See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: There's Nothing Mainstream About the Corporate Media
Source:
Common Dreams
URL Source: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/10/6968/
Published: Feb 11, 2008
Author: Harvey Wasserman
Post Date: 2008-02-11 06:23:41 by Zoroaster
Keywords: None
Views: 352
Comments: 25
February 11, 2008 Discuss this story Print This Post E-Mail This Article Published on Sunday, February 10, 2008 by CommonDreams.org There’s Nothing Mainstream About the Corporate Media by Harvey Wasserman As we stumble toward another presidential election, it’s never been more clear that our political process is being warped by a corporate stranglehold on the free flow of information. Amidst a virtual blackout of coverage of a horrific war, a global ecological crisis and an advancing economic collapse, what passes for the mass media is itself in collapse. What’s left of our democracy teeters on the brink. The culprit, in the parlance of the day, has been the “Mainstream Media,” or MSM. But that’s wrong name for it. Today’s mass media is Corporate, not Mainstream, and the distinction is critical. Calling the Corporate Media (CM) “mainstream” implies that it speaks for mid-road opinion, and it absolutely does not. There is, in fact, a discernable, tangible mainstream of opinion in this country. As brilliant analysts such as Jeff Cohen, Norman Solomon and the Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) organization have shown, the “MSM” is very far to the right of it. The mainstream of American opinion wants this country out of Iraq. The Corporate Media does not. It refuses to give serious coverage to the devastating human, spiritual and economic costs of the war, and it marginalizes those demanding it end. The mainstream of American opinion wants national health care. The CM does not. The mainstream of American opinion is deeply distrustful and in many ways hostile to the power of large corporations. Obviously, the CM is not. The mainstream of American opinion strongly questions whether our elections are being manipulated and stolen. The CM treats with contempt those who dare report on the issue. The Corporate Media takes partisan stands (often in favor of the Republican Party, but always in defense of corporate interests) by sabotaging political candidacies, especially those of candidates who challenge corporate power. This year it blacklisted the populist candidacy of John Edwards, suffocating his ability to compete for the Democratic nomination. Mainstream American opinion is no fan of George W. Bush and does not take him seriously as a credible leader. A very substantial percentage has long wanted him and Dick Cheney impeached and removed from office. The CM does not tolerate such a discussion, and utterly marginalizes Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the veteran Congressman who has dared to seriously raise the possibility. Mainstream American opinion is committed to protecting what’s left of the natural environment. The Corporate Media makes an occasional show of sharing that concern, but stops where Corporate interests might be impinged. On the other hand, it promotes failed technologies, such as nuke power, where centralized, corporate profits are huge. Never in our history has the control of the nation’s sources of information been more centralized, or more at odds with what the country as a whole believes. This divergence is not limited to the attack pack fringe of far-right bloviators who dominate the Corporate opinion print columns and talk shows. Virtually all “personal” opinion expressed on the corporate airwaves and in the syndicated big newspaper columns is significantly to the pro-corporate right of moderate American opinion. The “news” pushed by the major radio/TV networks and newspapers slants unerringly toward the interests of the five major corporations that own the bulk of them. They bury stories of vital importance while spewing endless hours and column inches at the mind-deadening likes of Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears. Their excuse is that they “give the public what it wants” and are “in business to make a profit.” But the real profit centers of the corporations that own the CM are not in providing news and information. General Electric, Westinghouse, Disney and the other media-financial-industrial behemoths have too much to lose from an accurate reporting of the true news of the world. To protect their core interests, they are bread-and-circus PR/diversion machines, not real news organizations. They resemble the old Soviet official mouthpieces Izvestia and Pravda far more than the news providers envisioned in the First Amendment, by Founders who saw balanced, aggressive reporting as the lifeblood of democracy.Nor does the corporate right never hesitate to attack. Since Vice President Spiro Agnew assaulted those who dared report the truth about the Vietnam War, the absurd myth of a “Liberal Media” has been used to intimidate and silence mainstream opinion. In fact, the term is used to apply to any outlet that harbors even the slightest expression of dissent. Even conservative newspapers or broadcasts that may be overwhelmingly pro-corporate, but which occasionally tolerate a whiff of dissent, are branded as subversive, ungodly and “out of the mainstream.” There are indeed liberal publications and radio shows in this country. But it’s no accident that they struggle financially, and for access to the airwaves. Thankfully, just as the CM solidifies its power over our mass media outlets, the internet has burst forth as an open, wildly diverse medium for mainstream opinion and actual truth. Its preservation will require what Thomas Jefferson called “eternal vigilance.” That includes restoring the Fairness Doctrine, enacted by a Republican Congress in the 1920s to guarantee balanced opinion on the emerging electronic medium of radio. It means a ban on unified corporate ownership of large fleets of radio, TV and print outlets. It means busting up the monopolies that warp public access to information and opinion. The word “mainstream” has nothing to do with the massively monopolized machine that has a chokehold on our democracy. It’s the “Corporate Media,” and there’s nothing mainstream about it.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 5.
