Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

The Time Has Come to Create a Real 'Liberal Media'

By Robert Parry, Consortium News. Posted November 21, 2008.


Deep-pocketed conservatives have long dominated the media landscape. If we want real change, it's time for progressives to fight fire with fire.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Robert Parry

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Having spent more than three decades in Washington, I’ve seen enough mistakes made – and opportunities missed – for a lifetime. So, at this turning point in American history, I’m venturing beyond my normal role as reporter to offer a few ideas about what must be done now.

For one, the progressive side of American politics must invest much more in media and do so immediately.

Looking back over the past three decades, the cost of the Left’s complacency on media – i.e. its failure to create a reliable way to get important facts to the public and to counter the Right’s propaganda machine – has been almost beyond calculation.

America’s right-leaning media imbalance was a big reason why George W. Bush was able to misgovern the United States for eight years, leaving the nation in two bloody wars and wallowing in the worst financial crisis since World War II. Hundreds of thousands are dead and millions may soon be out of work.

Despite Barack Obama’s election victory, this media asymmetry will not go away. Indeed, it is almost certain to limit his ability to bring about significant change and could tilt the country back in the direction of the Republicans in the not-too-distant future.

It is a pattern I have seen often since 1977 when I arrived in Washington as a reporter for the Associated Press.

During that time, while the American Left has been largely absent from the national media landscape, wealthy right-wingers (from foundations like Olin and Scaife to media moguls like Sun Myung Moon and Rupert Murdoch) have poured tens of billions of dollars into media.

Over those years, the Right built a towering – and vertically integrated – media structure reaching from newspapers, magazines and books to talk radio, cable TV and the Internet, an apparatus concentrated in the power centers of New York and Washington.

The Right also invested money in attack groups to go after mainstream journalists who dared dig up information that put right-wing policies or politicians in a negative light. Offending journalists were accused of “liberal bias” and often found themselves hounded from the national press corps.

Over time, this imbalance had a spillover effect. Many right-wing and neoconservative pundits landed prime spots on mainstream TV news shows and the Op-Ed pages of leading newspapers, such as the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Even the most dangerous of right-wing ideas – such as free-market absolutism at home and neoconservative imperialism abroad – got respectful if not reverential treatment across the mainstream-to-right-wing media spectrum, the news outlets that most Americans read, heard and watched.

Left’s Miscalculation

The Right’s bullying was made more effective by the fact that the progressive side of American politics chose – also starting in the mid-to-late 1970s – to withdraw from any serious commitment to national media.

One of the Left’s favorite slogans became “think globally, act locally.” In practice, that meant favoring local activism (such as direct philanthropic spending on projects like feeding the poor or buying up endangered wetlands) over national media (i.e. building the kind of informational infrastructure that the Right had).


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: media, air america, progressive movement

Robert Parry's new book is Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Thanks, and on to the Fray
Posted by: Ray Duray on Nov 21, 2008 1:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Robert,

I've been reading your Consortium News Service for years. It is spectacularly good. Thanks for enlightening your readers.

As to the "urgency of now", I was deeply gratified to see that MSNBC had Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos on the network on Thursday to excoriate Barack Obama for Obama's treachery in endorsing Joe Lieberman to retain his Homeland Security Committee Chairmanship. On air, Markos described Obama as "spiting in the face" of the progressive community. I agree.

It is precisely because we've ended up with a George Bush-lite corporate imperialist as our next President that the utter necessity of a vocal, activist and informative progressive media is so pressing.

We've been bamboozled. The American people should not be allowed and/or forced by a corporate media complex to acquiesce to what is shaping up to be the most wrenching economic chaos and hardship in living memory.

From all I've seen, we really have an appalling lack of financial and economic analysis from the Left. The one huge and obvious elephant in America's living room today is the utter lack of will on the part of the Establishment Democrats, Obama or any Washington voices I'm aware of to call for the swift regulation of the madness of derivatives trading on Wall Street. Unless and until this form of unregulated gambling is controlled, the world economy is going to be akin to a frenetic ball plunging through pinball machine. There needs to be some adult supervision applied to the crazed lunatics on Wall Street. And the media would be an excellent place for this cause to be taken up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thanks, and on to the Fray Posted by: luzmejor
It is my hope ...
Posted by: realmuzik on Nov 21, 2008 1:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... that all those voters that were swayed by Obama's Progressive promises are not just keeping their "eyes on the prize," but motivating and organizing in reaction to "every move he makes." (pardon the pun)

That's why a REAL Progressive media is so very, very crucial and critical. Air America, Pacifica, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and other independent media are just not enough. Bravo to Markos of the Daily Kos for speaking truth to power, as always.

