none of it matters. *none of it*

[montana500]

until the dems find some billionaire to start buying up radio stations across the country, and until they have a lineup of dem/moderate radio hosts across the country like the GOP has on virtually every radio dial across rural and even urban America.

We cant compete with their immediate talking point spew 24/7. We simply can't.

2 things to fix the democratic party first and foremost:

1. develop a cable news station like Fox.

2. start buying up many rural and southern radio stations, and insert moderate/dems host lineups so they can convey Dem talking points 24/7.


Until then, it's all a big waste of time. You may as well spit into a fan.

[Bouncy Ball]

1. I. Totally. Agree.

They have a WELL coordinated, well run propaganda MACHINE. It runs 24/7. All the little lemmings get their talking points DAILY and they are as wrong as the day is long, but it doesn't freaking matter.

They who control the airwaves control the debate.

That needs to be fixed and this little voting problem we have (ahem) needs to be fixed in a SERIOUS way.

Do those things, and there is SOME hope for democracy again. Until then, you're right, it's a big waste of time.

Gore is starting up his network in 2005. It won't be overtly political from what I understand, but the programming supposedly will be very progressive.

What we need is overtly political stuff for OUR SIDE.

I boycott the mainstream media completely, by the way.

[NMDemDist2]

2. agreed, they started this in '64 and 40 years later they are reaping the

results

I have been singing this tune for months

[montana500]

16. how many of you

have driven across the country lately?

If you haven't, I highly suggest you do. And while doing so, keep the radio dial on. The *entire* dial, and every non-music station has nothing but right wing hosts. Rush Limbaugh , Hannity, Dr. Laurua * are on every dial*. Every worker in American from the guy driving his tractor to the mechanic are listening to this swill. And guess what? There are no other choices on the dial. None. this is what has caused the dems to lose votes since 2000. We need to give them a choice. The only reality they see is the crap on cable news and the radio. And when Dan Rather fucks up, the giant, seething, swarming mass of right wing media tries to destroy CBS as an "outsider".

Who gives a flying fuck about Johnny Liberal and get out the vote efforts in Hippiestock Massachusets? Those people will vote anyway.

Bill Clinton himself helped seal the fate of the dems by passing the 1996 media ownership rules. And he's a fucking moron for doing so. You could only own 30 or so stations before 1996. Now, Clear Channel and other huge right wing corps have bought *thousands* of stations, and they run their top down right wing programming from a single nerve center, all thanks to Bill Clinton and the 1996 congress.

It is a huge mistake. And one of the reasons Kerry had trouble in 2004 was because he wanted to reverse those rulings. So the media looked fo any single thing Kerry did and jumped on it. Never mind that Kerry made Bush lie twice in the debates about owning a lumber company and his comments about Osama Bin Laden. *that wasnt news*, but Kerry's haircuts and Teressa's comments were.

It simply ASTOUNDS me that John Kerry got as many votes as he did in this nazi media. IT's simply amazing.

When Bush wipes out environmental protections, rules are *eased* according to the media, lol. That says the rules were "too tight".
This kind of crap in the media is all over the place. All over.

You saw the lack of fair coverage of the Kerry events on cable news. You saw the biased crap from Hardball and various other networks.

None of it matters. NONE of it. They bought up the emdia and now control the debate. *they control the debate*.

It doesnt fucking matter who the head of the DNC is, for he will always be a commie weenie according to every radio dial and tv news in America.

It doesnt matter if we run an injured marine who fought in Falujah for president. He will be the guy who hid behind buildings while his mates battled the enemy.He will be the guy who questioned authority...and did he really earn those medals?

dont you see? None of it matters. None of it.

So fuck you Soros. You have to be the dumbest, emotional reactionary billionaire in the history of the world. And fuck you Ted Turner for losing control of CNN. And fuck you Bill Clinton for letting the media ownership rules expand from 30 owned statons to thousands.

[outrage]

37. You're absolutely correct when you say

It doesnt fucking matter who the head of the DNC is, for he will always be a commie weenie according to every radio dial and tv news in America

Sad and true. As long as they control the media we haven't got a snowball's chance in hades. And the "mainstream" media is nothing but a corporate owned mouth piece for the mis-administration.

[quaoar]

44. I'd be willing to bet

that if we named Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf as head of the DNC, the RW would denounce him as a weak and ineffective commander who coddled Saddam. And hate-radio listeners would believe it.

[Rockerdem]

103. Overcoming the media whores might be our biggest hurdle

Its not the only problem, but maybe the biggest. I know blue collar people who have jobs driving around and long-tripping, and their radios are locked to talk stations. Some of them are sports call in programs - those people are politically inert and cant be reached in any form, and they dont vote.

Its the right wing ranters on the air who do the most damage, and we have NOTHING to counter it. Think about it: on-the-job- political indoctrination, and its all one-sided. Depressing even for the most optimistic liberal.

The problem is that, when they get home, they turn on CNN (or the others) and get what they heard during the day ratified by supposedly "neutral journalists". Thats our problem. If Wolf Blitzer would just expose the daytime chatter as the crap it is, we would stand a fighting chance.

[TrustingDog]

39. don't be saying that about Big dog...

""Bill Clinton himself helped seal the fate of the dems by passing the 1996 media ownership rules. And he's a fucking moron for doing so. You could only own 30 or so stations before 1996. Now, Clear Channel and other huge right wing corps have bought *thousands* of stations, and they run their top down right wing programming from a single nerve center, all thanks to Bill Clinton and the 1996 congress.""
===
we all here know he is perfect in every way and so many DUers want to bear his children... :P - same shit, a bit less stinky pile. or not.

