Anti-Fox Basic Cable channel: Isn't there ONE progressive multi-billionaire to fund it?

[theophilus]

Isn't there ONE liberal thinking rich person who would be willing to lose millions a year to possibly save this country? Fox News, and right wing radio, are the worst things to ever happen to this country, imo. Will no one help the majority who like truth? Being "fair and balanced" is not enough. The people need to see how dangerous the Republics are! Why will no one help? Your thoughts......

[w4rma]

1. What big business would buy commercials on it? (nt)

[theophilus]

4. I don't know. If enough people watched it, I suppose some might.

More than half of voters voted for Obama. I would never watch FoxNews, as it is. If I had a liberal alternative I wouldn't watch CNN or MSNBC either. And I never watch Corporate News big three. Like I said, if someone had fifty billion they could lose a billion a year and carry on for fifty.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. Ding ding ding....we have a winner

There is just not enough listeners to support it at this point

[Kansas Wyatt]

2. 'Progressive multi-billionaire'

:rofl:

There may be a multi-billionaire, who would like you to think they are progressive, but if they really were, they would not have allowed the damage to be done the last eight years without objecting all the way.

[theophilus]

3. I guess you are right or someone would have made a try. Sad. n/t

[Richardo]

12. Like George Soros, for example?

Warren Buffet is pretty reliably on the Dem side as well.

I don't think a lefty Fox is a good idea, but not all billionaires are like the Monoploy guy or Scrooge McDuck, either. (Is THAT the "truth" that the Lefty-Fox would get out there?)

[Kansas Wyatt]

14. When was the last time Soros or Buffet bought or started a tv and/or news network?

Print will not do, because the majority of Americans now get their "news" from television.

If Buffet or Soros really gave a shit about what was happening to this country, they would have put a network up that gave Progressives, or even, Democrats the opportunity to freely speak about what was wrong and what was needed in this country. But no, they are happy with conservative diatribe being parroted all over the airwaves. After all, it does make them MORE wealth.

If someone really gave a damn about an issue... Just paying lip service to the cause, when one can do a hell of a lot more, is disingenuous. Sorry, but that is just the bottom line.

[theophilus]

16. That's what I wonder about. Are there no mega rich that want to

help save the ecosystems we know and love? Build electric cars and sell them cheap! Are people so consistently greedy? Where is the altruism? It's depressing but I wish we could encourage enough so that someone would step up. They would go down in history as a positive good. That should sit well with an ego.....or not.

[Kansas Wyatt]

21. I just do not believe that wealthy people saying they care about progressive issues...

Are really genuine. After all, it would be so easy for them to at least become a voice to be reckoned with, when they put their weight behind it. Yet, aside from only giving a few endorsements and paying lip service, they have not stood up and took a stand.

If you look at what they could do, as opposed to what they have done, it is very clear that they like the wealth "conservative values" adds to their portfolios more.

[Richardo]

22. They didn't get to be billionaires by flushing their money down the toilet

The issue was: are there progressive billionaires? I think I gave an example of two.

And if the test of one's regard for the country is how much of their personal net worth they invest in unviable businesses, where are YOU on that scale?

[Kansas Wyatt]

24. "Progressive Billionaires"

I apologize for pointing out that those "Billionaires" have not REALLY done anything that would make someone call them a "Progressive." Paying lip service, is no better than offering chump change to someone ,without insurance, needing an expensive operation.

[Richardo]

25. So it's just like being on DU

This is lip-service central.

[Kansas Wyatt]

27. If you would rather watch the Corporate News...

That is your right.

[Richardo]

28. There's a non sequitur for you.

Whether I do or do not watch 'corporate' news has nothing to do with you disparaging those with money just because they don't spend it on things YOU want.

Figure out what YOU can do rather than waiting for some white knight billionaire to come fix it for you.(Clue: uninformed bitching on an internet message board does not count as doing anything.) Go find the information sources you trust and get your information from them. You obviously have access to the internet - therefore you can access any information source you like, mostly for free. That's what I do.

But for Christ's sake... casting aspersions on someone's patriotism because they don't spend THEIR money on YOUR fantasies is just weak.

[Kansas Wyatt]

31. A Few Facts For You...

1) I do whatever I can, whenever I can to oppose anything billionaires want. I will be no party to enabling or condoning a billionaire's further greed. And yes, that does include voting against billionaire's tools.

2) I cast NO aspersions on someone's patriotism because they don't spend their money on fantasies... Really, you are just pulling shit out of your backside now, because I NEVER made any remark about anyone's patriotism. It does sound like you have a confusion, between patriotism and wealth though.

