Media Control in America

[thebullet]

You are a liberal, and an idiot. You have totally alienated me, by telling me I am stupid for not thinking the way you do, by telling me how I should think as a woman, as a lesbian, as a good citizen.

But geez, Colly, how do you really feel? I don't remember telling you how to think as a woman or as a lesbian. Not being either, I have no opinion about how you should think.

However, being an American citizen I do feel that I have a valid opinion about what it means to be a good citizen.

Is what I quoted about right wing control of the media totally out of bounds from your point of view (that's what this thread is about, after all)? I was quoting people of the right. Bill Moyers is a Baptist minister and a good journalist. Had you heard his interviews of these right wing pundents even you would have been surprised at his even-handed handling of the questions, regardless of the outrageous responses he was receiving.

Yes, from my point of view the responses were outrageous. When I hear a man who is a major force in right wing media say that journalism is only opinion and facts have no place there, I for one am shocked and stunned. I was foolishly brought up to believe that journalism has some relationship to reporting of facts.

I am not a liberal. I am a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Perhaps from your point of view that makes me a communist.

Perhaps from your point of view I am an idiot. I would rather not play dueling IQ's with you, Colly, but I'd bet we'd be on a pretty even playing field.

Try to control your temper, Colly. You're acting like a lesbian female. (just kidding, don't get your panties in a wad).

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Nngh. Bit of an aside here. This was not a pretty election.

It set a bad precedent or rather confirmed a bad precedent that both sides miraculously failed to note. It officially became moot how an official acts in office. An official can be the most rabid end of the political spectrum or the most incompetent buffoon ever and it still won't shatter the overall 50/50 split of our country because in truth the elections are fought and won over pet issues, ideologies, slogans, etc... Who the candidate is, how they perform has become moot.

Clinton sat on his ass for 8 years taking credit for a Silicon Valley boom and trying to not make waves. For this half the country thought of him as god, the other half the anti-christ. Bush...well, we all know the radically different approach Bush took and the same thing in the opposite direction happened.

The problem with this has become that now in a radically polarized culture where the pet issuians and minor ideologues are forced to play offensive line for major league psychos, people have grown to hate each other personally. Perhaps it's been around all this time and the media of debate has become so urgent that it's coming out, or perhaps it's because more and more people are radicalizing out of neccessity.

I'm not sure of the particulars, but it's becoming the norm now that the psycho wing of the Right wishes bodily harm, murder, concentration of the people of the Left and the psychos of the Left recognizing this and tired of being alienated on the Rhetoric War has begun to fear, hate, and demean all the denizens of the Right. Which furthers alienation of the Right giving more voice to the psychos and the spiral to Hell is complete.

To me, this is a bad thing. When the Right believes all Lefties are traitors and sinners and the Left believes all Righties and in-bred lunatics, we have a Yugoslav situation and in modern history, that didn't end so good. Especially for the unity of the country.




Back on the topic. Yes, the media has shifted itself right a dangerous amount. The regular media trying to appease accusations of left-wing bias has removed almost all mention of the left-wing point of view and only rarely acknowledges the center-left viewpoint, and ends up generally in a center-right category and growing further. Then there are groups like Fox News and Limbaugh that are unashamedly Far Right-wing. I think much of the blame for this falls on the Democrats who have become pissant little weakling fuckwits too scared of looking bad to stand up for either their ideology or the appearance of their ideology to the public. Environmentalism has become a dirty word associated with Hippie-wannabes named Dewdrop instead of a cause most hunters and fishers find themselves allied with hikers and naturalists on. Capitalism with a Conscience has been irreparably linked with Communism. Ditto for any form of Socialized Medicine and oddly enough Social Security. Saying "hey, shouldn't wars be at least tangentally defensive in nature" or not supporting every single war campaign launched by the US is anti-American and traitorous in the common-language and Anti-War has been utterly portrayed as anti-Americanism to the point that any Peace Rally anywhere is labeled by many an Anti-America Rally.