[Borgnine]

104. It's what brought down Dean too.

He mentioned he wanted to break up the media conglemerates, and shortly afterwards he went from being reported as the Democrat's golden boy for 2004 into a joke.

[gumby]

3. A gigantic problem with the "divide" in this country

is that the "Red" (commie) people speak a totally different language.

After years of psy-ops propaganda, they can no longer think in a logical manner. They think totally in sound-bites, "what-ifs", "both-sides" and victimization.

Reddies are no longer able to use the English language to communicate to others outside their own brainwashed group.

It's a really, really, really sorry state the United States is in.

[KnowerOfLogic]

4. True; there is absolutely no even-handedness in the broadcast networks'

(tv and radio) treatment of political issues. And keep in mind that the airwaves are PUBLIC PROPERTY, yet they have been completely and ruthlessly taken over by reactionary religious groups and corporate robber barons.

[tjdee]

5. Oh of course it does--just because you can't think of a way doesn't mean

it can't be done.

Can it be done by tomorrow? Probably not.

But it can be done. And we don't necessarily need a millionaire or a bunch of talk show hosts. We just have to think of something else.

[NMDemDist2]

23. Bill Moyers on Media

snip>>>

That’s the flame of truth your movement must carry forward. I am older than almost all of you and am not likely to be around for the duration; I have said for several years now that I will retire from active journalism when I turn 70 next year. But I take heart from the presence in this room, unseen, of Peter Zenger, Thomas Paine, the muckrakers, I.F. Stone and all those heroes and heroines, celebrated or forgotten, who faced odds no less than ours and did not flinch. I take heart in your presence here. It’s your fight now. Look around. You are not alone.

read the entire speech here.... http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/24/1731220

[Old Mouse]

6. not true

This is the last generation to rely on television news.

That is why all of this had to happen now, while a controlled media still has influence.

[The Doctor.]

10. They have made certain of it.

That this will be the last generation to rely on such news.

But consider the folie-au-deux ciricculum of the net and go from there.

Should be a wonderful study - I hope we're around to do so.

[FizzFuzz]

7. Thank YOU!!!! I've ranted a time or two myself

on this subject.

I so freaking agree with you. Wish the people in a position to do something about this would get the show on the road already for cying out loud.

[Shopaholic]

8. Yeah--a lot of good the internet did is in the last election. . .

the Repugs have already got that angle covered too. Why do you think you see so many disruptors and trolls (no doubt paid for by the GOP) on the 'net? They understand that this is the next medium and they're prepared to control it too. Look at the way AOL & Yahoo phrases the news they post.

Remember the DNC Political Strategist who tried to post here earlier in the election season? Remember what his number one message was? The Media.

There are billionaire Democrats but our "leaders" don't seem to understand that they've got to get these folks to pony up the dough not to fund our candidates but to fundamentally change the way the news is being covered in this country. Buy up newspapers, buy up TV and radio stations, buy (or start-up) a cable news network. Until we can take these steps, I'm very afraid that we will never see another Democratic President in the White House.

[montana500]

14. I hate this enter a subject box. thx.

"There are billionaire Democrats but our "leaders" don't seem to understand that they've got to get these folks to pony up the dough not to fund our candidates but to fundamentally change the way the news is being covered in this country. Buy up newspapers, buy up TV and radio stations, buy (or start-up) a cable news network. Until we can take these steps, I'm very afraid that we will never see another Democratic President in the White House. "


sad. but true.

what exactly was Soros doing with all his money?
the best use for that would be to buy newspapers, radio stations and invest in a fox news for the dems.

[FizzFuzz]

31. I missed the DNC stratgist trying to post here

That must have been interesting.

Frankly, the priority need for getting some media control seems so self-evident to me. We've BEEN putting out honest and important messages, we've BEEN refuting lies, but every time, we get excited on the internet*s*, yet it ultimately comes to nothing, because our voice continues to fall into a silent black hole.

Prime Time media is where the largest % of the country gets their info. If we don't get our share back there, we are cooked.

The Fairness Doctrine got trashed, that's a fact and so, we have a completely different paradigm in front of us. The ongoing example of RW illogic relentlessly gaining the upper hand should be proof enough that the integrity of the message isn't even the point anymore. Eyeballs are what's important now, and without a network to call our own, our eyeballs have been hijacked.

Instead of focusing over and over again on how to modify and remodify our message attempting to catch every shift in the RW's shower of lies (and seeing us wasting our energy like that must be pleasing to them), we need to realize that market share and a simple message is tantamount.

I'm no expert in political strategy nor legalities nor policy, but I do have some basic common sense.

[NAO]

9. This is THE ABSOLUTE Truth - TV creates reality for majority of electorate

I've been saying this for a long time.

Far too many people passively accept the reality presented by TV for any other type of political activism or grassroots to have any effect.

The only way to get people thinking along progressive lines is to have it spoon fed to them on TV. The elite have found a way to truly subvert democracy, and it is TV.

[The Doctor.]

12. Yes, the media is...

The biggest pen.

[kamqute]

11. Don't start brainwashing people

Like the F***s news network? Yeah right! The left is supposed to be more intelligent AS WELL AS MORE DIALOGICAL. If we ever do get any real TV presence, it had better be attached to blogs or phones or something or it will lose its interactivity.

[NAO]

13. Not Brainwashing, more like DEPROGRAMMING

You wouldn't have to use deceptive or sinister tactics to be successful.

All that would be required is to report the news, without the conservative spin. The Daily Show does this by merely showing clips of politicians saying one thing, then saying the opposite.

If you have cable, check your local access stations as many of them carry Amy Goodman's news show "Democracy Now!" which does a very good job of reporting real news and providing context and interpretation.

