It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Selling Of The Mainstream Media: A Threat To American Democracy

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   

The Selling Of The Mainstream Media: A Threat To American Democracy


www.opednews.com

The mainstream media is neither free nor independent

The consolidation, and subsequent compromise, of the news media actually began during the Reagan administration, but it really hit its stride in the last decade. In 1983, fifty corporations controlled all of the news media in the United States. Back then, the experts found that alarming. By 1992, that number had dwindled to fewer than a couple of dozen corporations. Today, a mere five major corporations control the majority of the news media in the United States: Time-Warner, Disney, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, Bertelsmann AG (Germany), and Viacom (formerly CBS). For the sake of argument, add General Electric’s NBC, which comes in a close sixth.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   
This is, hands down, one of the MOST IMPORTANT issues facing us in modern times...A good part of the success that the gov / M.I.C. / Corporational triad has had at scamming the american populace is directly related to their near TOTAL OWNERSHIP and infiltration of the Main Stream Media outlets. They have effectively carried out psychological warfare amongst the populace by buying up these outlets and using them as their propeganda mouthpieces in brainwashing the public at large to ride along with their agendas.

It is of the utmost importance that we not only become fully educated on these tactics and who is behind them, but that we spread that information to as many people as possible to awaken them to how we have all been played by these sneaky, dishonest vermin.


If the public is to hold our leaders accountable, the news they rely on to do so must be unbiased and from independent sources. Consolidation, however, actually reduces the number of reliable and independent news, opinion and information sources. It also affects the way the news is reported to the public. In a study done by Pew Research Center for the People and the Press and the Columbia Journalism Review, more than one quarter of the journalists surveyed said they avoided stories that might conflict with the interests of their news organizations or its advertisers.




www.opednews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 16-4-2008 by DimensionalDetective]



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
And lo and behold, here's an example of how the crookedest administration in History regularly uses their co-conspirators in disinfo-the MSM---To carry out False News Reports!

But this is in no way solely related to just the Decider and his henchmen---This is widespread amongst all aspects of government. They have mastered the art of brain-washing and propeganda, and the MSM is their greatest tool to carry out these psychological attacks and "flow of information" to the masses...



The Bush administration isn’t just adept at twisting the truth and lying to make its point. Apparently it is also pretty adept at pre-packaging the media.

Bush administration engages in domestic covert propaganda
In February of 2006, a GAO report (3) identified over $1.6 billion in public relations and media spending by the Bush administration during 2003, 2004 and the first two quarters of 2005. For example, the Department of Education contracted with Ketchum Communications, who then sub-contracted with conservative commentator Armstrong Williams to editorialize in favor of the No Child Left Behind Act. However, the most disturbing use of taxpayer dollars is in the creation of ‘video news releases,’ something the Bush administration is apparently quite adept at. These spots are made to look like independent newscasts and are designed to fit seamlessly into news broadcasts. While the issue of legality is not addressed in the report, prior GAO reports take the position that video news releases by federal agencies violate the ban on covert propaganda if they are broadcast to the public without revealing the role of the federal government.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


This was important 50 years ago. It is way beyond saving now. It is not really a threat to democracy, because we aren't really a democracy anyways. We have a corrupt 2 party system. We are told who to vote for by our media. Our votes don't matter, considering we only get to choose between slightly different versions of the same crap.

This is just one of OH SO MANY examples of how utterly broken our system is. At least there is an internet now so people can have access to real news as opposed to purchased propaganda. But the internet is not enough to save this ship.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Real good, DD-Star'd!

But I get my news from YOU, DD, now; i don't even watch the boob-tube
much any more!!!

(They don't know it, but i'm as smart as a fifth-grader)!!! almost...


I try not to be brainwashed, except, of course, by Above Top Secret!!!

I don't need viagra, or a new hummer, or gieco, or 15 second news
bursts (between commercials); Main Stream Media = CORPORATOCRACY!



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Hiyah great thread started here


I was JUST commenting two days ago to some like-minded friends that we all have seen in our lifetime the total subjugation of unbiased news reporting, very scary.

However...I don't agree with your premise that the Bush administration "owns" or has subverted the MSM. If that were true, it wouldn't be non-stop Bush-bashing, Iraq-Bashing, Economy-Bashing, going on 24/7.

That alone rules out that the MSM is in the Bush administration's pocket. We'd be seeing even a more rosier picture then what's on Fox news, on EVERY news channel, if that were true.

But I agree that the MSM is a joke, bought and paid for buy special interests...they don't even PRETEND to dish out the facts anymore.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Dammit, DD!! I'm trying to work here and you keep flushing these darn rabbits for me to chase down!!