The list goes on and on about what the Democrats have failed to preserve through their pathetic actions. It is one of many reasons I am a registered independent.



Okay, that's enough politics from me today. I'll try to avoid arguing too many actual points because in the past I usually served only to alienate more people at the expense of my own mood. Not a good trade overall.

Maybe this country will heal it's wounds and maybe the loyal opposition will Idunno oppose, or perhaps America will split up into warring little whining babies of factions, or maybe it'll become a totalitarian shithole. I dunno. I'd like the first, cause despite what the psychotic fringe likes to yell out, I do like this country and living here...

That and I suck at foreign languages.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

But geez, Colly, how do you really feel? I don't remember telling you how to think as a woman or as a lesbian. Not being either, I have no opinion about how you should think.

However, being an American citizen I do feel that I have a valid opinion about what it means to be a good citizen.

Is what I quoted about right wing control of the media totally out of bounds from your point of view (that's what this thread is about, after all)? I was quoting people of the right. Bill Moyers is a Baptist minister and a good journalist. Had you heard his interviews of these right wing pundents even you would have been surprised at his even-handed handling of the questions, regardless of the outrageous responses he was receiving.

Yes, from my point of view the responses were outrageous. When I hear a man who is a major force in right wing media say that journalism is only opinion and facts have no place there, I for one am shocked and stunned. I was foolishly brought up to believe that journalism has some relationship to reporting of facts.

I am not a liberal. I am a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Perhaps from your point of view that makes me a communist.

Perhaps from your point of view I am an idiot. I would rather not play dueling IQ's with you, Colly, but I'd bet we'd be on a pretty even playing field.

Try to control your temper, Colly. You're acting like a lesbian female. (just kidding, don't get your panties in a wad).

Lets start right here:

I am not a liberal. I am a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Perhaps from your point of view that makes me a communist.

I never said you were a communist. I haven't called anyone in this forum one that I recall. Always you slide in these little innuendos about my views or the views of anyone who disagrees with you, that have nothing to do with what they have said, but paint them in a bad light.


And here:

But geez, Colly, how do you really feel? I don't remember telling you how to think as a woman or as a lesbian. Not being either, I have no opinion about how you should think.

Not true sir, not true at all. You and Huckleman spent part of a thread telling me I should vote for your man because the Dems were more supportive of women and gays. Even a very fine leftist in Mr. Lucifer Carrol made mention of it and I put you both on ignore for a while because I was livid over the presumptuousness. I am sure I can dig up the thread if you wish.


The particulars of this thread are of minimal importance. The continued pattern of crying in your wheaties day in and day out makes it merely symptomatic.


You said:

Yes, from my point of view the responses were outrageous. When I hear a man who is a major force in right wing media say that journalism is only opinion and facts have no place there, I for one am shocked and stunned. I was foolishly brought up to believe that journalism has some relationship to reporting of facts.


Absolutely. Like Dan Rather reporting the facts days before an election. Like media outlets trumpeting the results of exit polls showing Kerry winning by a landslide when in fact that Data was raw data that had not been analyzed or released offically by the firm providing exit polling results, but had been "leaked" to internet blogers. The fact that early exit polls showing the election as already decided have been shown to stifle voting for the "loseing" candidate notwithstading. Defintely a conservative biase there.

The liberal biase in the media is just as ponounced as it ever was. A half hour of NPR will convince most anyone they are listening to a liberal slant. It's always been this way. There is almost always a liberal slant in the person of the reporters and in their coverage. There is a conservatve slant as well, in the person of the outlet owners and in the case of FOX it is probably an instituionalized biase. But it is there working both ways.

Don't compare your intellect to mine. You are the man who said a vote for anyone but Kerry is a vote for Bush. My mind isn't small enough to make such stupid statements I hope.