[ldf]

30. simple, really

here is what is being reported on fux, cnn, msrnc, etc,

and HERE is the truth.

and HERE is what is NOT being reported on fux, cnn, msrnc, etc.

[Debs]

50. That

Is what Media Matters for America does every day, of course its only a website but its a start. A problem with progressives buying media is they will not really be self sustaining. Advertising is how all media make thier money and bussiness will not support a progressive message no matter how much money they would make doing it. Its institutional

[OnionPatch]

74. They might if we support them

The businesses, I mean. This is a perfect example for buying blue. There are some successful liberal talk shows out there but they stress that it's important for us to support their advertisers to help keep them on the air.

[HootieMcBoob]

76. Media Matters is more than "just a website"

It operates a website but it is exactly the kind of organization we need to build. There's also Center For American Progress and The Rockridge Institute, People For The American Way, etc. We now have Air America which is getting tons of advertising support which blows your idea that progressive news won't make money.

Remember they've had over 30 years to build this machine. We've only just started. It will take time but it will happen. I'm excited to see what InDTV will be like.

[Debs]

97. True

I stand corrected, it is much more than just a website. I only meant it wasnt a network or cable channel but it is most definitly a step in the right direction

[sonicx]

15. no, TV and radio are for the masses. Blogs are for junkies.

Anyone can tune in to TV and radio, no matter the age, reading level, political awareness, etc. But who reads blogs? political junkies.

[outraged2]

17. I understand the importance of mass media BUT

Whatever happened to word of mouth, talking TO people instead of AT them? Isn't part of the problem the party is suffering from an image of being disconnected from regular people? With the stranglehold the right has on all the markets and media wouldn't time and money be better spent on another way to reach the people? It seems to me a waste of time to try and fight on THEIR terms. Just my opinion, but it seems that having various Dem/progressive leaders do things like town hall meetings around the country could be effective.

[montana500]

18. yes

thats obviously another peice of the puzzle.

[sonicx]

19. Sorry, but word of mouth starts with the media

Limpballs, Hannity, and Drudge provide the talking points to which every conservative in America will repeat like robots.

the stuff you are talking about (town hall meetings) are helpful but secondary. We aren't in the 1800s. face-to-face interaction is not the primary means of communication.

[outraged2]

22. works both ways I think

We can go round and round on this, its sort of a chicken and egg argument. I am not looking to duke it out, just open up the possibility of other options. I think a large part of the problem is that there is precious little, if any, face- to-face interaction. Everything has become so abstract, theoretical that needs and concerns of real, ordinary people are lost. I think TV has a lot to do with that. That is why I mentioned something a bit different.

[bobbieinok]

90. RW message is shared/transmitted by friends in religious right churches

are liberal congreagations everywhere in the country??

point of this comment: need a grassroots organization with 'outlets' everywhere

didn't populism at the end of the 19th century spread through granges (farmer social, etc, organization everywhere in the midwest)?

[outraged2]

92. yes

The populists had all kinds of different people of surprisingly varied backgrounds going around to rural communities and having seminar type meetings on various subjects. Their primary purpose was educating people and sharing information, the political movement grew out of that.

[rman]

106. How are you going to reach 300 million people by word of mouth?

And how is that going to offset the effect of the mass media?

One reason why word of mouth isn't really working that well (aside from the problem with the large scale), is that most people have lost interest in politics - so why would they ever talk about it? Also many if not most people have lost the sense of being part of the national community - individualism and all that.

I'm not saying that it's pointless for people to try and be the media, it's just that it's going to be a tough struggle. It's not going to produce significant results any time soon.

[Eric J in MN]

20. It wouldn't be that difficult to create a liberal version of Fox News.

They have very little investigative reporting.

We just need some charismatic people to talk about newspaper stories and do interviews.

[demwing]

21. Are the Media our enemy or our obstacle?

I'm not sure, but I believe that there is so little difference in the way we must deal with the reality that it does not matter, at least initially.

Your post is spot on. We must deal with the reality of media bias if we ever hope to move forward.

That's exactly what the Neocons did. They plotted patiently and now reap the benefits.

Do we have time to plot patiently?

[Ron Green]

86. With all due respect, I don't think our patient plotting will bring

results. The masses don't want to think, they want to feel. And nothing feels stronger than the stuff spewing from the RW media: Scary foreign boogeyman, Dead photogentic pregnant woman, Waffling northeastern liberal elite, Bizarre has-been pop start pedophile....the list is literally inexhaustible.

Barnum was right, Mencken was right, and so was Plato - people are not capable of directly governing themselves; democracy means they must be represented by the "best of men." And what the RW have done over the past 40 years is to replace statesmanlike "best of men" with Machiavellian ones. Statesmanship won't ever come back, as long as there is TV.

[FormerDittoHead]

24. Yes - but there's more...

I completely agree about the TV news and radio. I just un-programmed my Tivo to tape the CBS news after I saw the "official white house spin" of Rumsfeld's trip to Iraq. Made me sick.

But let me ask you all: where do businesses advertise?

EVERYWHERE.

Is there a medium which businesses do NOT advertise their message in?

NO. Everything from product placement to stickers on race cars.

Maybe we could learn something from them???

How about some MUSIC. Remember the 60's and 70's? The music "industry" existed back then as well, but music got the 'message' out...

Remember Folk Music and coffee houses, or am I showing my age?

How about some TV Shows. Remember All in the Family? It was like the #1 show at the time.

How about some Movies. I'm not talking about 9/11, I'm talking about stories showing our VALUES like Grapes of Wrath.

How about a magazine that doesn't read like a text book.

I could go on, but the idea is we have to get back in the game!