The revolution will not be broadcast.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: 2thepoint
» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: Quannah
» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: 2thepoint
» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: Quannah
» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: 2thepoint
» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: Quannah
» RE: It is my hope ... Posted by: SkeeterVT1
dipconsult
Posted by: dipconsult on Nov 21, 2008 2:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A word from Europe:

We in Europe also suffer from a lack of accurate information from the media because of the dominance of media moguls who peddle not only neo-conservatism, but also trivia to divert attention from reality.

The more the extreme right media go, the more this drags the rest rightwards in order to be 'unbiassed' or 'fair to both sides'.

We (see our website www.dipconsult.eu) have spent 6 years warning of the worldwide disaster if the G E Bush neo-conservatives (PNAC) invaded Iraq unilaterally, and then detailing the damage done.

But over and again the 'politically correct media' refused to take up this message preached by so many of us with life long experience in foreign affairs.

Only on the web did we find serious and informed opposition to those twin ideologies of "free market absolutism and neo-conservatism" which - as predicted - brought about worldwide financial chaos and the worldwide disasters stemming from "Iraq"

But exactly how are we to vastly augment accurate, fearless, unbiassed media as is so essential in the new post-Bush era if the damage of the last 8 years of confrontation is to be limited and an era of international cooperation inaugurated?

Yes - we need investment: but from where despite that "fierce urgency of now?

We'd be glad for any comments at dipconsult@hotmail.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Media
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Nov 21, 2008 2:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think the Daily Show, Rachel Maddow, Olberman, etc. have the right idea. The Left will need to remain sharp, edgy, and have a sense of humor in order to have a place in the media.

I like Democracy Now, but to compete in the commercial sector, I don't think that the gloomy, monotone, outdated type of leftie/liberal image will work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Media Posted by: americansheep
» RE: Media Posted by: Quannah
"Liberal" Media
Posted by: Tom Degan on Nov 21, 2008 3:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
MSNBC is off to a good start with Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. It has driven me to distraction low these many years, listening to these assholes on the far right bitching and moaning about a "Liberal" Media that doesn't even exist. Or hearing them whine about the "Far Left".

The "Far Left" that the Far Right loves to cry about went the way of the Edsel, the 8-Track tape and the 45 RPM. You don't believe that? Next time you're in any big city, try finding the local chapter of the American Communist Party. Good luck.

The GOP has gotten so extreme in recent years, today's moderates are percieved as "extremists".

Many years ago, when I was fifteen years old, I remember reading an essay the biographer Albert Goldman wrote about the writer Jack Kerouac and the comedian Lenny Bruce, both of whom were (and still are) held up by the Left as cultural icons - when in fact, both men were decidedly conservative in their personal views. Said Goldman:

"They were only radical in their choice of words"

I think that would adequately describe a lot of us so-called "radicals" What we are seeking is a gentle and just society, where every one is treated equaly, with kindness and respect. When you think about it, that's not a very radical idea at all.

peace....

It's The Most Wonderful Time of the Year

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» BY THE WAY....Danny Schecter Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: BY THE WAY....Danny Schecter Posted by: blondesprite
» RE: "Liberal" Media Posted by: Ray Duray
» RE: "Liberal" Media Posted by: luzmejor
» RE: "Liberal" Media Posted by: luzmejor
The Progressive Change we SEEK!
Posted by: Ottomatic on Nov 21, 2008 3:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1- Break up the Media Monopolies. One outlet in one market for a start. Open channels for Local Independent Media Broadcasters.
2- Take the Money out of Politics. Level the playing field by- Publicly Funding All Elections.
3- Kick the Lobbyists out of Washington and nail the Revolving Door shut.
4- Increase Representation and Participation in Government by ending the One Party ( Wealthy Monopolistic) System.
5- Bring the Militia Home
6- Disband The DARK ARMY
7- Expand the Bill of Rights to include these additional Basic Human Rights:
The Right to:
A- Total Health Care including Dental and Elderly Care.
B- Gainful Employment that pays a livable minimum wage.
C- The Right to Clean Air, Pure Water and a Clean unpolluted Environment.
D- The Right to efficient, livable, affordable Housing.

This is a Good Start and please feel free to add your own:

The Capitalistic False Market System has FAILED U.S. and the World.
It is a DEAD SYSTEM.
The Market has spoken.
Pouring any more of our Limited Resources into it is a tragic fatalistic mistake.
A complete waste of valuable Energy and our limited Time.
We must move on.
We have more Important work to do.

GREED is EVIL.
Selfishness and GREED is the Evil in the World we must face.
Help lift the Twin Corporate veils of Secrecy and Oppression.

Join the Micro-Democracy Revolution
Go Green
Go Organic
Go Local
Let’s build together a Self Reliant, Self Sufficient and Self Sustainable Community based on these positive creative Values, Goals and Ideals:
Cooperation, Brotherly and Sisterly Love, true Compassion, Harmony, Generosity, Peace, Helpfulness and Forgiveness.

