The whole US media is Run by Zionists. Its all a Zionist spin factory, really. Doesnt surprise me.

All preseidnets weve had in the past 25 years have been rabidly pro zionist.

I have been against media propaganda since before I was born...well ok after, but I am still against it. My very first day here on ATS I spouted anti-propaganda text in an attempt to assist others in seeing the falseness of media....to no avail. Hopefully this thread of yours will help.

I have the same feelings on the media.
The bewildering thing is I only heard about this today from a rant on some nutjobs site when I was looking for something else. It took a good bit of searching to find out if what he was saying had any basis in reality, then another to find a report from a semi-competent news source. The only others I could find was USA Today talking about how it would be good for phone companies.. No mention of anything else, and one from the Boston Daily Globe. (Plenty on the usual independent sites)

Perhaps this one just slipped by me. Has this been widely reported in the U.S? Or is the biggest change in the U.S media market being largely ignored by the media itself? If so it would be ironic if it wasn't so obviously deliberate.

If they tried this in the U.K the uproar would be huge.

There is always a constant debate here about the extent papers owned by people and conglomerates like Murdoch influence public opinion. It should be hard to believe that this is going to be passed in the states with only muted criticism but when you take into account the state its already in, I suppose you've got the perfect environment for something like this to be put though. As I said, this part is pretty much a formality. Any thoughts on its chances of getting through congress?

Will that be another formality?

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
The whole US media is Run by Zionists. Its all a Zionist spin factory, really. Doesnt surprise me.

All preseidnets weve had in the past 25 years have been rabidly pro zionist.

You can play with words all day, and wast all the time. Here is a simplication for you

Illuminati = Satanists
Nazis = Satanists
Scull&Bonesmen = Satanists
Zionists = Satanists
Bohemian Club = Satanists

This list is not complete.

If one studies the rank and file of the Bohemian Grove, you will see who owns the media.

I have studied who owns and runs the media.

I do not believe in Satan. I am not a christian. Thus, i do not believe Satanists run the media.

But rabid pro Israel kill palestinians by the village full Nazis do.

You don't have to belive in Satan to know that others do.

Others can.

Most Satanists Ive seen dont even believe in Satan, just those principles identified as Satanic, like do what thou wilst and all that drek.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Others can.

Most Satanists Ive seen dont even believe in Satan, just those principles identified as Satanic, like do what thou wilst and all that drek.

Now you get the point. If it smells like...........Looks like.............And Tasts like.......... By God, it must be .................

[Edited on 2-6-2003 by All Seeing Eye]

Actually, any company owning a couple of different stations doesn't stop anybody else from starting their own station. I would say it would just have to be managed to be profitable ie getting the viewing audience or listening audience(if we want to throw the whole ClearChannel issue in) to draw sponsors to run ads. Seems to me that to keep anybody from owning a company on the basis of any other business they may own infringes upon freedom of the press and freedom of speech. I was glad to see the FCC also start to grant individual 1 watt FM stations to the general public as well. While I'm for freedom of the airwaves in all aspects, I do see the need to manage them and I feel this should be the area of the FCC not determining who should not get to own what but to farm out freq.s as fairly as possible. Their auctioning of them , I disagree with. I feel there should be a set fee and then a drawing and then responsibilities of the winner to see they are utilized so no one could win them and not use them.

Now you get the point. If it smells like...........Looks like.............And Tasts like.......... By God, it must be .................

ZIONISM. Thats what my eyes, ears, and nose tell me.

By definition, Zionists could be classified as what you see as satanists.

Posted by Kegs: Has this been widely reported in the U.S? Or is the biggest change in the U.S media market being largely ignored by the media itself? If so it would be ironic if it wasn't so obviously deliberate.


Oh indeed, Kegs, ignored completely. The only outlet I ever heard reporting on this issue with any voracity was NPR. They, again to the best of my knowledge, were the only ones who looked at this impending issue to see all sides of it. All the major outlets might have covered it but was glossed over and done quickly so as not to raise the publics alarms. This is a bad turn of events if you ask me.