[bobbieinok]

91. disagree with many about All in the Family...IMO, it made bigotry

respectable..

liberals cheered it because they thought Archie was so obviously wrong and Meathead so right..

I watched it a few times with my RW brother....every time Archie would say something he'd say 'right on'

on All in the Family, bigotry was heard on prime time for the first time since the early 60s.....IMO, a lot of people identified with Archie and felt finally they had a respected voice on TV...hey, 'the show won awards, he won awards, they don't give awards for incorrect info, do they????'

[StopDiggingTheHole]

25. You omitted choice #3

3. Present a message and plan that the majority want, trust and will enjoy. Many people want many things and all we need to to do is hook up with these wants and deliver them. Good messages come in small packages.

[sonicx]

27. He wasn't presenting a list of choices. all of the above is needed.

[despairing optimist]

26. Don't forget Air America. On second thought . . .

does anyone else think the format is dumbed down? I try valiantly to listen every morning, but I find the format uninteresting and trivial. Is there any hope for a more intelligent iteration?

[Shopaholic]

28. I can name two Democratic billionaires off the top of my head

other than Soros:

David Geffen & Steven Spielberg. And they already own a movie studio (Dreamworks SKG)-so why not add a TV network too? Why isn't the Democratic party leaning on the folks with multi-millions and billions to fund more liberal media and to oust the corporate whores who now dominate the media like Geffen and Spielberg?

Why not pull a bunch of these fat cats together to buy up newspapers, radio stations, and networks across the country? Why isn't the Democratic party doing anything like what the the Repugs did to gain media control in the first place?

Where are our well-funded Democratic think tanks? Where are our well-funded Democratic publications? Why oh why don't they exist? And what can we do to convince the DNC that they are very much needed, unless of course, the DLC is so well-entrenched that it suits them just fine for the media to be repug whores and for us to continue to lose elections. . .

[LibDemAlways]

38. No matter how liberal guys like Geffen

and Spielberg are, they live in the Hollywood bubble of wealth and power. They may give generously to charity, but at the end of the day they go home to lavish, gate-guarded compounds. They aren't motivated to help the little guy in a way that would really matter.

It seems there are damn few champions of the ordinary person who have any voice at all in the media. These days it's all about a mega-celebrity like Oprah giving cars away to her studio audience as a PR stunt. That's nice, but the entire country is being screwed daily by the Bush admin. and those in a position to use their considerable money and influence to speak out, don't or won't.

[Debs]

51. And many movies

Have a liberal message, Matewan and Salvador come to mind. Yet how much media coverage do these excellent movies with top notch stars get? We are a bussiness run society and the media serves power. Its institutional. Bussiness will not support a progressive message overall some smaller bussinesses will but the large corporations will not, even if a CEO with a brain and concience did, and even if it made them money he would be fired and a more bussiness savy CEO would take his place, this is harder than it looks

[MsTryska]

82. Business will support anyone

who can make them money.



i'm sure someone threw out the same obstacle when Fox was tryign to get it together.

[Debs]

98. I dont believe that

Notice that when Donahue was getting the highest ratings on MSNBC he was canned for ideological reasons. The NYTimes fired one of Americas finest journalists Sidney Shambourg when he began to talk about corporate/gov corruption in New York. The Kwitney report was both getting good ratings and won a Polk award but could NOT get advertisers because he did stories about corporate connections to Guatemalan murders of union activists. Jim Hightower was getting great ratings when he was fired by Disney. No bussinesses do NOT just support anyone that will make them money.

[HootieMcBoob]

77. It's not the Democratic Party's job

The Republican party didn't create this machine. The large corporations created the machine by creating the Republican party.

As long as the Democrats (DLC, etc.) are beholden to the corps they will be losers who will not accomplish anything for us. That's why we need to do it ourselves.

Progressive entrepreneurs need to take the initiative, and we need to change the Democratic party to serve our interests the way the large corporations changed the Republican party to serve their interests.

[MsTryska]

81. Excellent Point.

what's the purpose of having Hollywood on our side, if we can't get there help with the media end of things?

[LittleClarkie]

84. How much of the party is hostile to liberal elitist rich people

Cats trying to herd other cats might be the problem.

Esp. if the alley cats aren't terribly fond of the pampered persians.

[BeachBuckeye]

29. Concerning the radio part of your post

I agree but the problem is that the Democrats are not willing to put their money where their mouths are. Some very fine Liberal talkers are barely able to survive on the air because of lack of funds.

www.theguyjamesshow.com

[Clark2008]

32. I wonder when Al Gore's new cable station will be up and running?

They have some job openings:
http://www.indtv.tv/

And, if I wanted to live in California (and I don't - no offense Cali people - I'm not a "beach" person.), I would apply for at least a couple of these positions.

[Debs]

52. California is a lot more than

Beaches. There are beautiful mountain communities. Some of the most gorgeous forrests in the world and wonderful farmland. California is one of the most varied states in the union

[OnionPatch]

75. Hear Hear!

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skittles]

36. OMG

what planet do YOU live on???

[American_Liberal08]

41. Hmm?

Well, I live on earth. duuuh.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sonicx]

43. yup. Media Matters is another great link

www.mediamatters.org

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sonicx]

49. link please

btw, this really proves nothing. you need to look at the time perioud the survey was taken and see what the actual stories were at the time. I'll been this was taken right around that first debate (the one where bush did horribly and tanked in the polls)

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sonicx]

69. um, the top/right link on the first page said...

coverage was equally positive for both candidates before the debate and jumped for Kerry after the debate(because he kicked ass). Just like i said and it makes perfect sense. That is not bias. I don't even see them define 'positive' or 'negative' nor done it cover the 24 hour channels. Look at the pundits and commentators and you have mostly strong conservatives and weak liberals. They are the spinmeisters and tell people how they should think.