#1. To: Zoroaster (#0)
For you youngsters who were watching Bugs Bunny instead of following current events back then, Spiro Agnew was Nixon's VP before Gerald Ford and he was charged with tax evasion and resigned in 1973. (imagine how serious his crime against the establishment must have been for a sitting VP to be charged with that! And, "Why?" you may ask, "didn't Nixon pardon him????") Well, Agnew's real crime (which isn't in Wikipedia) was this statement: "Everything we see, read and hear is controlled by a handful of people within a half mile radius of Manhattan Island." Of course, he came dangerously close to breaking what was even then the ultimate taboo-but not until he left office did he identify that handful of folks as a clannish tribe of "non-Christians" in New York City. (wink wink) Although Wikipedia claims he was charged with tax evasion because as VP he continued to demand payments from MD contractors who bribed him as governor, we can safely assume that this is a crock of DAWGGY dew. Whoever successfully pursued criminal charges against Crooked Cock Clinton or Bloody Bi-Boy Bush? Does anyone doubt that even back then a VP had the power to send some no-neck special forces cutouts to solve problems like that? WWVPDCD? No, it was later when he made the comment below (which is in WIKI) that offers a clue as to why he was not protected by Nixon or even Gordon Liddy, who would have cheerfully cut some throats if asked to by a sitting prez or VP "for the good of the party": "In 1976, (Agnew) briefly re-entered the public spotlight and engendered controversy with anti-Zionist statements that called for the United States to withdraw its support for the state of Israel because of Israel's bad treatment of Christians, as well as what Gerald Ford publicly criticized (smooch smooch-HD) as "unsavory" "remarks about Jews"[5][6][7][8]" As you see, telling the truth was "anti-Zionist!" HAH! Try this on for fit: "He was criticized by the VP for anti-Soviet statements when he called Solzhenitsyn's GULAG ARCHIPELAGO "A splendid read!" Soundz kinda funnie, don't it? Now, WIKI goes to great lengths with anecdotal information to paint a picture of Agnew as despised by, and event a threat to Nixon, but, this type of two-step is their standard M.O. when trying to send the hounds on the wrong scent trail. Spiro Agnew was an unrepentant anti-Semite, but unlike Nixon he failed to play his cards close to his Orthodox crucifix. Nixon was already dead and buried before the tapes revealed his disdain for G_d's Chosen People. NIXON AND THE JEWS. AGAIN.
Way back with Spiro and his "effete snobs" period, I and my fellow government workers took a chance and sent him a telegram urging him on. Little did we know that gears were turning to depose first Agnew and then Nixon, leaving us with a worthless and harmless Ford that everyone wanted to shoot. There was one man and only one that would benefit from deposing Nixon/Agnew and the shooting of Ford.
I remember that ;) There was one man and only one that would benefit from deposing Nixon/Agnew and the shooting of Ford. So many close calls!
There are no replies to Comment # 5. End Trace Mode for Comment # 5.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestSince Vice President Spiro Agnew assaulted those who dared report the truth about the Vietnam War, the absurd myth of a “Liberal Media” has been used to intimidate and silence mainstream opinion.
#2. To: HOUNDDAWG (#1)
#5. To: Cynicom (#2)
Spiro and his "effete snobs" period
Replies to Comment # 5.