Strengthen the foundation The Republic of The United States of America was built upon by supporting and protecting The People.
Back to The Garden.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ask Michael Moore and Naomi Klein to...
Posted by: Bobsays on Nov 21, 2008 3:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Contribute 1 percent of their wealth: that should be a few tens of million. Use it to set up a venture fund to establish a media company. It is a myth the left and liberals don't have money: they are just either too cheap or too lacking in business acumen to put the money where their mouths are (though I favour the first reason, since they actually are very good at making money for themselves ).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I understand he has made... Posted by: sausage
» RE: Bank Statements? Posted by: oregoncharles
» Do the math, dude! Posted by: Bobsays
Don't forget Net neutrality
Posted by: scheherezade on Nov 21, 2008 4:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Net neutrality (or the lack thereof) will be a deciding factor with future online media access.

Telecom companies want to set up Internet tollways, and destroy net neutrality. Big media who are beholden to high-dollar advertisers have the resources to pay more for faster connection service.

Small companies could not afford this. They would have slower connection service. And nobody's going to visit a site that takes 3 minutes per click to upload.

If this happens, shoestring news outlets are dead in the water.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Follow the Yellow Brick Road
Posted by: Skelly on Nov 21, 2008 5:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What needs to happen is for a syndicate to copy the Limbaugh model in that a show is created and then shopped to stations coast to coast at no cost. Allow the stations to sell and keep all ad revenues for a period of time. After a fixed period of time, provided the show is successful as measured by local ratings, kick in a clause that calls for revenue sharing and/or pay for play. This model gets your message on the air, coast to coast with little or no start up risk for the local stations. Provided the show takes off and becomes popular the syndicate should be able to negotiate better terms of payment and the show will still air coast to coast.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like herding cats
Posted by: taxidriver on Nov 21, 2008 5:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean this as a compliment: liberals are cat-like; they're free-thinking, free spirits, who don't like to be told what to think and what to do.

Conservatives tend to be more dog-like, looking for a master to tell them what to think and how loud to bark. They tend to follow the Alpha male in the pack, whether it's George W. or Rush Limbaugh.

So, I don't think Liberals will ever be as successful at group-think mobilizing as Conservatives--and that's a good thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Like herding cats Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Like herding cats Posted by: nikolai
» RE: Like herding cats Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Like herding cats Posted by: nikolai
» RE: Like herding cats Posted by: VZEQICVA
Rupert Murdoch on the Left
Posted by: mfidelman on Nov 21, 2008 6:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we need is a Rupert Murdoch on the left - a visionary capitalist who actually knows how to build economically viable media entities. Failing that, a leftist venture capitalist who can invest in people and media entities. Al Gore seems to be trying this, but with unclear success. Maybe George Soros?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've been saying something similar for years
Posted by: SufiLizard on Nov 21, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And we've seen some progress. We all need to support Air America and liberal blogs, but we also need to find a way to strengthen the few progressive voices on TV.

Olberman and Maddow are doing great work, but they could be cut tomorrow. We need to find a way to get progressives on the boards of directors of MSNBC and find a way to push CNN to the left (to at least get them near the center rather than their current center-right lean).

Coordinating liberals is a LOT like herding cats but we need to do this if we don't want to see a President Palin in 2012. Just remember what an inept doofus George W. is and he managed to get two terms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Once more into the breach my friends......
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Nov 21, 2008 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are spot on, as I've posted elsewhere, the American people have been bamboozled by a corporate oligarchy intent on retaining it all! I don't know when journalists stopped reporting, but it was a slow grind to an immediate stop! And you are correct when Dan Rather was fired, that definitely sealed the deal!

Bill Moyers would make an excellent choice to lead a progressive change in the media, (he is familiar with all sides) but would he do it? Has anyone approached him with a proposal? In the end it will take a concerted effort (& money) to contain the beast of oligarchy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Moyers... Posted by: oregoncharles
» Moyers Posted by: Bliss Doubt
You got "Triangulatin'" Bill to thank for this media mess
Posted by: sausage on Nov 21, 2008 6:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one put a gun to former president Bill Clinton's head when he, happily, signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Dope from Hope could have just as well vetoed this abomination but, "free market" Democrat that he is, he trusted his "free market" business buddies to not create mini-monopolies in small to medium media markets.

What a friggin' idiot.

The FCCWeb page on the '96 Telecom Act unequivocally states:The goal of this new law is to let anyone enter any communications business -- to let any communications business compete in any market against any other.