-Colly

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Colly's got a distinct point. Often in the passion of conviction, we alienate. Whether this is in misguided benevolence, genuine malevolence, slip-of-the-tongue, rhetorical folly, or just world-view clash. Calling Repubs stupid for setting a precedent the predominate number of either party didn't bother to notice or calling liberals anti-American for asking hard questions. Such actions only serve to perpetuate the divide that has been solidifying after the gloating/mourning after-election period. It's not a pretty divide and it will prove as dangerous as the totalitarian movements you have pointed out.


The saddest part of this that I can see is that you are both moderates, both with some very good points, but the alienation has served to make it a slapping match of dirty accusations and false-readings. And bullet, as much as I find myself agreeing with your points, you have done greatly those two actions against Colly.


You know what? Fuck the rest of the point. It's the holidays and if the fucking divide on this country can't heal over for this one fucking holiday of unity, then it's all over. It truly is all over for this, my country. All over but the charismatic leaders and the ethnic cleansing.

Merry Christmas to one and all. From Ted Rall to Ann Coulter, from Al Sharpton to Dick Cheney. Everyone, Have a Happy Holiday with family and friends, with the joy of giving and loving unconditionally. Joy.

 

[dreampilot79]

For reasons I should not discuss, this topic hits near and dear to my heart.

You don't know the half of the problem.

It is nieve to believe that the news media is not influenced by their own agenda. Instead of looking at "the media" as an institution, you must look at them as people. People have agenda's.

Until a few years ago, there were limits on broadcast ownership. Those rules were intended to stop any one individual from having a monopoly on the news. Those rules have already been hammered and the "media" is working on abolishing all prohibition on that news monopoly. It has little to do with news and all to do with money. Money and the business side of both newspapers and broadcast media rule the news. Always have, Always will.

Until 10 years ago, no one person or company could own more than one broadcast station in a market. They could not own a newspaper and any broadcast outlet, nor a TV and any radio station and or newspaper. There were a few exceptions grandfathered in. Mostly newspapers who had bought broadcast (both radio and television) in the early 1950's before those rules were changed.

The rules also prohibited anyone from owning 10% or more of any company that did.

A few years ago, the cap on total radio ownershiip was taken off and in all markets you could own as many radio stations as you wanted so long as your combined ratings did not exceed 50% of the listeners.

In the major markets 5 years ago, the Newspaper/TV cross ownership rules came off. Now companies could own a newspaper, a TV station (or two if the ratings didn't exceed 50%) and more than half the radio stations.

There is a strong loby in congress with masses of money being applied to take all caps off.

At present 3 companies own almost 80% of the broadcast outlets in the US. They want the rules changed very badly so that they can purchast the rest. If this happens, those three companies will own virtually all of the news outlets.

Before one sees a big dark right wing conspiricy to own the news in the US, the issue isn't news but advertising money. Those three companies want it ALL.

The fall out from that is that those same people will then controll the news. Back to the opening. They are people, generally business people with a right wing agenda. Those people will then control the media and the news.

I do not see the right wing conspiricy to controll the news but I do see it happening. It has nothing to do with propaganda and everything to do with advertising money but the result is the same!

 

[thebullet]

I do not see the right wing conspiricy to controll the news but I do see it happening. It has nothing to do with propaganda and everything to do with advertising money but the result is the same!

I agree with you. I never said it was a conspiracy, merely a fact. You correctly point to the law changes allowing ownership of multipe stations in single markets as the deal breaker that has lead us into this alarming problem.

 

[minsue]

Colly's got a distinct point. Often in the passion of conviction, we alienate. Whether this is in misguided benevolence, genuine malevolence, slip-of-the-tongue, rhetorical folly, or just world-view clash. Calling Repubs stupid for setting a precedent the predominate number of either party didn't bother to notice or calling liberals anti-American for asking hard questions. Such actions only serve to perpetuate the divide that has been solidifying after the gloating/mourning after-election period. It's not a pretty divide and it will prove as dangerous as the totalitarian movements you have pointed out.


