conceived (AOL-Time Warner is the best example).

   Mergers often occur for no better reason than that someone on Wall Street causes them to happen, earning multi-million dollar fees just for doing some paperwork. In other cases it’s the elephantine ego of a Sumner Redstone or Ted Turner, who simply wants to control more assets and more people.

   We have laws to prevent this from happening. The Sherman Antitrust Act was passed in 1890 to curb "trusts," the Victorian Era term for what is today called a merged corporation. The larger a company becomes, the more power it wields. NBC went from being a divided company in the 1940s (half of it broke off into ABC) to becoming the reverse…RCA acquired it, then GE acquired RCA.

   The laws aren’t enforced. It’s never an issue at campaign time. It’s just accepted. It shouldn’t be. Until the Sherman Antitrust Act is taken out of mothballs, our only defense is boycotts of these companies and their advertisers’ products.

7. 

   7)

   big dan said on 2/19/2006 @ 5:11pm PT: [Permalink]

   I just saw on LINK TV, where only the United States and Australia are the only major countries who didn’t sign the Kyoto Treaty, and that the mayors of many American cities are bypassing the federal government and signing it. And that global warming is happening, and questionable scientists representing corporations are the only "scientists" disputing global warming. It is totally FALSE that there is a 50-50 debate among scientists, that global warming is happening, and the MSM is part-and-parcel projecting this false claim.

8. 

   8)

   Dredd said on 2/20/2006 @ 2:49am PT: [Permalink]

   The free press is in prison and being tortured into doing propaganda work by the republican party.

9. 

   9)

   darer said on 2/20/2006 @ 3:51am PT: [Permalink]

   {ed note: Comment deleted. Spam.}

10. 

    10)

    Arry said on 2/20/2006 @ 8:17am PT: [Permalink]

    Big Dan — Yep. The non-corporate sources are the news now. I think a lot of people who watch the corporate MSM don’t even take it very seriously anymore, though It is all part of being in a culture created by seamless vast entertainment conglomerates. Some people just like being part of that and don’t even think much about it. (Very poor citizenship!)

    I always thought Neil Postman’s book "Amusing Ourselves to Death" was a pretty good analysis of the situation, and I particularly liked his image of the Lincoln-Douglas debates and the contrast between folks who were entranced for hours at all the fine points made there and today’s corporate MSM viewer who can’t follow a chain of reasoning more than a step or two before getting bored and nervous for the next "news" snack fix.

    The concentrated corporate MSM is not just irrelevant, it undermines citizenship.

    Robert — Yes, whatever happened to "trust-busting"? I just read the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Act until my eyes were crossed. "Restraint of trade" seems to be the primary concept, and it would have to be applied to an industry not imagined at the time the laws were passed (1890 and 1914). The concept could still be applied though, I think. Also, I think our nation needs to acknowledge the vital necessity of an informed citizenry and pass some "antitrust" legislation specifically aimed at the media.

11. 

    11)

    Arry said on 2/20/2006 @ 9:53am PT: [Permalink]

    …and, I should add, the Republicans have taken advantage of the pervasive entertainment culture to a far greater extent than have the Democrats many of whom still carry diminishing vestiges of reasoning skills and civic responsibility (although, sadly, they are often embarrassed about them).

    Look at the talk shows. Look at the Sunday morning shows.

    It might be interesting to see who, among the Dems/Progressives are put on the most. Could it be those with some entertainment value or an ability to thrive in the sound bite culture?

    But, of course, the bottom line is that corporate concentration has created, not surprisingly, a class and network of power manipulators – the military/industrial complex interwoven with entertainment conglomerates. What other result would we expect?

    But, as a progressive, I think it is misleading to even talk about Democrats/Progressives, although, of course, there are progressive Democrats. Granted I watch almost no television, but from what I gather a true progressive is a rare sight on the MSM. Don’t forget that within this democracy-smothering corporate culture, the Corporate Party, comprising Republicans and Democrats, assiduously keeps under wraps the issues that will in any way expose its hypocritical and violent self-serving and corruption. The presidential debates are as clear an illustration of this as anyone would need, I would think.

12. 

    12)

    Dredd said on 2/21/2006 @ 3:43am PT: [Permalink]

    I take it one election at a time.

    Even one election is a vast morass of activity handled by people who are generally volunteers and who don’t really know the system at large.

    This election’s big story is the exposure of the republican majority in the House to being thrown out due to accountability.

    This will give democrats the majority. No other party has a chance, according to the polls, to take the House majority.

    We are so politically ignorant when we do not do the "political science" and find out how the congress works.

    The way it works is that the party with the majority of members in the senate and house get to appoint the chairmen of all committees, the majority votes in each committee, and to decide the agenda of that committee (link here).

    The sophistry of a multi party system and the hope filled rhetoric of progressives is better suited for a system of another nation besides the United States.

    It just does not work like progressives in the main say it works. And I am a progressive.

    I do not like the way it works, but if I plod on ignorantly, ignoring how the congress actually works, and then make a grand plan and scheme devoid of a country to realistically apply it to … where the hell is that?

    The answer is to put democrats in charge of the House, so the tide can be turned.

    =================
    SUPPORT CLINT CURTIS
    =================

13. 

    13)

    Arry said on 2/21/2006 @ 6:45pm PT: [Permalink]

    Dredd — You must have noticed that I didn’t say "Don’t vote for Democrats".

    Nevertheless, you have your apparent purpose, which I understand, and I have mine.

    I consider my purpose to be urgent also. It is to delineate the clear class nature (mainly in terms of the corporate elite) of the precipitous decline of the American system of representative democracy and all that goes down with it.

    Until people understand it, we will continue the decline under whatever corporate party is in power, I firmly believe. We have to stop the decline and we won’t do it by ignoring the facts. (That doesn’t mean one branch of the party is not worse than another and that it is not reasonable to put the so-called opposition party into power.) But the facts have to be kept in view and hammered home time and again until there is perceptible movement in a healthier direction.

14. 

    14)

    Arry said on 2/21/2006 @ 7:07pm PT: [Permalink]

    And Dredd…Don’t jump to conclusions due to my Green Party status. At this point, I do consider the Greens to be a "reform party" – the purpose being to reform the system, and I believe that in a small measure they have already succeeded – not nearly enough, of course. You don’t reform or revolutionize a system be sitting on the sidelines. You take intelligent chances with the inevitable result of getting people mad at you, but also (we hope) of moving things in the right direction.

    Maybe someday we will talk a bit more about third or multiple parties.