The bias of the media has more to do with the extreme disinformation that republican feed into it. Thus many of the facts around Kerry and Democrats are false or misleading. The media usually reports the misinformation and does very little to correct Republican's constant lying for fear of being called liberal.

go here and read...

www.mediamatters.org

btw, it's interesting that a liberal would watch a blatantly Republican-leaning show like Brit Hume...

[Debs]

54. CBS

Memogate was a put up job. The content of the memos were accurate as verified by the person who did write Killians memos. Even if the memos cant be authenticated the content was. As for the favorable coverage perhaps the content of the news had something to do with that. I mean how do you get a positive newsstory for Bush out of Abu Ghraib? The constant lies Bush was caught in? The tanking of the economy? Being the first president since Hoover to have a net job loss and constant bad news on the jobs story? Iraq?? There was less positive coverage of Bush because so many of his policy chickens came home to roost thats not NBCs fault. Still though Bush was caught in numerous lies they didnt call him a liar though they had no problem pushing the liar story about Gore that was manufactured. No possible objective observation of network news can come to the conclusion they are liberally biased

[Skittles]

55. maybe the reason Bush's coverage is not as positive

is because he is a THIEVING MORONIC INCOMPETENT PIECE OF SHIT

[RandomKoolzip]

65. You're just talking about the candidates. There are other issues.

Look at who owns the networks. Look at the board of directors of GE. Not only are they a major multi-national corporation (and as such, they benefit from the GOP's de-regulate-at-all-costs attitude towards multinationals and other "small businesses").....They're A DEFENSE CONTRACTOR. Do you reeeeeaally think they'd promote an anti-war message on their bought-and-paid-for station? Why, if people were influenced into thinking that the Iraq War was unjustified via network news, then the "War Effort" would lose support, and eventually that'd cut into our profits, goddamnit! And if people started voting democrat, then possibly, just maybe, the major corporate stranglehold on the media might get broken up, and we'd be unable to buy up other outlets!

Which is why you don't hear the broader liberal message on the major networks. You never hear anything about too much corporate influence. You never hear anything about rampant media consolidation (I wonder why?), you never hear anything about the bad things the US does, covertly, overseas. Which is why every negative story that comes out about Bush is quickly spun by major Scaife/Olin/AEI/Ailes bucks, and there always quickly appears a counter-strory that smears liberals. Think about it: The week Kitty Kelley's book about the Bushes comes out, "Rathergate" happens. The TANG memos are leaked to the press, and the same week, an elaborate tale of intrigue and forgery is spun to cast light on the veracity of the documents even though what's actually IN the documents is 100% true. And that ain't no co-inky-dink, pal.

Occasionally, you might get a story or two that seems positive towards liberal ideas. After all, we have to keep up appearances! If we don't throw the commies a bone now and again, the illusion would be too obvious.....But you'll find, time and time again, that that story is countered by hours and hours of pro-GOP (well, pro-corporate, same thing really) spin.

If you really are a liberal (I doubt it), do yourself (and us!) a favor and sit down with a copy of David Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine." Hell, I'll send you one of my copies. PM me with your address and it'll be in the mail by january.

And in the meantime, look at who sits on the boards of these media entities, look at which larger multinational owns them, and look at which RW-funded think tank/sfoundations get the most play in their political coverage. And look at the employees of these companies...there's websites that'll tell you who which political party they donate to.

Oh, and a word about "liberal bias:" thirty-forty years ago, it wasn't considered "liberal" to be against killing for unjust reasons, protecting the environment, opposed to violence, opposed to fucking other humans over to get your way, and opposed to rampant greed. Why do we now think of those as "liberal" ideas? Hmmmm.

The RW have spent billions of dollars on building this media infrastructure and it has paid off for them in spades. Guys like Scaife, Coors, etal. weren't afraid to pony up billions, knowing that they'd lose some, but also knowing that in the long term it'd turn into gold. Thirty-five years ago, the kind of ideas you see promoted on FAUX, talk radio, etc (privatization of everything but the kitchen sink, repealing civil rights, starting wars for oil, repealing environmental protections to help "BUSINESS!!!", PNAC, greed and fundamentalist christianity as the twin stripes on a very evil candycane) would have been considered fuckin' wacko nutjob nazi stuff....and yet now, it's the mainstream. Why do we think of those ideas as "mainstream" ideas? Hmmmm.

Either we get some liberal billionaires to erect a congruent machine or we're screwed.

[Debs]

53. I assume

that was a joke

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skittles]

60. if you think the networks are even slightly liberal

something is wrong. If the media reported the real truth about GWB THERE IS NO WAY HE WOULD EVEN BE CONSIDERED A VIABLE CANDIDATE. Can you even compare it to the trashing Clinton took?

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RandomKoolzip]

63. Your post litteraly made me laugh out loud.

Thank you for providing amusement. Good one!

"just becuase i think the networks are slightly liberal doesn't mean I'm a troll."

I'm gettin' that tattooed on my ass, dude! That's fuckin' hilarious!

"Just because I have my head up my ass doesn't mean I can't still speak. grrrr."

[Skittles]

64. what is it, the weather?

why are they trying to hide in here?

[RandomKoolzip]

67. I used to think they were getting paid; now I'm not so sure.

I think maybe now they're doing it because they LIKE to do it. It's like when a mercenary takes his rifle to the hills and starts picking off bystanders after a war is over. They gots the lust for killin' in their blood......it's hard not to feel sorry for them, really.