3) Take comfort in knowing that I do not care if people rip-off billionaires. Really, I don't care at all. Now please tell me that I am really suppose to give a shit about that.

[Richardo]

32. To your point #2;

If Buffet or Soros really gave a shit about what was happening to this country, they would have put a network up that gave Progressives, or even, Democrats the opportunity to freely speak about what was wrong and what was needed in this country.

So work on your short term memory, or your honesty.

[Kansas Wyatt]

33. The well being about the majority of citizens in this country...

Means "patriotism" to you? Okay, if that's where you want to set the bar... Then fine. Billionaires are traitorous fucking rat bastards, who ought to have their heads lopped off. Happy now? Good! Just remember that you are the one who defined "PATRIOTISM" as a duty to care for all other citizens to prove one's love of country.

Now about your quote: Actually, I was only commenting on two very wealthy individuals who only pay lip service to working people in this country getting raped and pillaged, without putting their money where their mouths are. These two people could have easily put up the money and turned a profit, creating and running a network to challenge Faux Newz (RNC Network) to advance Progressive Ideals, just like Faux Newz advanced the RNC's agenda. Nope, from their track record, it appears that they got a little comfortable with the conservative diatribe being spoon fed to the American People.

Oh, and another puzzling thing that doesn't mesh to well for Buffet... Why did he give several billion dollars to Bill Gates' foundation to send overseas, if he was really concerned about the working people of this nation? After all, he allegedly knew how bad working people in this nation were hurting, when he did it. Hmm... That really doesn't look like someone who gives a shit about what is happening to this country, but it does put him at the top of Progressive Ideals on the Global scene. So tell me, is he really a Globalist or a Patriot?
Kind of confusing when one becomes so obscenely wealthy, huh?

Nothing wrong with my memory or honesty, but how is your honesty and who do you represent?

[Kansas Wyatt]

17. When was the last time they spoke out against Boards in Corporate America?

They have and had the power to make waves, with regards to all the shit that has been taking place, but where was their voice when it came time to scream and raise hell about it?

[JonLP24]

5. I think Al Gore tried this a few years back

I have no idea what happened.

[theophilus]

6. His project is still going, I think, but it is lowkey compared to FoxNews. n/t

[eShirl]

13. http://current.com/

http://current.com/

[stillcool]

7. It's locked up...

like Standard Oil.

[EstimatedProphet]

8. Why?

An anti-Fox station will not undo what Fox says. If we have a Fox parallel, all that will happen is that the Fox viewers will keep watching Fox, and there will be a station that shows another side. It will just continue the polarization that is already running rampant. What we need to do is break through the polarization that we have now, not increase it.

[theophilus]

10. I believe having the truth out there is the only way a "breakthrough" will happen.

Right now the truth is available in small bits on MSNBC, Comedy Central, etc. Many people who aren't total wastes watch Fox as a source of news. The more you watch the less you know applies. I think a channel with a more friendly liberal tone would attract a lot of FoxNews viewers. Anyway, the truth would be out there in bigger chunks and the RightWing nuts would have to spend more of their time responding. The Corporate News doesn't challenge the RightWing nuts enough, imo.

Now if we round up people and "re-educate them" we would see progress. Since I see a lot of disagreement on DU, however, I wonder who will be writing the curriculum.

[EstimatedProphet]

34. Sure, but having a left version of Fox won't be the truth

That's what my point is. We're not going to win over fox viewers anyway, and a left-only station is going to perform the same function for the left that Fox performs for the right. All it will do is reinforce the base. A station that distorts to the left won't do anything but increase the divisiveness we already have in the country. but really, what you're describing in this post is a more balanced station, and not a Fox of the left.

[Baikonour]

11. Why would a multi-billionaire be liberal or progressive?

Even Bill Gates, who is often looked at as a "good" rich guy, is quietly a republican.

[blindpig]

15. Fuck depending on the rich.

We should just take what is ours, and that includes the airwaves.

[theophilus]

18. What is your plan that does not involve much money? n/t

[KharmaTrain]

19. You'd Do Better Right Now Investing In The Titanic

Broadcasting is far from one billionaire. Many have tried, many have lost. Murdoch was lucky to have inherited daddy's corporation and built it into what it is now. He also funds his fake news channel with a dozen other ones...in short the money he made off the Simpsons, NFL football and his movie channel goes to fund the "news" one.

Right now broadcasting is a big loser. Thanks to the recession, revenues have been dropping all over the place, TV properties are still over-priced and getting financing for such a huge venture is all but impossible with the banks being so insolvent.