Nice find and fine work as usual -- stars and flag -- keep it up for the rest of us
Thanks.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by LateApexer313
 


Oh-I wasn't insinuating that Dumbya owns all of the media---You have to remember that much of the MSM is also owned by left-winged interests as well, and you will get some reporting on the screw-ups---But as you can see in the above article (3rd post down), the Bush admin did use a particular group to put out "mock" news casts and reports, that weren't even real!

But make no mistake about it---All the MAJOR chains of mainstream media are corporate / gov controlled and owned, and this very difinitively shapes the material and content of "the freedom of the press", as well as what material is "acceptable" to be broadcast out to the masses...

It is a HUGE conflict of interest, and the REAL news and stories of most importance NEVER get out to the people. These interests have too much to lose by letting that happen.

That is why it is up to US (the people) to go after the stories and rely on privately owned sources of media / reporting...



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I searched and couldn't it find it, but if it has been posted before, my apologies.

Anyway, I think this is very relevant to this thread:

Rupert Murdoch joins Associated Press board

WASHINGTON (AP) — Rupert Murdoch and Sam Zell, two media figures who led major newspaper acquisitions in recent months, are among four new members joining the board of directors of The Associated Press, it was announced Monday at the news cooperative's annual meeting.[...]

Murdoch, chairman and chief executive officer of News Corp., was appointed by the board until the next election of directors to fill the vacancy created by the departure of Jay Smith, who announced earlier this month he was retiring as president of Cox Newspapers.[...]

Murdoch completed his acquisition of Dow Jones & Co. last December, adding The Wall Street Journal to his global media conglomerate.

The same month, Zell took control of Tribune Co. after leading a buyout that resulted in the publicly traded company becoming private. The company owns the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, nine other daily newspapers and 23 television stations.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by danx
 



Indeed it is relevant! Do you guys know that Murdoch has been flirting around with buying up YAHOO? That is the next step for these corporately-infiltrated media outlets--To buy up OUR LAST outlets of "free" press...The internet news sites and search engines! Once they own these, they have total control of the flow and shape of information---The complete ability to brain-wash and "select" what we know!

Alarming...



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
reply to post by LateApexer313
 


Oh-I wasn't insinuating that Dumbya owns all of the media---You have to remember that much of the MSM is also owned by left-winged interests as well,


Can you please show evidence supporting this? Which MSM outlets are owned by leftist interests? I'm under the impression from looking at the ownership lists that MUCH of the outlets are owned and wholly controlled by right leaning corporate interests.

[edit on 16-4-2008 by pavlovsdog]



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   
There is a similar post to this topic, great video series done by RFK Jr. explaining how the media is owned. Great speech, very thought provoking.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   
AWESOME post. Truly sad that the media wouldn't report on this until the war was already lost. They can speak of it now because our knowing is immaterial.

Soon the relationship between the 'big 5' and the 'controversial' CFR/Bilderburg clubs will begin to become 'less' irrelevant. Sign of the times.

We have no press in this country.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Agreed! Did you check this out?

adage.com...

Listen to the video- it becomes audio because the reporters and broadcasters turned off their cameras- but one clever person left the audio on!



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dk3000
 


OMG! I can't believe you posted this---I was planning on posting it this afternoon! Tim Robbins stock just shot through the roof...THIS IS A MUST WATCH! He also just did a written piece on this as well---I will try to dig it up...

Guys a like Robbins and John Cusack are true hero's for exposing the unbelievable corruption and vested interests taking place between the special interests running (or RUINing) this country and the lack of media exposure to these criminals activity! They're taking big risks going after the media, as those are their advertising mediums for their projects...



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by dk3000
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Agreed! Did you check this out?

adage.com...

Listen to the video- it becomes audio because the reporters and broadcasters turned off their cameras- but one clever person left the audio on!



You and DD are my heroes ....



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Here is the written piece by Tim Robbins...He is basically SHREDDING the N.A.B., and rightfully so, as they are nothing more than puppets and mimics of the televised MSM...Robbins gets the picture, and lambastes these spineless cowards for their lack of reporting REAL issues that are affecting us all...This is a great read.

What a joke that the N.A.B. asked everyone to shut their cameras off!! Something to hide, much?!?



The Power and Responsibility of Our Nation's Broadcasters


Hello, I'm Tim Robbins. I'd like to thank you for the invitation to address you here at the National Association of Broadcasters. When I first received the invitation I was a little confused because the last time I had contact with the national media I seem to remember them telling me to shut the hell up.


I would like to start with an apology. To Rush and Sean, and Billo and Savage and Laura what's-her-name. A few years ago they told America that because I had different opinions on the wisdom of going to war that I was a traitor, a Saddam lover, a terrorist supporter, undermining the troops. I was appealing at the time for the inspectors to have more time to find those weapons of mass destruction. I was a naïve dupe of left wing appeasement. And how right they were. If I had known then what I know now, if I had seen the festive and appreciative faces on the streets of Baghdad today, if I had known then what a robust economy we would be in, the unity of our people, the wildfire of democracy that has spread across the Mideast, I would never have said those traitorous, unfounded and irresponsible things. I stand chastened in the face of the wisdom of the talk radio geniuses, and I apologize for standing in the way of freedom.