[Skittles]

68. there's so many of them lately

I come here to get away from such ignorance but I find it everywhere I go - scary

[proudbluestater]

35. Free Speech TV!!!!!! Dish Network Channel 9415

If you are still watching cable, you are missing this GEM of a network. It's a START in the right direction. Also on Dish is LINK TV. Both carry Democracy Now, a progressive news show which shows the stories the corporate media whores won't show.

Tonight on Free Speech TV, "Orwell Rolls in His Grave." A documentary with Greg Palast, Michael Moore, Danny Schechter, etc. about the changes which occurred through media consolidation.

After that, an interview with Laura Flanders, progressive talk show host and author of Bush Women. Hour long show in which she read from her book and took audience questions.

After that, "The Children of Abu Ghraib." You won't see shows like this on conventional/corporate tv.

Free Speech is totally independent. No commercials other than PSAs. It relies on contributions from "viewers like you." Unlike PBS, it does NOT take corporate funding.

freespeechtv.org democracynow.org linktv.org


If we all don't watch/support, it just might not stick around. And we NEED this voice! Desperately!@

[tkmorris]

58. Yep, great station

Worldlink (9410?) is another great station. I love them, and FSTV is the sole reason that I have DishNetwork and not cable nor DirecTV today. I delight in telling them that when they call me to try to tell me of their latest super special one time act now introductory offer.

BTW, if you have a cell phone you might consider Working Assets as a carrier. Liberal to it's core, and competes with the big boys just fine thank you very much.

MISSION
Working Assets was established in 1985 to help busy people make a difference in the world through everyday activities like talking on the phone. Every time customers use one of Working Assets' donation-linked services (Long Distance, Wireless, Credit Card or Online), the company donates a portion of the customer's bill to nonprofit groups working to build a world that is more just, humane, and environmentally sustainable. To date, $40 million has been raised for progressive causes.

The company also serves as a strong political force, dedicated to giving its customers the opportunity to speak out on critical public issues through its Web site and monthly phone bill.

http://www.workingassets.com/

[proudbluestater]

102. Didn't know Working Assets had cell phone coverage

I have an "el cheapo" plan where I buy $30 of minutes every two months. That's really all I care to spend or can afford to spend on the cell.

But I will visit their website and see what all they offer!

I had no idea the first month or two of Dish that I even had FSTV or LINK TV. They don't appear on the channel listing, nor are they very conveniently located, up there in no-man's land in the 9000s. Those are now my two main stations. I'll also watch HBO, but nothing commercial.

After the election I took great delight in calling Dish and changing my package from 120 channels to 60 and adding HBO. I told them specifically, "I want to get rid of FOX."

[OnionPatch]

73. I love Free Speech TV but.....

It is openly and unapologetically liberal. That's fine in and of itself, but what we really need is a cable news station along the lines of CNN, MSNBC and Fox that proclaims itself to be "fair and balanced" but actually leans left. As long as CNN, Fox, etc. deny that they lean right, it would only hurt the legitimacy of the new station to admit that it leans left. It must claim to be and appear to be arguably as "balanced" as the rest of them.

[MsTryska]

83. Only problem is Murdoch went and bought Dish Network.

the bastard.

[kdmorris]

94. He owns Direct TV

Charlie Ergen is the CEO of the Echostar Corporation, which is the corporation that owns the DISH Network.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

95. I would love to get those channels, but

my apartment building won't let us install satellite dishes. :-(

When I can finally afford to buy a condo...

[MsTryska]

96. really?

so it's not dish network?

that makes me feel much better.

[proudbluestater]

101. Murdoch owns 1/3 of Dish. Somebody should buy him out.

[socalover]

40. You hit the nail on the head! Excellent post!

[Ron Green]

45. I agree with what you're saying, but I have a nagging doubt about the

educability of the American people. The RW has succeeded with sound-bite media because their messages are sound-bite messages. The progressive message is visionary, complex at times, and reasoned. It does not fit well into the syntax of the electronic media and entertainment mix. Not only have the RW controlled the media companies, but they have taken advantage of the disappearance of context from the public and commercial discourse. Being a primarily fear-driven campaign, it goes straight to the Lizard Brain, or Lower Chakras, or however you want to say it. Our progressive message of hope and reason, appealing to the higher mind, will never compete, no matter how many media outlets Soros and Spielberg can buy.

[montana500]

46. we dont need to dominate

"Our progressive message of hope and reason, appealing to the higher mind, will never compete, no matter how many media outlets Soros and Spielberg can buy."


we dont need to dominate, just to offer a choice, and our own talking points. Skimming a tinfy few would be a tremendous help.

[American_Liberal08]

62. agreed

i completly agree with you.

[sonicx]

70. But you said the media is already liberal. what's there to fix?

:eyes:

[magellan]

66. Well I'm not sure how many would agree with me

...but what we don't need is a liberal media, any more than we need the current Reichwing media. We need the Democracy Now! format -- facts relayed by fact-checking journalists who don't spin, period. You know, what journalism is SUPPOSED to be.

I think public-funding is the only way to do this. Government/corporate-sponsored news is poison to democracy.

Just my humble opinion.

