 |
|
| |
|
|
|
 The Broadcasters’ Big PaydayPosted on Jan 9, 2008By Amy Goodman Hillary Clinton’s surprise victory in New Hampshire guarantees a longer, more competitive Democratic primary season. It’s like money in the bank for broadcasters, as the first billion-dollar presidential campaign continues. While the world’s oldest democracy, the United States, spends trillions of dollars claiming to bring democracy to Afghanistan and Iraq (through the barrel of a gun), what have we got here? A process driven by major donors shoveling huge sums of cash into the troughs of television broadcasters, who are holding the electoral process hostage through their control of the public airwaves. The same broadcasters arbitrarily exclude viable candidates from their so-called debates, elevating themselves to kingmaker. According to TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG, a group that tracks political advertising, overall spending by the presidential candidates in Iowa topped $50 million. In 2004, spending was closer to $9 million. The group reported that spending on all campaign and issue ads, for all current races (presidential and others) in the U.S., reached $715 million by the end of 2007. WMUR, New Hampshire’s only statewide commercial television channel, raked in millions of dollars from political advertising this primary season. WMUR’s headquarters is dubbed “The House That Forbes Built,” after Steve Forbes spent so much on ads in his 1996 presidential run. With the new compressed, “front-loaded” primary schedule, with more and more states moving their primary dates closer to those first-in-nation events in Iowa and New Hampshire, the need for money is extreme. Feb. 5, dubbed “Super-Duper Tuesday,” will see primaries in more than 20 states, including huge media “markets” like New York, Illinois and California. Barack Obama, Clinton and John Edwards will have to continue to raise huge sums, only to hand most of it over to broadcasters, who, through their control of the public airwaves, dole out access to the electorate. One way Fox News/News Corp. recently tried to influence the process was to exclude Ron Paul from a Republican candidate forum in New Hampshire, two days before that state’s first-in-the-nation primary. Paul was the most successful fundraiser among Republican candidates in the fourth quarter of 2007; he decisively beat Rudy Giuliani in the Iowa caucus, with 10 percent of the vote versus Giuliani’s 4 percent. Fox nixed Paul from the debate, while Giuliani was welcomed. The New Hampshire Republican Party pulled its support from the debate. Party chair Fergus Cullen said: “The first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary serves a national purpose by giving all candidates an equal opportunity on a level playing field. Lesser-known, lesser-funded underdogs have a fighting chance to establish themselves as national figures. [W]e believe all recognized major candidates should have an equal opportunity to participate in pre-primary debates and forums.” Paul appeared on NBC’s “Tonight Show With Jay Leno” (which has restarted production despite the ongoing Writers Guild of America strike, which is keeping Democratic candidates away from the strikebreaking network shows). Leno asked him how he was responding to Fox’s banning him: “I realized that they really had some property rights ability there, and I wasn’t going to crash the party. And I thought, ‘Well, maybe I ought to sue them.’ I’ve decided what to sue them over, and that is for fraud, because of this ‘fair and balanced’ idea.” While threatening to sue the network for its fraudulent claim of being “Fair and Balanced” (a ludicrous motto for Fox), Paul neglects the key point: The airwaves are not the private property of Fox. Rupert Murdoch and his News Corp. profit from their use of the public airwaves, which comes with the responsibility to serve the public interest. If the electoral process itself, the nuts and bolts of democracy, does not rate as a public interest, what does? ABC News pulled the same stunt on Dennis Kucinich, barring him from the debate it sponsored on Sunday night. Kucinich filed an emergency complaint with the Federal Communications Commission, saying, “ABC should not be the first primary.” He noted that ABC “is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Walt Disney Co., whose executives have contributed heavily to ... Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, former Sen. John Edwards and Gov. Bill Richardson.” ABC limited the debate to those four by requiring participants to place at least fourth in the Iowa caucus to qualify. But the Kucinich campaign said it “bypassed the Iowa caucuses,” preferring to focus resources on New Hampshire, then got shut out of the debate. Kucinich’s key points, getting out of Iraq and promoting single-payer health care, went virtually unheard in New Hampshire. The majority of the money that candidates are forced to raise is for TV ads. They are running to be the nation’s top public servant. The networks should provide the airtime as a free public service. The airwaves belong to the public; they are a national treasure. They should be used to enrich our electoral process. Instead, they are exploited by highly profitable TV networks, forcing the candidates to rely on monied interests. This vicious cycle must be broken. Denis Moynihan assisted on this column. Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 650 stations in North America. © 2008 Amy Goodman Distributed by King Features Syndicate Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation 
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
Why Do So Few Speak Up for Gaza?