Full Article:
www.opednews.com...



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pavlovsdog
 


Just do a search on which Candidates they endorse. Nearly all newspapers, CNN and the three big Networks all endorse Democrats. FOX and most AM Radio Syndicates endorse Republicans. I think that has been common knowledge for many years.

I live in a city with a Conservative majority (80%+) but our paper runs Liberal commentary, stories and endorses only Liberals. They give ONE PAGE to the Conservative opposition. The AM Radio shows are ALL Conservative except NPR which is nearly all Liberal. NPR is going broke and can not get enough listeners to sell advertising.

I fall into the middle somewhere and by listening to, or reading all of the above I get both sides. I worry about people who only listen to one side as they can't help but get brainwashed. That is the real danger of this as I see it. When people get so into one side of issues, they set themselves up to be used and abused.

I run into people all the time who only watch or listen to one source or side. Unfortunately for our future they vote with only part of the information. To get the truth requires an effort most people are not willing to put in.

This subject got lots of attention in the mid-80's but that did not change anything. We need a special category of anti-trust type laws to break these empires apart. Without an unbiased media we are just sheep headed to slaughter. Most will go willingly as they wrongly trust information just because their parents watched that channel or they endorse their favorite candidate.

Here is a link to an interesting article on perceptions of media bias:
Pew Reasearch Center


Overall, the public sees less political bias in news coverage today than it did a decade ago. Although a solid majority -- 69% -- of Americans see news coverage as containing at least a fair amount of political bias, that percentage has decreased from 76% in 1989. At the same time, however, the percentage of people saying news coverage contains a great deal of bias has increased seven points from 25% in 1989 to the current 32%.


Another link with info straight from the horses mouth, so to speak:
Media Bias Basics


“I worked for the New York Times for 25 years. I could probably count on one hand, in the Washington bureau of the New York Times, people who would describe themselves as people of faith....I think one of the real built-in biases in the media is towards secularism....You want diversity in the newsroom, not because of some quota, but because you have to have diversity to cover the story well and cover all aspects of a society. And you don’t have religious people making the decisions about where coverage is focused. And I think that’s one of the faults.”
— Former New York Times reporter Steve Roberts, now a journalism professor at George Washington University, on CNN’s Reliable Sources, March 27, 2005.


Another from the same source:


“Personally, I have a great affection for CBS News....But I stopped watching it some time ago. The unremitting liberal orientation finally became too much for me. I still check in, but less and less frequently. I increasingly drift to NBC News and Fox and MSNBC.”
— Former CBS News President Van Gordon Sauter in an op-ed published January 13, 2005 in the Los Angeles Times.


With radio the opposite would be true I think.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

I am really not trying to pick a fight but,


Here is a link to an interesting article on perceptions of media bias:




Overall, the public sees less political bias in news coverage today than it did a decade ago. Although a solid majority -- 69% -- of Americans see news coverage as containing at least a fair amount of political bias, that percentage has decreased from 76% in 1989. At the same time, however, the percentage of people saying news coverage contains a great deal of bias has increased seven points from 25% in 1989 to the current 32%.


Couldn't the results as easily be explained this as an indication the the 'politics' have become more an more indistinctly homogenized? What's to bicker about here? For bias to be apparent there has to be some distinction between the two parties. Or just as likely, the diminishing number of 'owners' of media sources could contribute to this trend as well. These statistics aren't exactly convincing because they conceal axioms which are evident from the report.

Also, in regards to the 'talking heads' of the industry. How many times have they revealed that they are directed on just what 'their' opinions are? Bias is an element of all reporting - it always has been. But no organization seems to 'report' on politics, they simply comment, or regurgitate position statements.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


We are not really arguing anyway. Read both links and you will see it presents all sides.

My personal experience is that there is a definite bias in media, but it goes both ways. When we show our own bias by not considering all news sources we literally brainwash ourselves by never considering other sides.

I'm, as I have said many times on ATS, not a member of either Party and like most people here I see one as being as bad as the other. They are different though in their viewpoints. Some of the issues are quite dramatic; like abortion and other hot button issues.

The best defense I think, is to frequent many news sources and hear all sides. I'd bet most news stories are factual, despite the fact reporters are now passing off commentary as news reporting. It's the Op/Ed stuff that makes up most of the so called news programs that leads us astray. The bias in that department should be obvious to those who don't limit their news sources due to personal bias.



new topics




 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join