OK, so what do we do about the media?

[Scuba]

It is clear today, that the media is, with a few notable exceptions, a fully bought and paid for tool of the right. As Rachel so elequoently pointed out, they are manufacturing the "news" as they see fit.

Dorothy L. Sayers (1893-1957) was a British writer, essayist, playwright and translator. She had the foresight to write

“The heaviest restriction upon the freedom of public opinion is not the official censorship of a press, but the unofficial censorship by a press which exists not so much to express opinion as to manufacture it.”

So what do we do? How do get the truth out? Can the Citizens United decision be overturned?

The best ideas seem to originate on DU. What do you say?

[madokie]

1. If we don't fix this problem America is lost

simple as that

[Junkdrawer]

2. I support TheRealNews and DemocracyNow....

Unlike US electoral laws, the media is not a "winner take all" thing. "Third Party" news can and should thrive.

[Jade Fox]

3. I was just thinking about this......

because after all the angst over the election, the problem remains that we are in an uphill struggle as long as the media is not required to tell the truth, and is owned by those willing to lie their heads off to get power.

[Ineeda]

4. All we would need is to establish is the same legal standards as with

any other 'product.' Truth in advertising. Under the Federal Trade Commission Act:

* Advertising must be truthful and non-deceptive;
* Advertisers must have evidence to back up their claims; and
* Advertisements cannot be unfair.

Why couldn't this apply to the 'product' of media? If it were news, the rules would apply, if clearly opinion, they would not.

[ShamelessHussy]

5. waaaaaay too late, all the liberal voices who pointed out this folly years ago, have been driven out

Nader springs to mind.

'nature' will have to follow it's course now until it becomes so bad and folks have fallen so far that they have nothing else to lose, and only then, will they collectively fight back.

until then it will be business as usual, unfortunately, as they are too entrenched right now.

[uncommon]

6. The first 30 seconds of Fox and Friends this morning -- "Just as new unemployment numbers are being

released, the President is going on an expensive trip to India" as if the two things have anything to do with one another. As if it is unusual for Presidents to travel internationally.

I turned it on out of morbid curiosity and immediately turned it off again.

My advice on an individual level is to just start watching the local news again. Fuck this cable news bullshit.

[democrank]

7. If you can...

Tune in to Democracy Now on Dish TV or Direct TV. Stop watching or commenting on Fox News. Don`t give them the time of day. Try letters to newspapers.

[deacon]

8. Just turn them off. n/t

[Scuba]

9. How do we get the masses to turn them off? How do we get ....

... those that don't watch any news to learn the truth, and act???

[spanone]

10. how do you regulate the truth? i do not know.

when i was young we had the fairness doctrine. this made news programs present both sides of a story.

once that was gone we got fox news.

[bluethruandthru]

11. A small but important step is to write, call or email

the media outlets every time you see or hear something biased or the reporter or anchor gives their opinion..during what is being presented as a newscast. Newscasts are for news...talk shows are for opinion. Their are NOT two sides to news.

As someone who works in the media, I can tell you that feedback from viewers/listeners does have an impact. With the exception of FOX...the other outlets don't want it to become common knowledge that they are so biased...even though they are. They need to be called out all the time.

[RickFromMN]

12. Can't there be progressive news outlets too?

Forgive my naivety. Why can't there be progressive news outlets too?

I thought, in other countries, Like England, there are liberal papers and conservative papers.

I thought, during the founding of our nation, there was the liberal press and the conservative press.
I thought Benjamin Franklin was a printer by trade, who used his press to push his ideas.

I don't object to opinionated news as long as it's carrying the label it is opinionated.
I do object to opinionated news that is passed off as impartial journalism.

We should get our news from many sources.

Opinionated news should be one source, but not the only source. It should be clear it is opinionated.

I hear people say they don't want opinionated news, and then hear what they watch or read, and shudder.

I hear local newspapers are in a death spiral. Journalists are heading toward the unemployment line.

Opinionated news sells. Impartial journalism...does that sell?

Why pay for good investigative journalism when people want a thirty second sound bite, or should I say twitter?
Why pay for good investigative journalism when you can get your news from the latest youtube video?

Whatever happened to Frontline or POV or in-depth reporting?

I remember watching, every night, from gavel to gavel, the Senate Watergate Committee hearings,
with Sam Ervin and Howard Baker. This was on one of the network television stations.

Would we expect such coverage now? I wouldn't. If I'm lucky I can watch coverage over the Internet.

Can I make a plug for "theuptake.org"? Of course "theuptake.org" has a liberal bias.
It is clear, at least to me, when they are expressing an opinion, and yes, I like a liberal bias.
They show an event, from gavel to gavel. One can watch the event in its entirety.
One can form one's own opinion.

How many people have the time or patience to watch CSPAN or CSPAN2 on television or over the Internet?

We are in a world of sound bites.

My mother is in a nursing home. When I visit her, I sometimes meet an 86 year old man who visits his wife.
The other day, he accused Obama of letting illegal immigrants vote in Arizona.
He was referring to the Appellate Court decision voiding the Arizona Proposition 200 initiative.
I looked at the 83 page court decision. I told him it wasn't Obama...it was the Court.
I told him Proposition 200 was found to be in conflict with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993.
I told him the purpose of NVRA was to insure poor people and minorities were allowed to vote.
That slowed him down, but didn't stop him voting Republican...he wasn't as confident it was Obama's fault.
He said letting illegal immigrants vote was wrong, but not letting poor people and minorities vote was also wrong.
Here is the appellate court decision if you have the desire to read it....
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/10/26/08-17094.pdf

Do I hate sound bites. Find me a way to beat sound bites without resorting to sound bites.

I fear it's only going to get worse.

[Stinky The Clown]

13. "Just turn it off" is the standard refrain from many. That is dead wrong

The media is, I argue, our most dire problem. If the truth gets out, the things we want will overwhelmingly be the favored positions in the country.

To this who disdainfully suggest just turning it off, how do you get the MoronAmericans who vote for teabaggers to turn it off. THEY are the ones to whom themessage is aimed. Not at you or me.