To see for yourself what a load of horsehockey that sentence is the Center for Public Integrity has a handy little Web site called "Well Connected , Tracking the Players in Telecommunication, Media and Technology," here,
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/telecom/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressive is Great, but let's not become THEM either
Posted by: Purple Girl on Nov 21, 2008 7:01 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There seems to have already begun the 'hard Left', bitching about every damn thing done In the Obama Transition. FYI Lefites (which I am One for the most part)...Obama Was Never a Far Left candidate. Stop acting like we voted in Kucinich (my Hero warriors for left progessive ideas).
What part of 'We are not Red or blue, Dem or Repub...We are all americans' did You Miss. Did you Also miss his 'cross pakistani borders to kill or capture AQ operatives'?
Seems the 'far' left is a gullible as the 'Far' Right...did you buy the Neo Cons 'Obama is the most liberal Senator'?
Did You miss that he worked with Lugar (Loose Nukes) and Mccain (Campaign reform) on Legislation?
What part of his promise to reach across the aisle, or 'team of Rivals' references Confused you?
Hasn't the 'far left realized the Neo cons have been working YOU too, for Decades! they've been very pleased when you get out there and make asses of yourself..It helps build animosity from the Far right. Examples you say? PETA, who goes around throwing paint on dead animal furs, terrorizes kids who just want to see the Oscar Meyer Weiner Truck and spend More time trying to convert every human to vegatarianism then working with farmers to regain their farms- Family Farmers must practice Good Animal Husbandry methods,BECAUSE their livilhoods depend on Higher quality products than does Big Agri Business- Who abuses food production animals...9-5 cheap unskilled hired help of major Corps.
another example you ask?
How about this 'Marriage' vs 'Unions' Crap.
Hint if you are not a member of a Catholic church..They won't marry You Regardless of WHO you want to 'marry'. How many Heterosexual couples must be united legally by a Judge, because they are Not affiliated with any church- many, about 4 mariiages in my family alone!
Let's make a distrinction...'Marriage' is the Religious term, 'Union' is the Legal Term. I don't give a shit what you call my husband and I on Paper, as long as my legal Rights are intact. It is Unreasonable and Unrealistic to expect the Catholic Church to marry heterosexuals if it goes against their Doctrines...Find a new damn church, You obviously do not follow their dogma anyway!
My point I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR THE SAME KIND OF BS FROM THE LEFT THAT I HAVE ENDURED 3 DECADES FROM THE RIGHT!!!!!Un compromising, Illogical, Irrelevant, Unyeilding, self righteous and counterproductive to real solutions to real problems which are Killing this country.
Frankly both these Extremeist should sit down shut up and watch how the Grown Ups get shit done!Give it a Rest and US a damn break! I'm over the 'Lunatic Fringes' on both sides of the Table.
Note I am a life Long liberal Dem who lived outside SF and LOVED to go to 'The City'- the Haight,The Castro (esp Holloween!). so i am not a Right Winger...I'm just sick of the BS fighting which addresses nothing and Certianly has failed to resolve anything in decades.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We've gotta walk the walk
Posted by: bking7698 on Nov 21, 2008 7:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We all say we want more liberal media outlets, but we can start by supporting what we have out there now. Link TV, Nova M Radio Network, AA, Randi Rhodes, Thom Hartmann, etc... It takes money to get and keep these voices going. Link TV, which has some superb programming is publicly sponsored - No corporate influence at all - but they need money to operate. As a small business owner, I advertise with Nova M in my local Phoenix market and will continue for as long as I remain in business. For what we may lack in consensus building, we more than make up for in the belief that doing the right thing is the right thing to do. Let's take these modest beginnings, and the inherent goodness of liberals and right this listing media ship.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Save the Internet!
Posted by: stellabloo on Nov 21, 2008 8:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excellent comment above on this topic but here is a link:

savethenet.com

I'm sure most of you know what incredible boon the internet has been to democracy, especially in the last election. I'm still amazed that I can sit here in my little neighbourhood and potentially share my seditious opinions with readers world-wide. But MSM is fighting back! No news like the canned news! So you need to fight back too. If the moral majority can come out in force to fight gay marriage, surely they can be persuaded to preserve the First Amendment :.?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lousy media a root problem
Posted by: Grandma Crabby on Nov 21, 2008 8:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I applaud this article.

In my experience, the pitiful state of the news media in America is one of the root causes of so many other problems.

If the news media had done its job, W. never would have been elected.

If the news media had done its job, the Iraq war might never have gotten off the ground. The list goes on.

Americans are so grotesquely misinformed they can not make decent decisions.

I worked in TV news for about 20 years. Trust me when I say no journalism is going on in American TV news rooms.

TV news executives only think about the production value of the show. In other words, how fancy and flashy everything looks. When they want to “improve” the show, they always turn to fancier sets, fancier graphics, new music that’s more dramatic, new hair-dos for the anchors. Younger anchors with bigger boobs. All that superficial, show-biz crap. They NEVER EVER discuss raising the quality of journalism. Journalism never even gets mentioned as something we should be doing.

In fact, I sat in a station-wide meeting once and listened to the guy who was the corporate head of the entire news division (company owned about 15 TV stations and a bunch of magazines) and he said, “Journalism doesn’t work.” Seriously. He chuckled at the notion of spending time doing real journalism. Ridiculed the station’s reputation back in the early 80’s when we put corrupt politicians in jail and won Peabody awards.

