FCC Republicans again attempt to weaken media ownership rule

Though they are all in their 20's, they show a maturity of thought that escapes so many of the intellectually juvenile who frequent this forum.

There are a great number of news stories that we can thank Talk Radio for reporting, because otherwise we would have never heard about it, or it would have been so de-emphasized or under reported on the next to last page, or distorted and mis-reported. As Rush likes to point out when he is accused of being biased and not offering equal time, he points out that "he is equal time." I tend to agree with him on that. After listening to "news," I need to hear the other side or a counter-balance.

A good example of the need for a balance was the CNN Democratic debate, which was scripted for Clinton, but was presented as balanced. If I view or hear something biased, I would at least like to hear the source admit to the bias, and all conservative talk show personalities that I know of admit that they present their views from a conservative bias. I can't tell you how many liberals I've heard that claim to be moderates or centrists, and it is nothing but their egotistical claim to being balanced, which is a crock to say the least. That is one of the reasons I don't like NPR. The Fairness Doctrine would bring more of that and worse.

Quote:

Though they are all in their 20's, they show a maturity of thought that escapes so many of the intellectually juvenile who frequent this forum.

I would heartily agree with that.

It is an attempt to illustrate how it is absurd to contend the desire and practice of media control belongs to only one side of the US political spectrum.

blatham wrote:

finn said

Quote:

Comparing the current US administration to the former USSR and the current China is pretty ridiculous and herein lies my complaint with your rhetoric.

I didn't compare them. It is an 'if X, then Y' argument using a real example to demonstrate the connection. If media control is effectively narrowed down in the direction of a single control point, to that degree liberty will be diminished. All authoritarian systems function this way and where information is so controlled (remember, it isn't on/off or black/white, it is degrees) there you have an authoritarian system. Five corporations now own the major media in the US. Would you wish it to consolidate down to three or two or one? Why not?

The title of this thread is FCC Republicans again attempt to weaken media ownership rule (emphasis added)

You begin your post explaining how the dastardly bastard who is engineering this diabolical plot is A REPUBLICAN, and has numerous ties (even through marriage for Heaven's sake!) to the Evil Bush/Cheney Empire.

SIDEBAR: You make much of Martin's connections to Weily, Rein & Fielding. This firm, as are all large law firms, highly cognizant of politics. That they operate in Washington DC makes their interest and consideration all the more intense. Weily Rein does tend to represent clients associated with the Right (Business for one), but I would like to think there is no inherent evil in this tendency as, surely, the Right is as entitled to legal representation as the Left. Weily Rein is no more or less sinister than the Frederick H. Graefe firm , Piper Rudnick and any number of Democrat focused lobbyists in DC.

Then (after some interesting exchanges with george) you respond to my challenge that you seem only to perceive bogeymen when they associate themselves with the Right with "It's not a left/right matter, in the normal or cliched sense of those worlds. There was Pravda in the USSR, and China will have its main information organs"

Not..."Yes, FDR, JFK, Lyndon Johnson, Bill Clinton et al did much the same," but evoking the Soviet Union and Maoist China as the counterpoint to Bush, Cheney, Martin, Martin's wife, and Weily Rein & Fielding.

But I guess you're right.

I would imagine the same thing, joe. But regulation of human or corporate behavior isn't occasioned only by some worst and certain extremity. It is unlikely that a natural gas tanker will run through that intersection below my window and explode on contact with a bus loaded to the gunnels with stradivarius violins and gifted catholic virgins but still we find reason for traffic regulations.

]It is a good thing to have the choice of either Corn Flakes or Oregano Sugar Stars for breakfast and to be able to purchase them at a relatively low price as set by open competition. But I don't think we'd want to say that meaningful democracy is dependent upon that situation. It is dependent upon a free and independent and varied media spectrum and upon the fact of a multiplicity of political viewpoints expressed and received/considered however.

But I consider it likely to the point of certainty that Martin, as a typical Bush administration political appointee, is in his position to forward industry interests, citizen interests being mostly impedimentary. Powell, Martin's predecessor, is now making the big dollars working for the media industry. He ain't a consumer advocate.

They why do you advocate the continuation of such authoritarian measures to control information and speech here?

Shall I presume you wish to label yourself as an authoritarian of the left?

What is the function of anti-trust law?

We might as well prevent newspapers from owning telegraph companies and semaphore relay stations while we're at it.

There's no question we are being poorly served by the existing media system.

I find myself turning increasingly to a growing community of bloggers who stand outside the symbiotic world of politicians, pundits, and related corporations.

The fundamental change in the way people consume the news had to change the way we executed a communications strategy at the White House.

Q. How much attention did you pay to the programs on cable?

I never worried about a certain cable show. What I was looking for were trends that were shaping the narrative and the conventional wisdom and whether we had to be in front of or behind those things.

Q. What about the blogs?

We had to set up a whole new apparatus to deal with the challenges they pose. Are they real journalists? The Washington Post, for example, has journalists who are now bloggers. Do you treat them as bloggers? Do they get credentials?

Q. Let's think of it as a practical matter. If one of those journalists-turned-bloggers, Chris Cillizza, e-mails you to say he needs an interview, and at the same time one of the Post's print reporters-say, Dan Balz-e-mails you and says he needs an interview, and you can do only one . . .

Balz.

Q. Because the print edition of the Post has more of an impact?

Because Balz is on multiple platforms. He's booked more easily on television. He's read by more people. He influences people a bit more. Now, the question might not be as much Chris versus Dan as maybe, "Is it Dan Balz or one of the guys at [the conservative blog] Power Line?"

Q. Yeah, or what if [conservative blogger] Hugh Hewitt called?

That's when you start going, "Hmm . . ." Because they do reach people who are influential.

Q. Well, they reach the president's base.

That's what I mean by influential. I mean, talk about a direct IV into the vein of your support. It's a very efficient way to communicate. They regurgitate exactly and put up on their blogs what you said to them. It is something that we've cultivated and have really tried to put quite a bit of focus on.

Criticism of the FCC's chairman is widely aired

'Lone operator' is said to keep plans from colleagues and manage the agency ineffectively.

By Jim Puzzanghera, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
December 10, 2007
WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission's monthly meetings are scheduled to start at 9:30 a.m. Under Chairman Kevin J. Martin, the trains don't always run on time, and recently they've come close to veering off the rails.

On Nov. 27, for instance, the FCC was slated to consider controversial proposals dealing with potential new cable TV regulations and increasing women and minority ownership of broadcast stations. Journalists, lobbyists and spectators waited as the five commissioners on the fractious panel wrangled over the issues eight floors above. When they finally showed up for the public session -- nearly 12 hours late -- the few spectators remaining had front-row seats for the sniping and accusations that are threatening to become hallmarks of FCC meetings.

Critics usually blame Martin, a soft-spoken Republican known as a political tactician who has accomplished the rare feat of being criticized by all four of his fellow commissioners. He is also facing a congressional inquiry into the FCC's procedures and allegations of flawed research studies, suppressing data, ignoring public input and holding hearings with minimal notice.