Dan Rather explains compromised, corporate, journalism

reply to post by 12m8keall2c


Just a curiosity. Are you speaking in favour for the fairness doctrine. If so I am sorry if you believe that the governement will ever determine fairness. You cannot legislate fairness and morality when will you people ever learn that legislation will not change/dictate morality but the hearts and minds of free people to choose that which is right...! Fairness doctrine is another evil to exploite laws for political gain.

reply to post by Maxmars


I think the true downward spiral of news today started with the drive to make the newsrooms profitable. The best journalism on TV was when the news departments lost money and the news was done as a public service.

One way to help cure this problem and return to unbiased and accurate reporting may be to remove advertising from the news schedule. No more sponsers, no more profit, no more "if it bleeds it leads" type reporting. Maybe by removing the incentive for profit from the news broadcasts, we can inject some impartiality back into the system?

reply to post by Maxmars


OK, I see what you're getting at, but the fairness doctrine still doesn't help in that arena. The only thing the doctrine mandates is that, instead of just getting one pile of bullcrap, you get an opposing pile of bullcrap spun the opposite direction.

What we need is a "Truth in Media" bill that makes the media accountable for the factuality and integrity of what they report. To date everytime this has been proposed it has been called a violation of the freedom of the press. I say that's completely against the nature of what our founding fathers had in mind when they touted a free press. In reality, they wanted to rid themselves as much from the yellow journalism of the day as they did from state controlled press, at least IMO.

Mind you, an act such as this, which places utmost importance on the truth and veracity of any news item reported would absolutely cause an outcry here at ATS. On the outside such an act would likely be supported and cheered here... until people discovered that guys like Alex Jones, Rense, and others would suddenly have to present real evidence and demonstrate a high level of fact checking in order to produce "news" items like "US & Russia second from launching nukes at each other" or "FEMA building camps to house majority of US citizens when NWO takes over."

So basically what people are calling for is more representation of their side, less representation of opposing sides of their view, one set of loose rules for their side, stricter rules for opposition sides, and from a truly neutral viewpoint no indication of fairness or expectations of accuracy being fairly applied will exist.

Originally posted by Nivek Serca

Just a curiosity. Are you speaking in favour for the fairness doctrine.

With regards it's initial and core premise.... Yes.

What it became?...need revamped, rolled-back.

 

reply to post by BomSquad


Perhaps, but I have seen some 'news' which is not much more than advertisements disguised as 'news.'

My local station does this all the time, with lengthy segments of 'what to do on Long Island' pieces that promote local businesses. At the national level it is accomplished with 'human interest' stories that just happen to deal with people, places, and things, which somehow represent the interests of the corporations that own the company.

I think the damage is done. Once the mega-corporations bought out the FCC we lost the media completely.

I am older than most posters here I think. I remember listening to national public radio and public television... they used to honor those people and organizations that supprt them by saying something along the lines of .., "This broadcast was made possible by the XYZ endowment" or "NPR would like to thank the XYZ chamber of commerce for their continuing support."
Now they go into a two minute descriptionof the sponsors services, their location,, website, and phone number - it's a commercial! on "NON-COMMERCIAL" media!

Commercialism is the corporate religion, and the religion of the capitalist state. In such a state, 'journalism' is akin to the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy.

Originally posted by Maxmars
I am older than most posters here I think. I remember listening to national public radio and public television... they used to honor those people and organizations that supprt them by saying something along the lines of .., "This broadcast was made possible by the XYZ endowment" or "NPR would like to thank the XYZ chamber of commerce for their continuing support."
Now they go into a two minute descriptionof the sponsors services, their location,, website, and phone number - it's a commercial! on "NON-COMMERCIAL" media!

You just touched a key issue of mine. I hadn't watched PBS since I was a kid in the 80's until my son was old enough to start watching Sesame Street & Curious George in the mornings last summer. I was home from work one day and my wife turned on the PBS kids stuff for him and I was dumbfounded. After each show they go through a little block of what can only be called commercials; Sun Maid raisins, shop at home delivery service, McDonald's, etc for a couple of minutes under the auspices of "financial support provided by:" To be honest, it made me mad. Here's PBS, a network that is paid for by my tax dollars & contributions and is touted as the last bastion of children's programming in which they don't get bombarded by commercials & consumerism, and it is basically no different from Nikelodeon's "Noggin" channel. I clearly remember as a kid seeing the quick, still life, end of program "Financial support comes from" list on PBS as a kid, but I remember it being a bunch of private and corporate grants without any commercials or advertised products associated with the list.

The 'Fairness Doctrine" is the functional equivalent to the Tooth Fairy. No such thing does or can exist.

The market place will have to mitigate this one.

Frankly, as long as wide-spread unfettered access to foreign and domestic news sources on the internet remains, not all is lost. Protect that, and over time, things might change.

[edit on 8-9-2008 by loam]

reply to post by Maxmars


I too remember when PBS would limit their "endorsements" to a simple identification and thank you to their benefactor. I remember the near shock and incredulity when I saw my first "comercial" on PBS for a corporate sponser. I think it is a true shame that they let the sponser themselves write and produce the spot that airs as PBS's "thank you" as well.

How to solve the problem of corporate interest in the news? It won't be easy, and it won't happen overnight. I won't even pretend that I have the answer, either.

How can we ensure objective reporting in today's day and age? Everything is driven by the not-so-almighty dollar. Public financing isn't the answer, then the media merely becomes the mouth piece of the governement (Pravda, anyone?).