Astrocreep, I understand that, should I want to, I could open my own station to compete with yours. However, do you see, say, the 2 of us having any chance in hades of opening a station, newspaper, etc and actually competing with the likes of Murdock and Turner? Their pockets are a bit deeper than ours, as such, they would bury us in a matter of days. Not only that but they also control the companies that create the content we would want to buy to put on our new little station, so in order to prevent any new kids on the block they would price everything out of reach.

The 2 minute hate speechs will begin shortly.

Originally posted by observer
Posted by Kegs:
Astrocreep, I understand that, should I want to, I could open my own station to compete with yours. However, do you see, say, the 2 of us having any chance in hades of opening a station, newspaper, etc and actually competing with the likes of Murdock and Turner? Their pockets are a bit deeper than ours, as such, they would bury us in a matter of days. Not only that but they also control the companies that create the content we would want to buy to put on our new little station, so in order to prevent any new kids on the block they would price everything out of reach.

The 2 minute hate speechs will begin shortly.

Yes, I understand it is a cut throat business. But, we've seen that its not a avenue one can just push their agendas on the masses with and stay in business. If the public didn't want to hear it, you can bet it wouldn't be on the air long...unless the governement used public funds to run it (NPR). Competition is indeed possible as we've seen from the alternative news channel Fox News rise in ratings above the big three while being limited to a cable only channel. Did they do that by forcing unwanted views on people and funding it themselves or did they find a niche, give people what they wanted and get the sponsors to pay their bills? Thats the key to free enterprise, you have to find your market and you do that by giving your target audience what they want. Its my opinion that by limiting the ownership of stations in the way we have, we have infringed upon freedom of the press and freedom of speech using discrimination. Now, if the government came out and limited ownership to only those who already own stations, I'd argue the same thing.

Limiting what an individual can purchase by using what they already own or don't own is a major violation of the Constitution as long as reasonable competition is still possible which it is certainly is. See, I'm not biased, I'd argue this either way. What an individual has or doesn't have isn't suffecient reason to limit what they legally buy as long as they operate it within the FCC's specs.

The biggest thing I think limits the individual is the FCC's practice of auctioning frequencies to the highest bidder. I think this practice keeps the liitle guy out more than anything. This applies to the whole spectrum, radio, TV, paging, cellular. I think a researched reasonable fee based on the possible profits for the frequency should apply and that random drawings be made for control. Now, once won, it would leave larger companies the right to buy these from the winners but at least there would be a chance to compete at the outset if so desired.

this whole media consolidation business annoys me in the extreme. honestly, I don't care if the media conglomerates are owned by Zionists, Satanists, or hamsters from the planet Saturn; it's the fact that the majority of media outlets are owned by a handful of companies. I guess I'm looking at this from more of a media consumer's perspective, but the more ownership is concentrated, the more quality seems to take a dive. case in point: Clear Channel. how can you tell a CC station? the stations playing the same crap in every market, including on-air talent. media consolidation tends to take the "local" out of the equation, because standardizing is cheaper and better for profits. it isn't better for programming, or for the consumer.

Good Point Astro and I don't deny what you argue other than one point; you said that so long as the megamedia services follow FCC rules you have no problem with them owning all the your market. But who do you think runs the FCC? Mr. Little Guy who owns one station or maybe CNN, Ganett and Murdock? Of course they will follow the rules if it is their pawns that are making the rules in the first place.

I also could not argree more with Morningcresent's comments. The less the competition there is the less the megamedia giants have to care about the crap they feed us as we will have no other venue to turn to for media content.
And CC really does suck!!

Originally posted by kegs


If they tried this in the U.K the uproar would be huge.

They don't have to try it. It's already been done.

Yeah, you're right enough. I forgot about the Communications bill, It's been floating around since last January and it's still stuck in the lords. It's not in force yet but it looks likes we're going to be both set up for this at the same time. so we're both shafted. Great.

There has been some debate about this, but none near what I would expect this far along in the process. Looks like they're doing a good job keeping this in the shade on both sides of the Atlantic.

This seems to fit in well with what William was talking about with the AOL/Microsoft collaboration. they two, time warner and Murdoch could well end up owning it all, press, t.v and the net. Depressing stuff. Wonder if the Radio rules change too...