They can't buy the election, so they're going to buy the media.

[theinquisitivechad]

Our usual "liberal" (read: truth-oriented) media outlets have taken a turn to the conservative lately. Think Republicans have realized buying the media is better than buying ads. What is our strategy?

[dawg]

1. They bought the media a long time ago.

The "liberal" media is only as liberal as the multinational corporations that own them.

[Whisp]

3. that's true but how does this work?

do the big bosses have a sit down with Ed and Rachel and say: hmmm, we would like you to slant the news This way....


or is it just an 'understanding' that media people have - w/o words even being spoken?
or is it just the fact that they are given orders to ratchet up the ratings, make it a World Wide Wrestling kind of format and it just naturally bends to the ridiculous then?

Does one top dog give barking orders to the Eds and Tweeties, and the Eds and Tweeties and Rachels aren't even Aware?

[dawg]

5. People can see who gets promoted and who doesn't.

Nothing has to be explicit. People can tell which way the wind is blowing.

How else could people like Wolf Blitzer and David Brooks continue to have the high-profile jobs they currently enjoy. Do you think it's their ability?

No. They know how to keep the right people happy.

[deutsey]

14. Yeah, I don't what happens on the inside of corporate media

But as someone who's worked quite a bit in a corporate environment, I know that there's a mostly unstated way you have to embrace if you want to succeed in the organization. Everyone in a corporate setting knows how the CEO and, consequently, senior mgt feel about certain things and if you want to climb that all-important ladder, you start feeling the same way (at least during business hours).

I never climbed very far up that ladder mainly because I refused to play that game.

[Whisp]

20. yes but Ed and that batch were really supportive of the President

then debate night happened... then things went all haywire with them.

they were not shy to point out some pretty good evidence against Romney and Ryan and repugs in general throughout these months - why would they do such an about face on the debate? (imo the debate went fine for Obama, I know that it's just a dog and pony bread and circus show for too many, but Obama was Obama, steady and true, and Romney was Romney, unsteady and false, so I can't for the life of me figure how the liar could be crowned the winner by these people on MSNBC).

how did they make that drastic switch? why? was it genuine or was it something they sniffed from upstairs?

[The Doctor.]

7. They have issues they aren't allowed to broach.

Unless they do it very favorably.

So, yes.

[robinlynne]

10. They fired Dan Rather. They fired Bill Maher. The list is long. And they do it with a great public

spectacle.

[City Lights]

13. They also fired Phil Donahue.

And at the time, he had the highest ratings on msnbc.

[deutsey]

16. My first thought, too

[robinlynne]

17. Thanks. having trouble remembering names.

[Whisp]

19. yah, I remember that disgrace.

Donahue was the only one fired for having an opinion opposite Cheney and the like, about the Iraq war. Think Maher got the pink slip too, iirc.

Is there a good tell all book on today's 'journalism'? There must be someone who can spill the whole fucking vat of beans on the industry - someone with a huge name and on their death bed and without family or friends to be threatened.

I guess there is no one then.
And if there were, they'd probably be declined by big publishers and the word would be out that this person was senile, woo woo or something to that effect.

man, we are fucked, have been fucked and will be forever forward. something has to break this hold on our minds and souls. This is like a really scary futuristics sci fi story

[theKed]

24. In the words of the Dude

Nothing is fucked, man.

Oh sure. They can quietly coerce 'journalists' and personalities. And less than quietly, too. But the days of big, consolidated media corporations directing the zeitgeist are numbered. They can read the writing on the wall as much as we can. How many people actually watch political ads, if they can help it? What portion of commentary is online blogging, or twitter, as opposed to talking heads? Now compare that to 4 years ago. We have the most powerful tool of education and communication ever created at our fingertips, and those are the things the Establishment fear the most: an informed, knowledgable, interconnected electorate. In a few more years they will lose the grip they have and fade away; hence the ferocious push to grab power and entrench their means of electoral control into the system.