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By Joe, January 18, 2008 at 1:47 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Good idea on the train. You know, such a train would have magical properties. If you place a silver dollar on the track as the train is approaching, you will find a flattened quarter in its place after the politicians have passed over.
In earnest now, I would like to see these candidates questioned on their knowledge of nuclear weapons. The management of our massive nuclear strike force, and related strategic processes, are the primary responsibility of any President. As far as I know, not one question has been asked of any candidate along these lines.
Report thisBy Joe, January 17, 2008 at 7:54 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Amy Goodman evened the score with ABC/NBC for excluding Kucinich. She radio broadcast her interview with the US Rep, basing questions on the performance of the estab candidates in the recent NBC Dem roundtable debate. I can see why the Dems didn’t want him there. Kucinich’s responses were striking in their clarity of purpose. He would have made the std troika look to be fools.
My complaint with interviewer Goodman is that she cut-off Kucinich just as he was attempting to give a v. brief statement in conclusion. Will these Goodman chicks never let a man have the last word?
The only cure I see for them is a visit to the shoe emporium of Steve Martin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feTrJSWnqdk
Report thisBy A Alencastro, January 16, 2008 at 3:51 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
re: big pay offarticle: 1000 to 2500 a pop for a dinner ticket excludes alot of us Amy… I would love to attend your dinner party but you have priced me out…. how is this different than the rest of the punk-ass-media?? (and I am a long-time fan)
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, January 16, 2008 at 10:20 am #
Ms. Kenney, your point is well taken. Although I am a fan of Amy Goodman, I agree with you that today’s format (or should I say virtual format) wasted way too much time on the tired bloodless remarks of the so-called front runners. I also agree with you that Kucinich and Paul have more in common than is generally acknowledged. For example, both of the candidates are opposed to NAFTA, the WTO, and corporate welfare to drug companies. And how does mainstream media invalidate them? Because Dennis Kucinich admitted seeing an unidentified flying object, something a large segment of the population has also seen. In the case of Dr. Ron Paul, his judgment is suspect because he questions the validity of the civil war. It takes a thinking adult to not bow down at the feet of the holy tyrant, Abraham Lincoln. As a candidate who is an advocate for individual liberty as opposed to government force, what was he suppose to say?
Report thisPeace, the beer doctor.
By Sara Kenney, January 16, 2008 at 6:18 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Lately I’ve had to turn off Democracy Now in the mornings or yell at it, while they spend so much time talking about Obama and Hilary and Romney and McCain….never once have they interviewed Ron Paul or even mentioned him besides the little blurb about his fundraising success. Just today they had Kucinich on, but they played the entire debate from last night and therefore giving the other candidates double the airtime.
Report thisThis article is a good attempt at mentioning the real candidates, Kucinich and Paul, but at the same time she takes a stab at Paul:
“While threatening to sue the network for its fraudulent claim of being Fair and Balanced (a ludicrous motto for Fox), Paul neglects the key point: The airwaves are not the private property of Fox.”
No Amy, you miss the point. The point is, that instead of wasting money on lawsuits, Ron Paul used another tactic and used the other networks who see themselves in a competition with Fox to get as much airtime. MsNBC actually aired the debate that Paul WAS included in while the Fox forum ran..and they had more viewers!
Also, Amy makes little effort to discuss candidates’ voting records…to clearly lay out the facts. Ron Paul and Kucinich have much more in common than with their other peers in their parties. I really hope Democracy now starts to wake up and really speak THE TRUTH.