Government can not interfere with the press, no matter how much or little we would like it to. It is forbidden by the first admendment to the Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

So what are we to do? What is the answer? I think I agree with burdman30ott6 when he said:

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
What we need is a "Truth in Media" bill that makes the media accountable for the factuality and integrity of what they report. To date everytime this has been proposed it has been called a violation of the freedom of the press.

This will, of course, need some sort of watchdog agency (perhaps the FCC or even a whole new bureaucracy) to monitor and report on the factual nature of reporting in the media.

Originally posted by Maxmars
Commercialism is the corporate religion, and the religion of the capitalist state. In such a state, 'journalism' is akin to the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy.

I just saw your post. Similar words, two VERY DIFFERENT conclusions.

So a non-capitalist state would produce improvements in journalism????

Can you give me a single current or historical example where that is/was true?

dang that was a really good video!! thanks!!

dan rather is totally keeping it real..sooo now what? shall we just not tune in?? make our own news?

iv always wanted my own show on public access with news.. real news
news that effects us.. i hate when iread cool scientific breakthroughs and im like WHY sint this all over the place?? why is it 24/7 about the elections they kinda hype it up TOO much u know

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by Maxmars
Commercialism is the corporate religion, and the religion of the capitalist state. In such a state, 'journalism' is akin to the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy.

I just saw your post. Similar words, two VERY DIFFERENT conclusions.

So a non-capitalist state would produce improvements in journalism????

Can you give me a single current or historical example where that is/was true?

AAAH! My mistake.... I meant to say ... ".. and the religion of the corporatist state!"

I need to be more careful as I express my anti-corporate media sentiments!

reply to post by BomSquad


I generally resist ideas that involve making government larger, but we do need some kind of control in place. The establishment as it is currently operating clearly will not be held to a higher standard unless forcefully (i.e. legally) compelled to do so.

Legislation is always an option, but when politicians get involved we have to be alert for extraneous political/partisan/ideological influences being brought into the mix.

I have emailed my NPR stations, and written regarding their 'ads', but my observations never rated a response I suppose.

The more this is ignored, the more it will happen. People have to be informed, make their voices heard and demand a really free and open media that is diverse and not run by Corporations or touched by Intelligence Organizations like the CIA. Dan Rather is absolutely correct.

reply to post by TaZCoN


Dan Rather is the joke, he hid his lefttist loon partisianship for years but since most of the media has been hijacked by loons, he now feels comfortable enough to spew his bias towards Republicans and Independants and having lived in that enviorment for so long he is now brainwashed thinking everyone else is wrong. If Dan Rather was right about anything why did he get fired? Why is the company he used to work for about to go broke and why is Fox News the number one cable news organization beating out competitors in thier timeslots by 3 to 1 sometimes more. Why when polled do Democrats say they watch Fox News? Becasue level headed Democrats know where to get the factual information. Yes Fox has its share of Conservatives but does that matter when there reports are fair and they give Dems equal air time. Cnn and Msnbc wont do that yet I dont hear people griping about that. We live in a consumer driven world, if Fox was bad then it would go under like Msnbc, its not so that says volumes.

this seems to be one of those speeches that will go down in history - 10 years from now we'll appreciate Dan Rather for coming forth "officially" and publicly with this information. this may be what the people need in these trying times to finally realize something's amiss with our country, and they can, in fact, make a difference.

Does anybody know of how the Canadian news media is compromised by these same things as it is in the states? Corporate and political spin is fairly obvious in newspapers such as the Toronto Sun, and my local town paper is an absolute joke where every article is an advertisement for business, or with an obvious slant to pander to the elderly community spreading fear about "today's generation" etc.
But for television news the spin seems to be a little more covered up, at best ( to be honest it has been a while since I've watched news on TV anyhow).
BUt yes, any Canadians have insight into our journalistic institutions?

Originally posted by alienj
reply to post by TaZCoN

 

...We live in a consumer driven world, if Fox was bad then it would go under like Msnbc, its not so that says volumes.

yes, that does speak volumes... about the sheer number of people oblivious to what's really going on in the world. fox news isn't any better than the rest - they're still just a corporation driven by money, not by the news and what really matters. since they didn't "go under like msnbc", that just means there're millions of people still under the spell of mainstream media, thinking it's all truth.

I find it interesting that this topic is being discussed in the context of Dan Rather. He one of the biggest liberal liars in news and that was proven. Having said that does anyone really worry about the media? Newspaper circulation is down and if the major networks are profitable its because you feed into them.

Most news that affects you can be found from several different sources and if you don't trust them keep looking. That is why you have the Internet.

Just because the old gray lady says its so doesn't mean it is. I also suspect Dan "the news man" Rather has his own agenda...

reply to post by kidney thief


if i were you, i wouldn't trust the television or any other mainstream media outlet for any news. stick to ATS for starters lol - there's plenty of people finding the real news that matters on here. also, i've noticed that cnn.com, for example, will show some "news" that ATS would have 3 days prior on their main page - happens a lot! as for your local news channel, just realize that with every news story, there's usually a bigger picture; so you've got to ask yourself with most news, "what are they really trying to accomplish here? ...what's the real agenda?" i'm sure Canadian news is just as bad as the states!

i suggest you start researching Freemasonry, if you haven't already...

www.knightstemplar.ca...
www.freemasonry.bcy.ca...

again, there's a bigger picture going on with them too...

While I was watching the youtube vid it cut out and "We're sorry this video is no longer available " popped up but the audio continued....

Many people have been left in the dark about Central Asia and the struggle amongst oil giants for the oil and natural gas there. Everything that hapens there has to do with OIL

Thanks you Dan

[edit on 8-9-2008 by Tuebor]