[RandomKoolzip]

71. Well, unfortunately.....

the definitions have changed. What used to be called "objectivity" is now called "liberal bias," because it's really hard to make the GOP's massage look attractive if you look at it objectively; it counters humanity's instinctual desire to do good by their fellow man, as well as the basic American character of our government, which is in place to do the most good for the greatest number of people. Give people minutes form PNAC meetings, or some of Grover Norquist's "Wednesday Morning" get-togethers, and I guarantee most "objective" voters would say, "Jesus, this is some scary shit!" Which is why they have to wrap their massages in gaudy but emotionally appealing packages like "moral values'" and "patriotism" and "rugged individuality." (BTW, a world made up of * billion rugged individuals kinda limits the definition of "individuality," dunnit? I mean, somewhere, there's gotta be some "rugged individual" copying another "rugged individual's" behavior unconsciously....but I digress)

Yeah....anyhow. The RW machine has shifted the definitions now so that "objectivity" (facts supported by other facts) is branded as "liberal" if those facts differ from the image and the message emanating from GOP CentCom. And the word "liberal" itself is now so larded with icky connotations for the average American simply because they've heard GHWB and Limbaugh and Gingrich, etc. countelss times spit out the word like it was a bad piece of meat. So no one wants to be identified as "liberal." So basically, instead of reporting facts that do not support their "reality," they change the facts to fit the "reality," when the model ought to go the other direction.

If there were really a "liberal" media, Grover Norquist would be synonymous with "Joseph Stalin." The reality is, however, that barely anyone knows who this shmuck is, even though his power is enormous and he sets the GOP agenda, because exposing him to the light would make most "objective" observers sick to their stomachs. The other night, I got into a discussion with a freeper on DU (they're unavoidable now! Worse than cock-a-roaches!) who could tell me the coutless evils Michael Moore has perpetrated on the US, but didn't know who Richard Mellon Scaife was. Ladies and Gentlemen: our media in action.

Against this machine, just reporting facts is not good enough. The facts have to be tied to an unconcious trait latent in the human character that Americans identify with and try to summon forth when they're at their best: altruism? their sense of humor? Resiliance? Maybe even patriotism, if the RW hasn't already cornered that market. The basic American character is liberal, after all; democracy is a liberal idea.


(BTW, not to toot my own horn, but I've been pushing this idea on DU for several months now, this idea of a well-funded counter-structure to buffet and combat the RW machine......it's good to see other DUers running with it!)

[magellan]

93. Nailed it

I hadn't seen your posts on this subject before, but you've described the problems we face perfectly. The Reichwing has, to our utter confoundment, completely and quite effectively hijacked the truth, along with the words we use to describe the various ideological positions that are still fighting over it. And the MSM enables this. Totally. The RW's Orwellian mass brain-washing could not be accomplished without corporate media help.

You're absolutely right -- just reporting facts isn't good enough. We've seen facts come to light now and again, and we all think, "Well, this will certainly be Bush**'s downfall!", and a few days later we're back to being fed the latest moronic parade of distracting info-tainment...or listening to some official gloss things over with some glib excuse.

And of course the excuse is accepted by the RW'ers -- but only if it comes from someone within the RW cabal. Any person, regardless of their professional stature, who speaks against BushCo is summarily dismissed as a "liberal".

Yeah, imagine it. Journalism has become opinion. Objectivity has become subjective. Pick your pundit.

I think we've passed the point where cleverly couching our own talking points will be met with any success. We've tried that. We're behind the wave every time it comes to telling the truth; the RW has already 'defined reality'.

In my first post I didn't offer any insight as to how we "normalize" MSM. But I'll say it now: it won't be pretty. It'll require forcibly cutting the ties between ALL corporations and our government. It'll mean repealing the amendment to the Constitution that grants corporations the same recognition as individuals, putting an end to corporate lobbying, overhauling campaign financing for REAL....and a whole lot more.

Quite honestly, I don't see us getting there any time soon. And I don't like to consider what it will TAKE to get us there. But it will happen eventually. The continued slide into neo-fascism will inevitably begin to bite on BOTH sides of the political fence, and people are going to be pretty pissed off when they start realizing how they've been lied to. Not just by BushCo, but by their own beloved media.

Can you see the required reforms happening under the current conditions? I can't. :(

[American Tragedy]

100. individualism, not individuality

Individuality refers to being distinctive. That is a liberal virtue, in my opinion. In my experience, people who differ from the status quo, like vegans or homosexuals, are much more readily accepted by the left.

Individualism is life oriented around oneself. That is traditionally associated with conservative thought.

[CJCRANE]

72. As Bill Clinton once said...

"The Media IS the Government".

(Something he apparently said off the record at the height of the Monica scandal).

[OnionPatch]

78. I couldn't agree more

This is a great post. You are exactly right about the whole media situation. If we don't get competitive in the media, we're screwed. I'm starting to wonder about our Democratic leadership that this aspect has been ignored for so long. Could it possibly be true that there aren't enough "rich liberals" to get us our own counter to CNN, Fox, etc.?

And I have driven across the US listening to the right-wing propaganda coming out of the radio the whole way. It was alarming. Especially in rural areas, there is literally NOTHING else. I also wonder how we win any elections at all with this kind of brain-washing saturating the media but I suspect it is a good sign: our message makes more sense and rings truer to the real patriot....It takes a lot of maintenance to convolute the RW message into something sensible and palatable.

Sadly, I don't know what the little person can do about this issue. I'd like to believe that grass-roots communications and such can counter this effectively but most Americans I know would rather stay home and watch "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" than go to a town-hall meeting. I just have a gut feeling that we're going to have to package our message in the same wrappings that Joe America is used to if we're to get it out there.

[Shopaholic]

79. Face it--the right wing sets the agenda these days--

I'll give you a perfect example. Faux's whole bs about "Christmas Under Siege" and O'Lielly (or should that be O'Loofah) proclaiming that they, and they alone were "saving" Christmas. I know I live in a Red State, but I swear, everywhere I went, that's ALL people were talking about. Not how many people were killed in the suicide bomber attack in Iraq, not how badly Rumsfeld is screwing up, now the economy-none of it. Only about how "Christmas" is being ruined and how "we" need to save it.