Guess which old-geezer, been-there-forever employee stood up and debated that issue with him? And wouldn’t shut up? Kept debating. Told him he was wrong. Go ahead and guess.

TV news sucks. Restricting corporate ownership is the best solution. Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine won’t really cut it. That’s the solution you hear bantered about but that is not enough. You have got to go back to local ownership and not letting 3-4 companies control the whole frigging media.

In case you did not know, the Fairness Doctrine was an FCC regulation that had been in place since the advent of TV and was done away with during Ronald Reagan’s term. The F.D. made all media outlets give equal time to liberal and conservative views or they could not keep their federal license. You had to present verifiable data on fairness every year at license renewal time to the FCC. In addition to doing away with the F.D., they also loosened the restrictions on ownership and one company could gobble up as many media outlets as they wanted.

The media conglomerates of today fight against bringing back the F.D. but many people who hate the media want to make it law again. But I do not think you can regulate your way into quality TV news. That would only give you a million Alan Colmes clones.

I think you have to have owners who give a darn about their local communities and journalism. But local TV news does not make enough money to make that feasible anymore. Back before cable TV, local stations could turn a good profit, but not today. They barely squeak by and lots of them lose money.


Now that I am done with War and Peace, I’ll get back to work.

Granny's crazy videos = Go get a chuckle!

Luv,
granny

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lousy media a root problem Posted by: luzmejor
Real Liberal or the dominate culture's 'liberal''?
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Nov 21, 2008 9:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To be truly liberal a press has to be willing to grill the shit out of a politician like a chicken on the grill. You have to have enough backbone to stand up for the rights of all people,even the ones you don't like and support their right to be and live different than you.

A liberal press would support the rights of women in all aspects of living not just the prechosen forms supported by the media now.
We need media support of women's reproductive health issues and not just the emotion pandering stories designed to steer your thoughts and not give you real information.

We need a liberal press that will hold accountable all politicians. One that will put them through the wringer when they support actions that are clearly vendetta and not true
National threat reasons.

Until we can field journalists and broadcaster that are willing to look someone in the eye and tell them 'Fuck You,you're probably a liar!" there will be nothing like a liberal press in this country.

It's the liberal press that insures real Liberty and Freedom. It's the controlled press that supports the ones that wish remove yours.
There's a reason they call it 'programing'!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Give them a shot of reality
Posted by: Democritus on Nov 21, 2008 9:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever since Reagan dismantled "The Fairness Doctrine" the right-wing media has had a field day. Now the reactionary establishment is squealing with fear because The Fairness Doctrine might be resurrected.

The right-wingers are whining because The Fairness Doctrine states that the commerical media must give equal time to both sides of any controversial topic. They've had it all their own way with Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly. But The Fairness Doctrine would force conservative station owners to balance their coverage. Chances are that they would muzzle their mouthpieces if also forced to air views enunciated by Stewart, Olbermann, and Maddow.

I believe that Obama will reinstitute The Fairness Doctrine. That alone would break the stranglehold that the conservative media has on our airwaves--and it's about time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

good article but--
Posted by: mwildfire on Nov 21, 2008 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it doesn't analyze WHY the situation so well-described obtains. The above post about herding cats is a small piece of the answer, but there is a much bigger one. The essential difference between right and left, the difference that endures through the decades, is the attitude toward what used to be called leveling, or socialism--equalizing incomes at least to some degree--versus an assumption that the rich are rich because they worked harder and were smarter, and policies that benefit them will trickle down to the rest of us.
Why is it that he rich are mostly on the right? because if they didn't make maintaining their wealth a high priority, they'd probably either never have managed to get rich in the first place, or wouldn't stay rich for too long. With that viewpoint and their enormous resources, they are very well positioned to pull the levers that will keep their advantages intact--like maintaining a campaign system that allows them to use their money to put/keep sympathetic politicians in office, and maintaining a media system that allows them to preach to the middle class and the poor that voting Republican will please God and spreading the wealth will cause the economy to crash. They also fund chairs at universities so that prestige economics schools keep churning out bright graduates who believe sincerely the dogma they've been taught, and thus work to maintain the status quo. Funding right-wing media is simply a business investment for them, one which pays off quite handsomely. As does investing in politicians. Supposedly mainstream media outlets are especially good, although the overt right-wing outlets are helpful for keeping the shock troops stirred up.
The left does not have, will never have, large numbers of the rich in its column, for obvious reasons.
As for foundations, years ago I tried to write a grant for a project doing public outreach on environmental issues in West Virginia. I got hold of a big book of foundations that fund environmental work, but found that many listed among the things they would not fund, any kind of media work. Why not? Cynically, I believe it's because public education is the only thing that could give green groups a fighting chance to see actual regulatory change. I noticed that many of the foundations originated from oil or chemical companies. Perhaps this is because the second or third-generation inheritors of these fortunes wanted to "do good work" with a fraction of their money to assuage their discomfort over how their wealth was obtained---but my more cynical theory was that the corporations fund green groups in order to keep strings tied to them and ease spying on them. Thus they can know in advance if anyone is planning a direct action, the one thing they fear. Directors of groups I've worked with constantly cite the need to avoid alienting funders as a reason for sticking with safe, within-the-system work like sending letters to politicians, turning out people for public hearings, collecting petition signatures. We could increase tenfold the number of people engaged in such activities without having any impact. Funding our groups is a cheap way to keep us diverted into safe activities like that, rather than anything that might threaten corporate profits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: If you think about it... Posted by: Cybershaman
» In a nutshell... Posted by: Grandma Crabby
dipconsult
Posted by: dipconsult on Nov 21, 2008 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The best idea so far seems to us to find an "anti-Murdoch News Corporation" for FREE media (don't talk left or right some "right" ideas are good. Some left ideas are bad - and who's "left" and who's "right" in the GW Bush Paulsonesque twilight?)