The saddest part of this that I can see is that you are both moderates, both with some very good points, but the alienation has served to make it a slapping match of dirty accusations and false-readings. And bullet, as much as I find myself agreeing with your points, you have done greatly those two actions against Colly.


You know what? Fuck the rest of the point. It's the holidays and if the fucking divide on this country can't heal over for this one fucking holiday of unity, then it's all over. It truly is all over for this, my country. All over but the charismatic leaders and the ethnic cleansing.

Merry Christmas to one and all. From Ted Rall to Ann Coulter, from Al Sharpton to Dick Cheney. Everyone, Have a Happy Holiday with family and friends, with the joy of giving and loving unconditionally. Joy.

http://www.addis-welt.de/smilie/smilie/diverse/fm_clap.gif

 

[dreampilot79]

I agree with you. I never said it was a conspiracy, merely a fact. You correctly point to the law changes allowing ownership of multipe stations in single markets as the deal breaker that has lead us into this alarming problem.

I'm not sure that the cross/multiple ownership rule changes made the problem.. but they intensified them and any further changes would make the situation even worse.

It truly freightens me to think that 3 people could control all media in the US within only a few years.

Since Bush is very in favor of the elimination of those rules, it could be that within 4 years (the media giants will be pushing hard now) that it will happen.

Those changes came very close last year and the push to eliminate all ownership rules will be really on in the next 4 years.

 

[rgraham666]

Bullet? Could you please apologise to Colleen. I think your attack on her was way out of line.

I've engaged her many times in debate. I've never found her anything but fair and opened minded. There are things she and I will never agree on, but we are willing to listen to each other.

And she finds much of what is happening as disturbing as you do.

Thinking about the original point, I'm much of the belief that democracy isn't a method. It has little to do with voting, campaigns, reprsentatives or people in the executive office.

Democracy is an attitude. It's a willingness to look at the world, trying to take in as much information as possible and making decisions on that information. Knowing full well those decisions are flawed and will need to be changed in the future.

Democracy isn't about fixed truth, but about unlimited, never ending movement.

Too many people are not interested in democracy. They're interested in The Truth. A Truth that cannot be denied except by evil people. Such an attitude is a betrayal of our humanity, in my opinion. It never ends well.

 

[dreampilot79]

Too many people are not interested in democracy. They're interested in The Truth. A Truth that cannot be denied except by evil people. Such an attitude is a betrayal of our humanity, in my opinion. It never ends well.

In my humble opinion, there is no such thing as TRUTH. Truth is something that people BELIEVE to be fact. Truth is merely a perspective of facts that one holds with religious fervor.

More people have been killed over the "Truth" than anything else. The truth of religion trumps even human greed.

As for democracy, it is a state of mind and not a system of government. It is both rule by the people AND tolerance of others. Good sportsmanship? Not just rule by the majority, but respect for the minority.

 

[gauchecritic]

Getting personal

Pilot is probably right and the main mover in recent years, not just in the US but the world is Rupert Murdoch.

Whether it be ownership, advertising standards, sport or almost anything media related then if Rupert wants it, he gets it. Rules? Change them. Laws? Break them, then buy them, then change them.

This man, is probably entirely responsible for almost all the changes in ownership rules in the US media. You can see the way he works by the fact that he freely gave up his birthright to become an American citizen (all the Aussies I know are justly and fiercely proud of their homeland) in order that he could own media in the US.

But where Pilot is misled is the money aspect. Money is a tool, as those with or without it can attest, what Rupert desires, at all and any cost is power and the more he has, the more he wants.

What all peoples, the world over know, deep down inside, is that it really doesn't matter who is king or president, who is left or right, who is good or evil, the thing that really matters, even after bloody revolution, is that tomorrow, or the next day or next week they will still have to rise at 6.30 and go work for the man to keep themselves and their loved ones alive.

And this is the reason that you really can fool all of the public all of the time. They know they're being fooled, but they still have to earn a crust.

 

[dreampilot79]

What I know I'm right about is that the issue of media control IS NOT about control of the news or the propaganda fed to the people.