That's, partly, why this fight is important.

[City Lights]

27. Yup, the war drums were being beaten loudly and

Phil's show didn't fit with the image msnbc wanted to create. You'd think they would have realized, based on his viewership numbers, that there were lots of people out there who were against the war. Rather than acknowledge that, they silenced him and his viewers.

Oh how I wish there was a journalist ready to write a tell all book about the horrors of today's corporate media.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

15. Of course they're aware...

They've seen Olbermann fired, Schultz put on suspension.... Think about what happened to Dylan Ratigan on CNBC when he was the only one calling out Wall St. for the meltdown.... They set parameters...unlike Fox which seems to have no boundaries...thus MSNBC functions rather like a one-armed paper hanger.

[Whisp]

23. yeh. I really always knew this.

but it really smarts to have someone I liked like Rachel play this game.

Of course she's in it for herself and her paycheck and her book sales before anything. How could she possibly refuse to continue what looks like a job she really loves and a job that gives her so many opportunities? I guess in the end it's our human selfishness that gets us every time - and people with power know that very well.

Rachel is overall one of the best, but what is that really worth when push comes to shove and she buckles under when it really matters? All of the rest means nothing - it was all a stage show in my opinion - now looking back it was just good performances, that's all.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

25. She, like everyone else, needs a platform

from which to deliver her message. Even a one-armed paper hanger is better than NO paper hanger if you don't know how to hang paper yourself. Look at the ratings for Current TV....Would you like Rachel to have an even smaller audience? And she is gaining share...that's good for everyone, not just Rachel. The absolute best reporter out there is Matt Taibbi, but because he wants to be able to say whatever he wants to say he is limited to a few guest appearances and the readership of Rolling Stone. Another outstanding voice is Elliot Spitzer...but CNN was purgatory and Current is Hell....

[newspeak]

22. thank you-"they bought the media years ago"

and after over twenty fekkin years of repeatedly stating "the liberal media, the liberal media", they actually brainwashed some of the plebes to think it's true. but the media is "as liberal as it's conservative corporate masters allow it to be." I remember phil donahue was given a show on MSNBC and I remember the LIES to preemptively attack iraq. Mr. donahue told us that he was told to have at least two neocons to one dissenting voice on his show. the network was calling the shots and then his show was gone.

no one, absolutely no one should be talking about the soviet propaganda, pravda; as if we don't have it here. when I travel cross country, sometimes the only station, all the way cross country is limpballs or a religious station. I'd rather turn it off and listen to silence, than listen to bullshite.

and, I don't mind having a limpballs on, as long as, there is a strong opposition countering his shite. but, no, they give him an unfettered sounding board and screened callers, so there usually are no intelligent rebuttals-just pure ignorant bullshite.

[CoffeeCat]

26. Keith Olbermann would know...

He should tell us.

[Johonny]

8. +1

[sadbear]

2. They're one and the same.

How do you buy an election? Buy the media. Done.

[robinlynne]

11. Actually no. They bought the elections too. Our elections are now run by

private right wing companies, thanks to W and HAVA.

[The Doctor.]

4. "Going to"?

Ummm.... yeah.

[Blue Owl]

6. ABCNNBCBS is all Koched-up

Kinda like Al Pacino at the end of "Scarface."

[CakeGrrl]

9. Lately? They've been GOP-skewed for years.

[theinquisitivechad]

12. I definitely agree with you but

I think it's ramped up lately to an indefensible degree of 'shocking'. In my personal opinion, it's getting a lot worse...

[Waiting For Everyman]

18. The net is harder to buy.

And if that's bought sometime, then it's phones.

[PowerToThePeople]

21. They are the media, at least MSM.

There are left sources for info, on the net. That is why they want control over the net as well.

PBS/NPR have moved back towards center recently imo. At least not right as they were during GWB days. That is why they want to destroy it as well.