We must get rid of the present US/UK owner controlled media plugging the twin ideologies of "free maket absolutism" and "neo-conservatism" which have gone a long way to wreck our Western world. (see our website www.dipconsult.eu)

I see Soros is mentioned but he's doing a lot already with his Open Society which is funding lots of good things like the European Council for Foreign Relations - how about Branson?

please send me at JP Diplomatic Consultancy any other possibles at dipconsult@hotmail.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Journalism is neither left nor right
Posted by: Grandma Crabby on Nov 21, 2008 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I gotta jump back in here.

What we need is QUALITY JOURNALISM.

Quality journalism is neither liberal nor conservative, it is FACTUAL. As Steven Colbert says, "truth has a well known liberal bias."

Over the years, quality journalism has been branded as liberal because conservatives don't like to deal with reality.

Take Bill Moyers. He has been branded a "far left PBS guy" by right wingers like Bill O'Reilly. If you examine his work, you do not see biased, liberal reporting. You see in-depth, fact filled, reality based journalism.

Part of the problem here is labeling. People do not seem to know what real journalism is, since it is so scarce. To call Bill Moyers a "far left" reporter is absurd.

If we got rid of all the right wing media only to replace it with left wing media, we would still have crummy coverage and an ignorant population.

WHAT WE NEED IS REAL JOURNALISM. FACTS. FAIR AND BALANCED. A COMPLETE EXAMINATION OF ALL SIDES OF THE ISSUE.

Is that so much to ask? Guess so.

Granny's crazy videos = Go get a chuckle!

Luv,
Granny

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Earth To AlterNet- It's Time To Wake Up
Posted by: NoPCZone on Nov 21, 2008 10:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1- We are NOT a center left country, nor are we a liberal country.

After an 8-year assault upon civil liberties, the rule of law, common sense and the most serious economic downturn in almost 80 years a DLC Democrat disguised as a liberal (Obama) barely gets elected despite the lamest form of Republican opposition.

2- We are not a well educated or well informed country.

Over 80% of American households did not read a single book last year. Even fewer regularly read a news magazine or opinion journal. Even fewer have extensively travelled or lived outside the United States.

3- Most Southern 'Democrats' are nothing but Republicans in disguise.

My 'Democratic' Senator opined yesterday that among other things, auto worker wages would have to be reduced to 'world levels' before she would vote for a bail out. This despite the fact that the UAW agreed to a new hire wage lower than that of non-union Japanese plants in the South. This is your 'Democratic' Party at work.

4- Most Americans still buy into the foundation myths espoused by the Religious Right.

5- Most Americans still buy the Republican Mantra about government being basically evil and incapable of effectiveness.

6- Most Americans still cling to faiths that deny/oppose modern science.

7- California, our most diverse and progressive state, just embraced the hate and banned Gay Marriage.

8- We do not have a two party system- we have a one party system with two branches.

It's called the money party and it has two right wings- one moderately right wing and one extremely right wing.