It is about Control of the almighty currency. Perhaps you are right that it is about power and not money but the motivation is still NOT control of news.

It's just that news flows from the top.

 

[rgraham666]

I quite agree with you, dreampilot.

If there is a Truth it's probably too big for our tiny little minds to comprehend.

And too simple for our sense of grandeur to accept. "Is that all?!" we'll ask.

But people like to think their opinions are The Truth. It relieves them of the burdens of responsibility and thought.

 

[dreampilot79]

I quite agree with you, dreampilot.

If there is a Truth it's probably too big for our tiny little minds to comprehend.

And too simple for our sense of grandeur to accept. "Is that all?!" we'll ask.

But people like to think their opinions are The Truth. It relieves them of the burdens of responsibility and thought.

And more importantly.. it makes them RIGHT and RIGHTEOUS.

Having THEIR truth allows them to abuse those that do not have the TRUTH.

 

[rgraham666]

As a clever little line in an essay I did a couple of years ago put it, "Ideology is not about being good, but about being right. It's quite amazing what you can do when you're right."

 

[amicus]

"This country is in trouble! If people like Amicus truly believed in freedom, they would be screaming from the rooftops demanding a free and honest press in this country...."

Thus spake the Bullet..aka andrew wiggins...upon opening this thread...

Bullet...you just don't get it...

I started doing talk radio in about 1964 in Hawaii for an independent radio station, KTRG...

It came about because on my Jazz show, I introduced an album by Thelonious Monk...and asked my listeners to comment on the music. Well...they did...filled up my four telephone lines for the rest of the program.

The owner of the station was listening and the next day called me into the office and offered me a 'talk radio show' during the day.

Being an advocate of Ayn Rand, my base to talk from was easy to determine.

The reason most talk show hosts are 'conservative' is that left wing advocates cannot defend their positions on air, live, to an active audience.

And you really don't get it about individual freedom and democracy. The 'people' the democracy, they choose who succeeds and who fails in talk radio. I know, I did it for 30 years and if they don't like you, they don't listen, if they don't listen, you cant sell advertising, you can't support the show.

The same thing about broadcasting, it should be a free market place, there should be no FCC that determines who can own media outlets. But then again, you just don't get, you don't have a clue as to what a 'free market' 'democracy' means.

You are in short, as Colly intimated, an intellectual snob, who thinks that a high IQ should determine who rules and makes the law.

Asshole!

You really don't get it at all.

The people rule, fuckhead. They vote. They exercise the power of the consumer by 'choosing' where to spend their dollars.

You and your fuckin E-kids masturbate mentality into some socialist utopia.

Colly was right again in terms of media bias, 80 percent of all journalists vote democrat, every election. They all have a personal liberal education and advocacy that permeates their presentation of the news...the so called journalism of the times.

There is no threat to the bill of rights or the constitution at least not from the pathetic fundamental right wing fanatics. The real threat is your ilk. Your anti business, anti corporate stance which is in effect an anti human freedom stance as no business, no corporation can exist without public support for their goods and services....democracy....freedom...in other words....

The reason people didn't buy the edsel, is the reason people don't buy what you sell. It stinks...

amicus...

http://www.publishamerica.com/shopping/shopdisplayproducts.asp?Search=Yes

 

[amicus]

JohnMOrrison....

Appreciate you pointing out the issue of Liberals claiming they are not liberal and claiming as truth anything they wish.

The media is at best the second most liberal institution as 90 percent of all college professors are left wing liberals...while television, radio and newspapers may influence some, it is the young that the slimy liberals really prey upon and the damage is vast.

amicus...

http://www.publishamerica.com/shopping/shopdisplayproducts.asp?Search=Yes

 

[gauchecritic]

Maybe you need to re-think your post there a little Amico, you just gave the so-called Liberal Left view of why Capitalism and globalisation are bad things.