To top it all off, once Faux began to gain traction with this "story", then the other cable news networks followed suit (monkey see, monkey do). That's what they do with stories both big and small, political, and non-political. This was a clear diversion away from what is really going on in this world. As long as the right-wing sets the agenda, and pulls focus away from the important issues onto trivial ones that titillate and tantalize, I really don't know how we're ever going to be able to get our message out there--that is--get the TRUTH out.

[Ron Green]

85. The little person can do nothing about this as long as people respond more

immediately and viscerally to FEAR, which is just what the RW noise machine has figured out. Our message is not a fearmongering message (and by fearmongering I mean all facets of "breathless reportage" and entertainment-style "news" about Scott Petersen or the Swift Boat Vets or what have you.) Unless our progressive message is delivered in the sound-bite format which has become the standard in ALL media across the nation, we will not be heard, because consumers will not buy it and sponsors won't pay for it.

Since we cannot change human nature, I don't see how we can ever compete with the RW machine. People DON'T want to sit still and listen to reason, when they can be excited and scared by bullshit.

[MsTryska]

80. I totally agree....

i made a post about that last week actually.

it was my latest fantasy - a real live watchdog press.

[Qanisqineq]

87. Absolutely

When the other side isn't presented on radio and people only hear the right's talking points, they can be convinced that the left is all wrong. I've seen it happen with pretty liberal people -- deny it all you want, it does happen. Especially when they are stuck in Iraq with nothing but Limbaugh and FAUX news.

[IStriker]

88. What a joke. I guess none of it matters then because...

if you take every dime from every billionaire Democrat and it sounds like Air America, all you're going to have is a bunch of formerly rich Democrats!

[Shopaholic]

89. So your answer is to just roll over and be trampled on by the right-wing

media?

[earth mom]

99. This is a great topic

and I think that so much of what's been posted is right on the money.

What I keep coming back to is how did the righties beat as at our own game? Hollywood is painted as "so" liberal and produces all these movies and t.v. shows that are the polar opposite of suppossed rw "values"-which is a crock I might add. I know their media takeover has been in the works for years and years, but how in the hell did they get control of most of the t.v. stations and radio stations without the left sitting up and taking notice long before now?! Why the hell haven't ANY of the mega rich liberals out there done a damn thing to balance the scales?! Off the top of my head I can think of Spielberg, Streisand, Oprah-they've got the money, the connections and seem to give a damn-yet why aren't they addressing this problem or is it a crisis (?) head on?

Also, so far, no one in this thread has mentioned Michael Moore. I'm new, so I'm not sure what the general consensus around DU is about him. Not that it would change my mind because I love what he is trying to do. He is one of the few on our side that is in their damn f-in faces-though he has been strangely quiet since the election which I find to be alarming. Death threats perhaps? I truly hope not!

And another thing...while I'm not so crazy about Howard Stern-he was on Letterman the other night and the whole exchange was great. First off, the interview went on forever, not your usual commercial block every couple of minutes. They were talking about Syrius Satellite Radio which Howard is leaving his current radio show for. Dave and Howard talked alot about censorship and really hammered home how many stations are controlled by Clear Channel. They both seemed to be in total agreement that they don't approve of what's going on with the media and over the airways at all. It was amazing, I couldn't believe that the show was even being aired! Afterwards, I couldn't help but feel that if only Howard would change his format to just left wing politics-I know he hates *-and cut out all the other crap than we might have an excellent opponent to duke it out with O'Lielly and all the other jerks.

Lastly let me just say that I absolutely positively think the freepers who invade every and all message boards are paid to do it. Those f-in a-holes don't give any one a moments peace ever. Kinda like telephone solicitors or extremely bad salesmen.

[Tactical Progressive]

105. I agree in general, especially about the TV station

I don't understand what is taking so long with that. It boggles. This should have been done before the 2002 election. There have been people screaming about it for five years now.

I don't think radio stations are that big of a deal, but it certainly couldn't hurt, and there should at least be an alternative to the right wing's FM hate machine in major markets.

Two other things come to mind, though. One is everyday rank and file Dems speaking out in normal conversation in the same uncertain terms that Republicans are all too willing to spew in any public setting they're involved in, for instance talking about the right wing's 'moral' values of greed, racism and lies. About right wing traitors letting America get attacked in 2001 and lying to start wars. Dems need to start speaking out unabashedly and unequivocally in day-to-day conversation.


The other is, and I don't know quite how to put this... progressive media won't make much of a difference either. The right wing hate machine isn't a one-way street; there has to be a receptive audience for communication. The right wing has learned to tap into the ugly side of people that is already there. It isn't concocted, or learned, or inculcated or tricked into them. It is there ready to be unleashed, and it is being so. These people aren't going to be educated back to civility or decency no matter how many progressive channels there are unless all of them are, and that isn't going to happen.

You see, TV programming, radio programming, outspoken personal argumentation isn't going to change people who already have the ability to be honest and decent, and just don't want to for anything on this earth. When there were only the major television outlets to propagate a reasonably progressive view of the world, the selfish, bigotted mindset was kept in a state of suppression, just barely. That world is never coming back. Evil has its outlets now, promoted from Ailes and ClearChannel, unsuppressed and now even largely supported by mainstream media. The lid is off. The ugliness is activated and it has the one thing evil yearns for - like-minded monsters to make your worst instincts acceptable and protected. All the countervailing viewpoints of decency and honor mean nothing when they can get even one avenue of community with fellow Fascists.

I want honest TV just so I have something to relate to, and maybe pick up some marginals, but don't kid yourself for a second that the fifty-million Fascists in this country have somehow been brainwashed or misinformed into their beliefs and can be turned around with good TV and radio programming. They've been released and given sanctuary and they won't ever be going back into their cages. They don't want to be good. They want to be what they've been being.