Maybe we should all pick a state and migrate to it- taking it over and driving the luddites out. It's a thought...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do I dare quote Marx?
Posted by: tomkara on Nov 21, 2008 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ruling class = ruling ideas. The wealthiest in society control the means of production, meaning they control the advertising revenue sources for the most part. Our mass media is advertising based, except (partially) for PBS and NPR. You will never get Proctor and Gamble to sponsor a "subversive" program (unless maybe enough of us tell P&G that we want them to, or we aren't going to buy their products). However, at one time, even as conservative as the US mass media has always been, there was an obligation to use the airwaves in the public interest. That needs to be restored so that when blatantly biased political viewpoints are advanced, equal time is given to opposing views. Public interest could also be invoked to require networks to have news departments which are independent and which derive revenues from the parent company with no strings attached. Things like that could be done legislatively, or with the assistance of progressive FCC commissioners.
As far as creating something new, Air America was a good example of what not to do - try to have 24/7 ranting on AM stations. I never understood why Air America didn't establish FM stations that appealed to people with a variety of alternative music, liberal talk, and news, instead of straight talk. Most stations that carry right wing talk radio also play music and other programming. The suggestion that a good program like Rachel Maddow get syndicated on radio by offering stations the program free for a year seems like a good one, but many station owners are so rabidly right wing they probably wouldn't even consider it. I can't even get my local NPR station to carry Democracy Now even though it's offered for free for a year (and the station repeats Morning Edition - taking up four hours). And as others have pointed out, there are wealthy lefties who should and could buy up some powerful stations and create an exciting new format - so where are they? George Sorros? Michael Moore? Didn't Al Gore start a satellite network?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We won't have a truly progressive media...
Posted by: truthteller on Nov 21, 2008 10:39 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...Until supposedly progressive sites openly allow criticism and discussion of the undue influence of Zionism and the Israeli lobby in U. S. media, not to mention government - including the incoming administration.

AlterNet is the one place that seems to have allowed any level of discussion of this. I was banned from CommonDreams two days after the election for comments I made there on a David Corn piece in which I said there wouldn't be any great structural changes in the government because of his appointment of hard-core Zionists like Israeli-born Rahm Emanuel, and Obama and the rest of the poltical elite's deferring to AIPAC. That's all it took to get me banned from even READING articles on CommonDreams. Shame on CommonDreams for oppressing discussion of a major political and foreign policy issue while calling themselves a "progressive" media outlet. Pure BS.

The same goes for Air America since the Green Family took it over. I have heard both Thom Hartmann and, before she was fired from there, Randi Rhodes dump callers who wanted to discuss this topic, largely without comment, and go onto the next caller. When AAR first started, I fondly remember hearing my girl Jeanine Garofalo and Sam Seder openly criticizing Israel and it's treatment of Palestinians. I don't think you would hear that today. I notice that Jeanine is no longer anywhere near AAR.

There is more criticism of Israel's actions allowed by the Israeli media within Israel than there is in the U. S. Until that changes, we are not going to have a truly free and progressive media in the U. S.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Quit twisting my point Posted by: truthteller
» RE: Quit twisting my point Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Quit twisting my point Posted by: truthteller
» RE: Quit twisting my point Posted by: Quannah
Fat chance
Posted by: Bliss Doubt on Nov 21, 2008 12:24 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, for the moment we'll go with the traditional "left" and "right" labels, even though they don't really mean much any more.

"...the Left’s complacency on media – i.e. its failure to create a reliable way to get important facts to the public and to counter
the Right’s propaganda machine – has been almost beyond calculation."

Since 95 percent of this country's media is owned by five mega-powerful conglomerates, all who donated heavily to Bush's first and second elections, and got the relaxed media ownership rules they paid for, the internet has filled the gap, and with a very few notable exceptions, only on the net can you find any true progressive news and issues. Even many of the stalwart "left" publications like the Nation have at best softened their edges, and at worst sold out.

The right wingnuts in my own family continue to gripe about the "liberal media" without understanding that the editorial decision is in what's left out, not what's included.

I don't know what ever happened to "equal time" rules for political campaign seasons, but the Nevada primaries debate was aired only on MSNBC, and at the last minute they shut out Kucinich, and said they could do that because they were a private media corporation. That was the second to the last straw. Next was Texas, where the party came up up with a whole new rule for Kucinich, saying that he could only debate if he'd sign a promise to support whatever Democrat candidate should eventually receive the nomination. If it isn't the "private" media, it's the party of the so called left itself that is squashing the progressive movement.

Now, even the internet is endangered as the last outpost of real, untampered news, and I haven't the least doubt that Obama will give it over to the corporatocracy for complete privatization, if not in his first term, then in his second, lame duck term.

I think Parry is preaching to the choir, and we in the choir are singing as loud as we can already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fat chance Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Fat chance Posted by: Bliss Doubt
Advertising Dollars
Posted by: harlan8 on Nov 21, 2008 1:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What is said is totally correct. However, the power of advertisers is an important thing to remember. If the big advertisers, like car companies, don't want to support a media outlet, even a deep pockets backer will not be enough to keep it afloat. While TDS and other outspoken shows have support from Movie companies, I do not think they get the big money support like CNN, etc. from car and mulitnational advertisers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And how about a truly MODERATE INDEPENDENT media?
Posted by: maxpayne on Nov 21, 2008 2:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's just drop the "right" and "left" labels and try finding common ground instead. And I'm not saying simply pander to the other side. Be what you want to be but be reasonable with others about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

nvannes
Posted by: nvannes on Nov 21, 2008 2:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sounds fine with me. Too much progressive thinkin' ain't enough, especially in light of our late start. Let's get it rollin'. Rockin' and Rollin'. This guy, Rush Limp Balls, is the worst thing that happened to this country since Joe McCarthy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whenever I'm Questioned About my Political Position.....
Posted by: Turiye on Nov 21, 2008 8:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
......I've never said anything else than, "Far Left Leaning Liberal Pinko Commie Red", of course to get the complete point across.
If you want some Liberal Media and Outright Truth, here you are because not the screaming limbaugh oxycontin addict type of lies, Truth and Nothing But the Truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TheRealNews.com is not even mentioned here ...
Posted by: halg on Nov 21, 2008 8:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... and yet, TheRealNews.com is EXACTLY what you are all looking for!