By Kristin, January 14, 2008 at 8:08 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
If you want change, then QUIT YOUR BITCHING AND WORK FOR IT. I mean that in the most affectionate way possible, but it IS a challenge. C’mon, let’s start something now when we’re only going against the green stuff..we are RUNNING OUT OF TIME. A kid was just MURDERED by a Miami cop for being DISRUPTIVE AT A PARTY by TASING…federal $ is being siphoned to local police departments to outfit their officers with these weapons, whose use I might add, the UN has denounced as a form of torture. Bush nominated a board-sitting member of Taser International Bernard Kerik, who you may remember as the NYC-PD thorn in Giuliani’s side, for Homeland Security Secy..that didn’t go thru however they’ve found another way: http://thinkprogress.org/2005/05/12/taser-getting-paid -to-police-itself/
The only way we can be free is if we refuse to be controlled and spoken for.
A little inspiration from Die Weisse Rose: “Germans! Do you and your children want to suffer the same fate that befell the Jews? Do you want to be judged by the same standards as your traducers? Are we do be forever the nation which is hated and rejected by all mankind? No. Dissociate yourselves from National Socialist gangsterism”...or Neoliberal Fascist gangsterism..
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, January 14, 2008 at 3:10 pm #
I think you are being a little harsh with Amy Goodman. Where else but Democracy Now! does Dennis Kucinich get treated as a serious candidate? It was also on this weekday program that I learned of election fraud, injustices of every sort, and interviews with guests that other media outlets will not even touch.
Report thisBy Michael Foley, January 14, 2008 at 11:32 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
... and, I might add, fake issues. Today’s discussion of the gender vs. race “issue” was a case in point. There was little here we couldn’t find in the mainstream media, minus her Princeton guest’s air of academic femininism. The “issue” lets both Obama and Hilary off the hook, of course. No need to discuss the pressing issues that might be resolved with a new politics in this electoral season. “Race” and “gender” are all about “who the candidates are” and how voters “feel” about them and not what they will do if elected. Better not discuss that, because neither the one nor the other promises the sort of change we so desperately need.
Amy’s coverage mimics mainstream coverage in more ways than this. She’s spent far more air time on Hilary and Obama than on those candidates who are addressing the issues, adding her annointing to the putative front-runners to that of Fox News and the New York Times. Is this really the alternative coverage we’ve come to expect?
I have a suggestion. Forget the presidential race. We can’t do much about electing the sort of king (or queen) who will make a real difference. What we need is a renewed counterweight to our periodically elected kings. Let’s focus on the Congressional races and try to help build a force to throw out the polls, all of them, and replace them with genuine citizen’s candidates, accountable to the citizenry.
Michael Foley
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, January 13, 2008 at 3:55 pm #
It is difficult for some people to grasp, but there are large segments of the population who see nothing wrong with this country being under corporate control. People who believe that Walmart, McDonald’s, Microsoft, Lockheed Martin and Blackwater are part of the great American fabric that covers all of us ungrateful peons. The same can be said of network television deciding what is proper political discourse in this country. Many folks feel that such matters are best left to the professionals. But for what it is worth, that concept is wrong. As Lewis Mumford once said: “lighting is too important to be left to the experts.”
Report thisBy Phil, January 13, 2008 at 5:48 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Greetings Amy,
I highly recommend you pay attention to http://bradblog.com and http://blackboxvoting.org
As it stands right now, NOBODY knows what happened in New Hampshire and they probably won’t know if the chain of custody for the paper ballots is broken.
Basically we have all lost our constitutional right to vote. However at the same time, corporate media is perceived by the public as no problems, everything is fine. And by the time we find out about problems (AND THERE ARE PROBLEMS) and can prove them, the wrong candidates will again be sworn in. Then they will be free to break their oath of office again.
If we can’t get a grip on our elections we are done.
Right now you can’t even describe the United States as a Constitutional Republic. Over the last seven years this administration and congress have stopped obeying the constitution.
Now with this patriot act, real id, the homegrown terrorism bill, and a myriad of other un constitutional acts, it will be a matter of time before the police are let loose on the public.
The key to stopping these problems are making our elections transparent. They’re not transparent when electronic signals can not be seen by the human eye.
Report thisBy kesa, January 11, 2008 at 6:18 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Stop watching TV. Life is too short to spend it in front of the idiot box. If your candidate isn’t on your ballot, write in their name. If enough people refused to buy in to the BS, something might change. Just stop participating in the way that THEY want you to.
