From The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 8/21/06:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/281799_firstperson21.html

The media trivialize vital issues

CARL A. COOK
GUEST COLUMNIST


How does one go about making massive changes in a modern society?

In our case, fellows of think tanks were paid to create rationales for
predetermined economic and political positions, much as in the old
Soviet Union.

Billions of dollars have been spent to convince the public that its
interests and those of the corporations are the same.

A first step was when the Fairness Doctrine was abolished and radio
stations were no longer required to air opposing viewpoints.

The rationale was that corporations have a right to free speech,
although corporations are far more powerful than people.

Then, behind closed doors, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was
passed.

All radio regulations were thrown out, and independents were bought
up.

That legislation resulted in the rise of right-wing radio,
coast-to-coast.

Is it a coincidence that Clear Channel's Tom Hicks bought the Texas
Rangers, making George W. Bush a multimillionaire?

The reason corporations such as GE and Westinghouse own media outlets
now is to keep certain issues quiet, such as lobbying, pollution and
job exportation.

The way the media treat corporations these days is the same as Soviet
media treated communism in its heyday -- with deference and
discretion.

Did you know that:


-----George H.W. Bush is making millions through Carlisle, thanks to
administration policies?


-----A billionaire funded the Arkansas Project to try to bring down
the Clinton presidency?


-----The wealthiest 5 percent own 84.4 percent of everything in
America, and the bottom 40 percent owns less than 1 percent?


-----Our national debt now equals $30,000 for each person? And which
political party has accumulated most of this debt? (The answer will
surprise you.)


-----Two companies count 80 percent of the votes in U.S. elections?
(ES&S and Diebold.) And that the owners of the two are brothers?


-----Last month, half the lawyers in the IRS's Estate Tax Division
were laid off en masse? (DemocracyNow TV)


You would think the media would be delighted that those issues
happened on their watch, but some things are too important for them to
cover.

News is supposed to provide us with information on vital issues and
should educate us so we can make good decisions.

But now vital issues are trivialized, and fluff such as movie stars
and gossip command vast coverage.

Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., says:

"Rupert Murdock has had a tremendous influence in the worst possible
way, on culture and media in the U.S. and England.

His shtick is appealing to working-class people, and taking them to
the right.

And he does this through violence, through superpatriotism, and
through sensationalism.

Fox Television is the first example we've seen that makes no pretense
of objectivity.

All of their talk shows are controlled by extreme right-wing
Republicans; it is a front for the right-wing of the Republican
Party."

Some stories disappear (no-bid contracts to administration companies)
while others are repeated endlessly (Monica Lewinsky).

The media do not discuss the disparity between the rich and poor in
this country, or the disappearance of the middle class.

Sanders asks, "Why is it, that with all this advancement in
technology, and all the efficiency gains we have, that the average
American is now working longer hours, for less pay, than he did 25
years ago?"

Says Gary Sick, U.S. diplomat in past administrations:

"We know what to do with someone caught misappropriating funds, but
when confronted with evidence of a systematic attempt to undermine the
political system itself, we recoil, in a general failure of
imagination and nerve."

From The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 8/21/06:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/281799_firstperson21.html

The media trivialize vital issues

CARL A. COOK
GUEST COLUMNIST


How does one go about making massive changes in a modern society?

In our case, fellows of think tanks were paid to create rationales for
predetermined economic and political positions, much as in the old
Soviet Union.

Billions of dollars have been spent to convince the public that its
interests and those of the corporations are the same.

A first step was when the Fairness Doctrine was abolished and radio
stations were no longer required to air opposing viewpoints.

The rationale was that corporations have a right to free speech,
although corporations are far more powerful than people.

Then, behind closed doors, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was
passed.

All radio regulations were thrown out, and independents were bought
up.

That legislation resulted in the rise of right-wing radio,
coast-to-coast.

Is it a coincidence that Clear Channel's Tom Hicks bought the Texas
Rangers, making George W. Bush a multimillionaire?

The reason corporations such as GE and Westinghouse own media outlets
now is to keep certain issues quiet, such as lobbying, pollution and
job exportation.

The way the media treat corporations these days is the same as Soviet
media treated communism in its heyday -- with deference and
discretion.

Did you know that:


-----George H.W. Bush is making millions through Carlisle, thanks to
administration policies?


-----A billionaire funded the Arkansas Project to try to bring down
the Clinton presidency?


-----The wealthiest 5 percent own 84.4 percent of everything in
America, and the bottom 40 percent owns less than 1 percent?


-----Our national debt now equals $30,000 for each person? And which
political party has accumulated most of this debt? (The answer will
surprise you.)


-----Two companies count 80 percent of the votes in U.S. elections?
(ES&S and Diebold.) And that the owners of the two are brothers?


-----Last month, half the lawyers in the IRS's Estate Tax Division
were laid off en masse? (DemocracyNow TV)


You would think the media would be delighted that those issues
happened on their watch, but some things are too important for them to
cover.

News is supposed to provide us with information on vital issues and
should educate us so we can make good decisions.

But now vital issues are trivialized, and fluff such as movie stars
and gossip command vast coverage.

Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., says:

"Rupert Murdock has had a tremendous influence in the worst possible
way, on culture and media in the U.S. and England.

His shtick is appealing to working-class people, and taking them to
the right.

And he does this through violence, through superpatriotism, and
through sensationalism.

Fox Television is the first example we've seen that makes no pretense
of objectivity.

All of their talk shows are controlled by extreme right-wing
Republicans; it is a front for the right-wing of the Republican
Party."

Some stories disappear (no-bid contracts to administration companies)
while others are repeated endlessly (Monica Lewinsky).

The media do not discuss the disparity between the rich and poor in
this country, or the disappearance of the middle class.

Sanders asks, "Why is it, that with all this advancement in
technology, and all the efficiency gains we have, that the average
American is now working longer hours, for less pay, than he did 25
years ago?"

Says Gary Sick, U.S. diplomat in past administrations:

"We know what to do with someone caught misappropriating funds, but
when confronted with evidence of a systematic attempt to undermine the
political system itself, we recoil, in a general failure of
imagination and nerve."

_______________________________________________________

How true

Harry

From The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 8/21/06:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/281799_firstperson21.html

The media trivialize vital issues

CARL A. COOK
GUEST COLUMNIST


How does one go about making massive changes in a modern society?

In our case, fellows of think tanks were paid to create rationales for
predetermined economic and political positions, much as in the old
Soviet Union.

Billions of dollars have been spent to convince the public that its
interests and those of the corporations are the same.

A first step was when the Fairness Doctrine was abolished and radio
stations were no longer required to air opposing viewpoints.

The rationale was that corporations have a right to free speech,
although corporations are far more powerful than people.

Then, behind closed doors, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was
passed.

All radio regulations were thrown out, and independents were bought
up.

That legislation resulted in the rise of right-wing radio,
coast-to-coast.

Is it a coincidence that Clear Channel's Tom Hicks bought the Texas
Rangers, making George W. Bush a multimillionaire?

The reason corporations such as GE and Westinghouse own media outlets
now is to keep certain issues quiet, such as lobbying, pollution and
job exportation.

The way the media treat corporations these days is the same as Soviet
media treated communism in its heyday -- with deference and
discretion.

Did you know that:


-----George H.W. Bush is making millions through Carlisle, thanks to
administration policies?


-----A billionaire funded the Arkansas Project to try to bring down
the Clinton presidency?


-----The wealthiest 5 percent own 84.4 percent of everything in
America, and the bottom 40 percent owns less than 1 percent?


-----Our national debt now equals $30,000 for each person? And which
political party has accumulated most of this debt? (The answer will
surprise you.)


-----Two companies count 80 percent of the votes in U.S. elections?
(ES&S and Diebold.) And that the owners of the two are brothers?


-----Last month, half the lawyers in the IRS's Estate Tax Division
were laid off en masse? (DemocracyNow TV)


You would think the media would be delighted that those issues
happened on their watch, but some things are too important for them to
cover.

News is supposed to provide us with information on vital issues and
should educate us so we can make good decisions.

But now vital issues are trivialized, and fluff such as movie stars
and gossip command vast coverage.

Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., says:

"Rupert Murdock has had a tremendous influence in the worst possible
way, on culture and media in the U.S. and England.

His shtick is appealing to working-class people, and taking them to
the right.

And he does this through violence, through superpatriotism, and
through sensationalism.

Fox Television is the first example we've seen that makes no pretense
of objectivity.

All of their talk shows are controlled by extreme right-wing
Republicans; it is a front for the right-wing of the Republican
Party."

Some stories disappear (no-bid contracts to administration companies)
while others are repeated endlessly (Monica Lewinsky).

The media do not discuss the disparity between the rich and poor in
this country, or the disappearance of the middle class.

Sanders asks, "Why is it, that with all this advancement in
technology, and all the efficiency gains we have, that the average
American is now working longer hours, for less pay, than he did 25
years ago?"

Says Gary Sick, U.S. diplomat in past administrations:

"We know what to do with someone caught misappropriating funds, but
when confronted with evidence of a systematic attempt to undermine the
political system itself, we recoil, in a general failure of
imagination and nerve."

_______________________________________________________

How true

Harry