The majority IS getting the truth...why President Obama's ratings and the support for the stimulus remain high. It's the corporate media that hasn't. We have a far bigger and more vibrant pulpit with the Internet and it continues to grow in size and credibility.

[theophilus]

20. You make a good point. I hope you are right. Thanks for the hope. n/t

[Romulox]

23. No such thing as a "progressive multi-billionaire"

Gluttony in the face of suffering isn't a "progressive" value.

[TheUnspeakable]

26. maybe we could lean on MSNBC

I've been thinking about this lately-Keith and Rachel are so good-they're like night and day compared to CNN :puke: I always imagine the people watching the first time and hearing the truth for the first time-how exciting it was for me. The ratings are rapidly rising for both shows-why can't we organize and get tons of people to email them and request some more good people (and please get rid of Joe and Mika) while at the same time getting people to stop watching CNN? I know the corporate media has another agenda besides ratings (keeping the Rightwing in power), but they DO care about ratings and they DO like money.

[calimary]

29. I've been asking that for years now.

If I had that kind of money, the FIRST thing I'd do is start buying up radio stations. Now would be a GREAT time to start looking, too, or start expressing an interest. Because the conglomerates, the CBSs and Emmises and ClearChannels are all hugely overbloated from greedy buying sprees over the last couple of decades, and now they can't sustain their huge, unweildly empires anymore.

I suspect there will be some sales coming up, especially if the corporate brass gets the sense that there might be some sort of governmental correction coming to their business, like re-regulation of some sort or a possible break-up of big monopolistic ownership (which would be GREAT!!!). Also, these bastards all bought high - stations were set at overinflated prices and these guys didn't care. They just knew they wanted 'em so they took on an absolutely UNGODLY debt to finance the purchase of these broadcast properties. Probably assumed everything would just stay peachy and would keep going up and up and up and up in value. And as we can see they were wrong and wrong and wrong. They're eventually going to HAVE TO unload some of these because they're drowning in debt. They're already laying off literal multitudes of employees - the staffers, in every department from on-air to programming and even to sales, are always the first to go. That won't stop the hemmorhaging because removing that overhead doesn't even begin to cover the red ink they've got on their books now. There will probably be fire sales soon.

And I would LOVE to have the money to snap up those properties. It'd be a buyers' market because these big boys will be desperate to unload these properties at whatever they can get for 'em - in a bad economy when there won't be as many parties with that kind of money to pay for these things, and a desperate need to dump properties that were bought for ridiculously overinflated prices. Now, those properties have decreased in value, probably below what they were really worth, originally. Especially since all the programming and on-air cutbacks for the local stations have caused their ratings to drop.

Here in L.A., I've been watching as the complaints from inside and outside the industry have grown - there's another round of "radio is dying" because the greedy, myopic cheapskates who own the stations have chosen in their "great wisdom" to cut back on the very things that make those stations so appealing to listeners in the market: the LOCAL stuff. The LOCAL jocks and/or other air people - who can ride in the LOCAL Chinese New Year parades and do live remotes at LOCAL high school football games and give out donuts and coffee at LOCAL gas stations during long gas lines and all that other crazy stunt stuff that local jocks and local air personalities do. And LOCAL shows where people can call in and request songs for their boyfriends/girlfriends - if it's considered cheaper to pipe in some syndicated guy from New York, then screw the locals. So EVERYBODY knows Ryan Seacrest but nobody knows their own local morning guy anymore - because there isn't one.

I'd buy up a bunch of these, put local people in drive time, and offer segments or maybe middays and a night or overnight slot of Air America or Nova M, staff 'em with liberals-with-attitude in the LOCAL in-house news department, and cobble together my own progressive network.

Either that, or we need to stage some sort of overwhelm-type philosophical takeover of MSNBC and push it completely over to the left so it becomes the anti-Pox. There's LOTS to be done. On air and off. TONS, if we're going to get OUR side of the message out. And that should be PRIORITY ONE for all of us: How to disrupt the enemy's communications to get OUR message out, while preventing or subverting theirs - or crowding them out.

[theophilus]

30. Thanks for the positive thoughts. I hope you win the Super Mega Powerball!

If I were a multi billionaire I hope I would do the same. As for MSNBC, I don't get them in my package. If they were to go left I might try to find the money to upgrade, though. I watch Keith and Rachel clips here on the DU.

[anonymous171]

35. I doubt there is a multi-billionaire progressive enough to do this. nt