Report thisBy Sanford, January 11, 2008 at 4:39 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Are you kidding? Americans are so glued to the tube after more than 50 years of intelligence insulting crap if they showed nothing but Shakespeare plays people would still watch the damn thing.
Report thisBy Donna Landay, January 11, 2008 at 12:41 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
If Great Britain can do it, why can’t we? Our campaigns go on forever until everything sounds like a cliche. Cut the time of our campaigns & cut the money for debates, political messages, etc. Networks should volunteer time to candidates for at least a month.
Report thisBy Frank Lieb, January 11, 2008 at 9:54 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
This totalitarian movement must be stopped. The entire news media hides behind the 1st Amendment while we are fed misinformation, which is not what our founding fathers had in mind. There is a lot of work to be done and we will need the right legislators to to get this country back on track!
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, January 10, 2008 at 3:29 pm #
Amy Goodman is correct but unfortunately with a Supreme court that thinks money is free speech, I just do not what can be done about it. It is like here in my own county I pay taxes daily (sales) to prop up losing baseball and football teams, while serious problems of the citizens are ignored.Corporate welfare is everywhere: from television, to the drug industry, to the privatization of the military and the promotion of useless products and policy. The bloody beat goes on and on…
Report thisBy rage, January 10, 2008 at 2:36 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Great article! The 4th estate has miserably failed us. I hope facilitating fascism and hegemony have been worth the money these mongrels have earned as shameless propagandists.
Report thisBy jackpine savage, January 10, 2008 at 7:19 am #
Easy for you to say, you’re already far away…and good on ya for it, too.
I have a hard time dealing with the grim reality; Dickensian humor is my only antidote. Well, that or return to the expat way of life, but that too looks like another dream squashed by grim reality.
Report thisBy Expat, January 10, 2008 at 6:40 am #
I’ve got to add this for ya’ll: “You sing all the words and play all the notes but never quite learn the song.” (The Incredible String Band)
Report thisBy Expat, January 10, 2008 at 6:27 am #
Ah, dreams, tongue in cheek, I love it ..but, we always wake up from them to our grim reality. Maybe well achieve them in a parallel universe far, far away.
Report thisBy jackpine savage, January 9, 2008 at 7:56 pm #
My long held dream is to completely reform the way that national (and even state) campaigns work. Actually i have two dreams, but one always wakes me up with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
For the primaries we should put all of the candidates who meet a minimum threshold of viability on a train together. One train for the Democrats, one train for the Republicans. Then we make them ride around the country and give speeches/debates together. One candidate, one car. The taxpayer foots the bill for the train ride and food. Each candidate gets one TV commercial per state that can run no longer than a week prior to the train’s arrival. The primary season could be lengthened to one year…a week for each state. (I haven’t figured out what to do about incumbents and elected representatives running.)
Come general election time, there would only be one train for all nominees…and an increase in the number of cars they get. When rail access is not available buses may be substituted.
My other dream is to take all of them, lock then in a house somewhere and make the whole thing into a 24/7 reality TV show. Challenges for commercial spots could be won from games of RISK or Monopoly…or any number of things we might wish to make them do together. Call it The RealWorld, Beltway.
Report thisBy JimBob, January 9, 2008 at 4:45 pm #
Broadcasters charge by the eyeball. They’re not going to have as many eyeballs to sell to those free-spending pols if all they’ve got on is “America’s Next Top Pastry Chef” and reruns of CSI we all saw the first time around.
Report thisBut then, they’re not thinking with the big head these days.
By PatrickHenry, January 9, 2008 at 4:25 pm #
The most dangerous threat to our national security come from the consolidation of media in the hands of a few individual corporations.
Report thisBy P. T., January 9, 2008 at 4:16 pm #
The longer the race drags on, the more money the candidates need. This is a real opportunity for lobbyists, corporations, the rich, and so forth to buy them off.
Report thisBy Timur Rozenfeld, January 9, 2008 at 3:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
This may be of interest:
http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/01/09/new-hamps hire-vote-fraud-confirmed-ron-paul-votes-not-counted/
This may explain why Ron Paul got less votes than expected and why Barack Obama’s results were way out of sink with polls.
Report this