Pilot and I took great pains to point out the entire raison detre of large corporations (I'm not speaking on Pilot's behalf here) which was money/power with no thought at all to 'the people' or their 'power'.

Whilst wending your Randish way through simplistic supply and demand economics and, as ever, insisting that it applies to international economics in the same way as to a barter system, you fully supported the beliefs of the pinkoes that essentially it doesn't matter who actually owns the factories as long as they provide a means of support for their workers.

Monopolies, whether in whatever trade, goods, services or information, in the same way as classical communism, have to expand in order to stay afloat. The best method of expansion is control of supply and the means of production.

Essentially producing either the only, or the cheapest, product with which to exercise this control. What better way to secure control over the monopolised than by being able to control their government? How do you control their government?

Surely you know. From dictators to presidents, from generals to elected representatives: control communications. First point of attack for revolutionaries and freedom fighters alike. Mass media.

Take the television and radio stations first and tell the people exactly what is happening. Keep them informed with any old pap. The communists are going to march across the Iron Curtain. The Muslims are going to slit your throats. The Jews are going to steal your money.

The people. don't. care They want food and shelter.
If you want to tell them they are an anarcho-syndicalist commune they'll say "Fine, what time do I start work?"

If you tell them they are serfs and must pay tribute to their Baron they'll say "Ok but I can only afford one pig a year."

Tell them they are slaves and must work til they drop from exhaustion they will say "Where's the water guy?"

But you try insisting that they have no freedom and they'll string you from a lamppost and spit on you.

In the end, if you really believe that what you have there (or here for that matter to a lesser extent) is Democracy then you haven't the faintest inkling of what Democracy or Freedom is.

Do you really think that being able to stop votes being counted by a court injunction is what Democracy is about? That being born with the opportunity and will of the people to become the President of the US without being able to draw on billions of advertising dollars is what Democracy is about? That exploitation of third world countries by multinational corporations with billions of dollars, thousands of lawyers and an army of lobbyists is what Democracy is all about?

As per ever Amico, you're talking out of your arse.

 

[cantdog]

He'll duck, gauche. The raving man, Morrison, has already left.

 

[amicus]

Guache, you left handed awkward critic of everything free, do you ever advocate your socialist uptopian concepts or only attack the free concepts of mans magnificence?

You are so mired in 19th century anti capitalist propaganda as to be almost beyond comprehension here in the 21st century.

You are like the horse and carriage trade of the 19th century, and the mom and pop stores of the 60's, you just want to stay in the past...do so...no one gives a shit...

But when you go public with your anti deluvian concepts, expect to be ridiculed for your antiquity and your blinder bound affectation with 19th century utopianism...

You really should get a modern life...

amicus...

 

[thebullet]

To gauche:

I know I go over the top a lot; sometimes I let my heart speak before my head. But I'm happy that someone like you can be calm and give well considered opinions that closely approximate my own when I'm not pissed off.
Thanks.

 

[amicus]

Oh, my, a pathetic pity party portentious of two liberal twats...the sky is falling, the sky is falling! You Kerryites are really silly.


amicus...

 

[Gary Chambers]

George Bush does the work of 3 men

Larry, Moe and Curly Joe.

 

[amicus]

Gary Chambers...


geez..the pot calling the kettle black...Lord Haw Haw...and the Brit defectors in ww2...you jealous bastards should apply for citizenship in the US, but I doubt you would qualify. We have enough whusses already....

Tell us yanks how proud you feel begging to the housing committees to find a place to live....

You twats...what a disgrace to british history...

 

[minsue]

Gary Chambers...


geez..the pot calling the kettle black...Lord Haw Haw...and the Brit defectors in ww2...you jealous bastards should apply for citizenship in the US, but I doubt you would qualify. We have enough whusses already....

Tell us yanks how proud you feel begging to the housing committees to find a place to live....

You twats...what a disgrace to british history...

I'm pretty sure Mr Chambers is Canadian, but I could be wrong. Either way, your talent for debate appears to be degrading, Ami. Feeling OK?