If Mr. Parry (and all you posters) are genuine fans of Left media, you need to check out TheRealNews.com and become $10/month sustaining supporters.

Paul Jay, CEO and Chief Analyst for TheRealNews, is a veteran CBC journalist and filmmaker who is already looking to get his program on television (which has been the plan all along). Although currently based in Toronto(?), they are planning to move their news operation to Washington D.C., so you can see they are very serious.

And, speaking of the CBC, you may want to check out the daily broadcasts of "The National" that network's leading news show. I have found it interesting to see the news, which includes American and Canadian news, from a non-commercial source (albeit, it is funded by the Canadian Government, so they might be watching their toes sometimes). There is no advertising (Ahhhhh!) and few, if any, bullshit features. Note the site is cbc.ca, NOT cbc.com.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

just brain storming possibilities
Posted by: using on Nov 21, 2008 10:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now...i think you might have hit on something. One drop and one drop could make alot of drops (ask Barack who kept asking for money...little bits of it and that kept us feeling involved)
Michael Moore and others in Hollywood who are activists can do a benifit.
Gore is an idea...and he is involved in green and stock. He or others could design a media mutual fund that would invest in building a progressive media that has the potential to blossom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In response to blaming Israel for our plight
Posted by: using on Nov 21, 2008 11:03 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Absolutely....Israel is the basis for America's woes. Israel wags America's tail.....causes us to continue to guzzel gas and bury the well running electric cars that were built in this country by our workmen and leased by Americans who were happy with the product, oh and it is the Israelis that have the Saudi's in for festivities....oh that was the Bush family. Oh and Israel is the reason our jobs are outsourced, our economy crumbling, our children dumbed down, our health care system broken, our people angry and disheartened. Yes, who else but a large powerful empire like Israel can be responsible for the state of America's demise? ANd how come you are not feeling any compassion or responsibility for your own countrymen?
I did not notice any desire to discuss why the Saudis and other ARab dictatorships allowed the Palestinians to wallow in dispair while Israel took beaten Jews from all over the world, provided homes and educated them for productive employment. Israel was no more than a barren desert which by their blood and sweat they turned into a flourishing green haven.
Do you know why the ARab leaders said they wanted Israel dead from day one....because they did not want their people to see what can be accomplished when a government supports instead of oppresses its people. So, they veiling their eyes with hate. The only hand the oil rich Saudis, with abundant unused land extended to the Palestinians, was money to pay families that allowed their own children to become living bombs.
And sir, while you are busy pointing your finger at the Isrealis the Bush group has steadily brought us to a dispair of our own. Oh and interesting I do not hear that you believe you should be held accountable for the victims and abuse of the Guantánamo detainees.
Perhaps you were banned from other web sites because they did not want to smear their fight for a better world with your irrational, anti Israel spin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OUR MEDIA IS OWNED BY THE RIGHT, FINANCED BY THE RIGHT AND SERVES
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Nov 21, 2008 11:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the right wing. The only choice for the poor is to avoid contact with their lies. That is a tough thing to do.

I meet self professed democrats daily that spout right wing talking points with nearly every breath. The right wing think tanks create right wing lies faster than they can be rebutted. Their resources are so vast. They usually run budgets of around 200 million each. This means that around a thousand million, a billion, dollars gets spent each year on right wing propaganda. Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, or Chairman Mao would have drooled over such a propaganda machine.

Very slowly the American people are learning that they are being systematically lied to. Something has to give. We have to take the United States back from these bastards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Consortium News Service = Inaccurate Information!!!!!
Posted by: ds1st on Nov 23, 2008 11:45 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been reading your Consortium News Service for years. It is not an accurate source for information. Poorly done!

There are to many liberal-socialist news outlets. We need more conservative news channels. If it was not for radio or cable the United States would be closed to the conservative viewpoint.

Thanks Rush and Bill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tap Hollywood
Posted by: cori on Nov 28, 2008 7:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Warren Beaty, Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Danny Glover, Martin Sheen and many more. They are all rich and should be encouraged to donate. We need more Bill Mahers, Bill Moyers, Democracy Now and Free Speech America. Nows the time. The fight for the people is one that never ends and we should keep it up. This time the revolution will be televised. Big money always has the same agenda as should we.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement