There is little we can do immediately to get rid of the little whore at the FCC. 

What we can do is relatively simple. We begin a campaign of letter writing and/or email campaign. When a conglomerate owning a newspaper buys local radio and or television stations in our area we contact all of the advertisers.  We do not threaten to boycott their products.  We simply inform them that the dollars they are paying the conglomerate in advertising are wasted.  Since we are not watching those particular outlets anymore and no longer reading the paper, their messages are having no affect on their bottom line that is positive. 

Then we begin a major campaign to inundate Congress with demands for legislation to force the conglomerates to divest the media outlets they have acquired since Martin’s decision.

The FCC has forms on its websites for complaints.  Why not use them to file complaints against the FCC itself?

My read:

“The complaint I am filing is against the FCC and, in particular, those Commission members who voted to allow further consolidation of the broadcasting industry.  The sources of information, whether tv or radio or newpapers or magazines, are already in far far too few hands.  It is almost becoming a monopoly not too dissimilar to the “Robber Baron” history of the late 19th Century where only the uber rich controlled certain industries.

I do not believe that those commissioners read the Constitution, read their mandate, remembered their oaths of office or remembered their ethical need to be open, honest, fair, balanced and not swayed by party affiliation.

Rescind your decisions that further consolidation, especially allowing the already rich to own more.  Rescind anything that directly or indirectly limits the competition, especially if it puts non-broadcast media into ownership of print media or vice versa.  Remember for once that you are here to protect the public, not the biggest campaign contributors to the Republican Party.”

You can also e-mail directly to commission members on the fcc.gov website.  Give them a piece of your mind directly.

Is this really any surprise to anyone?  When has this government been responsive to the people?  A government that has no problems with 1.2 million dead in Iraq has no problem ignoring you when it comes to media consolidation. 

IMHO, the internet will be next.  That has been a real thorn in their side and you better believe that you wont see a repeat of Ron Paul after 2008.  The internet will be for shopping and one way media - from then to you.  Get ready.

The big question is. . . what are we gonna do about it?  How do we set up alternative media to these giants?  They’ll just buy up anything that becomes successful.  What is our strategy now?

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the end of democracy as we know it because it impaled the Fourth Estate, and made impotent the First Amendment.  Here is a link to a report about it.  It was signed by Bill Clinton, so I guess we can expect more of the same if Hillary is elected.

http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/{8A2D1D15-C65A-46D4-8CBB-2073440751B5}/FALLOUT_FROM_THE_TELECOMM_ACT_5-9-05.PDF

I keep reading comments about the danger of loosing your democracy. 

Got news for you america, you lost it years and years ago.  Longer ago than you think.

Time to open your eyes, and some are starting to do that, which is encouraging, but is it too late is the question.

I keep reading comments about the danger of loosing your democracy. 

Got news for you america, you lost it years and years ago.  Longer ago than you think.

Oh well, the administration’s long term plans are starting to really backfire. 

The fall is going to be an interesting thing to watch.

I feel that the same that the comment that waxman made, are we in danger of losing our democracy. Why does the media feel that one size fits all, or are the corporate giants just gaining because of Bush and the Republician belief that trusting the corporate giants will make us feel better.

The old addage that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer is why having a president like Bush is so dangerous because Bush really did not have much experience when he ran for president, being governor of Texas is really a joke, the oil people run Texas so Bush was just a figurehead.

So any Demcrat would be better off than a Bush, and the newest crop of Republicians want more of the same, religion does not belong in our government, believing in God is one thing, but religion does not belong in government, many religions believe in God but not the fire and brimstone variety.

To comment by waxman, I feel the same way, ever since Bush has become president the common man/woman can just go to Hell.

The bottom line is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, or in this case all news is homoginized from a point of view, and that point of view is usually Washington D.C. or New York, New York, all the rest of the country does not count, just like the presidential election even before Calif. is finished at the polls the television blog is calling out the winner.

Why the rush anyway, the founding fathers had the winner and only after three months did the winner take the office, so I say again why the rush, the rush to get from here to there is not necessary.

People used to take trains to get from here to there, it might have taken longer but maybe the rest was worth it.

People in many countries live longer than those of the United States, more doctors do not make for more healthy people, might be because doctors think drugs do the trick, but what works for one may not work for another or to quote my father who probably quoted another “What is one man’s meat is another man’s posion.