Time
To Go After the TV Newsmedia
October 24, 2002
By Judith
Foster
Maybe we've been barking up the wrong tree. Starting back
in the bad old days of Clinton's impeachment by Congress our
representatives have pretty much made it clear that they don't
hear or care about what their constituents say or feel.
Again and again they've ignored the flood of telephone calls
and emails and letters which have unequivocally stated what
the American people overwhelmingly want. Our elected representatives
have chosen to ignore the choices of tens of thousands of
people they have sworn to represent. Once elections were over
the majority of representatives forgot their campaign promises
as well as forgetting what their fundamental job is - to represent
the American people. The few that are true to their constituents
and their campaign promises end up being ignored by the TV
media.
The concerted effort by online organizations such as MoveOnPAC
and Not in Our Name as well as other organizations have served
to give the American people the power that their elected representatives
have denied them. So, if our representatives aren't interested
in listening, then the people must take their fight to another
front and against what might be the real enemy. The TV media.
If activist organizations such as Not In Our Name and Move
On as well as information websites such as Buzzflash, Media
Whores Online, American Politics Journal, Democratic Underground,
etc., and other websites can reach people and can also represent
the voices and the wishes of people worldwide on important
impacting political issues, then they can use this power to
fight against the worst enemy of a democratic and free society,
which is the propagandizing of the TV news media into a venue
used for the service of a political party ideology.
Society's right to get truth in journalism is the most important
weapon against the enemies of freedom. An informed people
are a people who have the most fundamental element of true
freedom. Whether they do anything to practice their right
to dissent or not is their right, but the choice to do so
is paramount.
These online organizations have shown that the potential
power of using the internet to reach individuals as well as
tens of thousands or even millions of people is a fact which
is being actively developed in our modern society. Whereas
before the internet each person had to rely on local newspapers,
on weekly or monthly magazines, and the daily news for information,
the internet has changed that in a way that has revolutionized
the processing of information to a level never before imagined.
Someone can sit at their computer on any given day and read
articles published on that same day in newspapers all over
the world by simply clicking on links, using search engines
or going to web pages from their favorite publication or news
outlets.
This is amazing and the implications of the uses of this
medium are staggering in their revolutionary impact on the
medium of worldwide communication. One of the impacts that
is already being felt and appreciated is the ability to virtually
connect every single internet user to groups of like-minded
people from every part of the world at any time.
Everyone knows the value of writing a letter to editors or
to corporate higher management as a form of criticism, or
to critique, or to thank for or correct articles or to just
post a comment. If internet organizations have mobilized tens
of thousands of people to contact their representatives, as
well as other organizations and governments and have gotten
results, then why not organize a comprehensive and concerted
movement to write emails and letters and make telephone calls
to the news conglomerates, their editors and the individual
journalists of the TV media.
It's time they felt the pressure of our dissatisfaction at
their degeneration into the propaganda arm of the current
Whitehouse residents. It's time for those of us who understand
what is happening as our government slides into the unconstitutional
and fascistic practices of secret tribunals, unlimited warfare
at the whim of one unelected man, as well as the obvious catering
to the political biases and ideological practices of corporate
owners to put the pressure on those TV media companies to
tell facts, truth and complete information about the news.
More and more Americans are disgusted with the incessant
24 hour coverage of a single topic because it is controversial
or salacious at the expense, for instance, of the much needed
coverage of the real and present danger of the shredding of
the Constitution and the implications of this by the administration.
The American people didn't need to know every agonizingly
embarrassing detail of Monica Lewinski's graphic version of
her mostly imagined affair with Bill Clinton at the expense
of over $40 millions dollars, paid for by us the taxpayers,
and also at the liability of real news. This pathetic affair
was not in any way a menace to the security of the United
States, nor is it correct to claim that the American people
had the right to know. That argument only applies if the news
is something that impacts our lives in some meaningful way,
such as national security. I defy anyone to explain satisfactorily
that any issue around Monica had an impact on anyone's security
as an American. Had she been a spy who had managed to get
the President to divulge top security information then the
scandal would be warranted.
Americans are not stupid and they know the media shouldn't
be in the business of pursuing more than the truth about topics,
issues and just plain news. The claim is that it's all about
competition and that they are giving the American people what
they want. So they feel they can be like The Jerry Springer
Show? Many of us don't watch Jerry Springer, but we feel OK
with it being aired because some people want to watch his
show. It's their Constitutional right. When I tune into a
news program I don't want to watch a Jerry Springer wannabe
show, I want the news which is the type of program they claim
to be, and I want facts and complete and unbiased coverage
and I want to be able to trust that I'm getting what I want.
It's time for the TV news media to start being professional
again. It's time for the American people to let the news conglomerates
know they will be out of business unless they start doing
their jobs and stop using the media as a conduit for their
own political agendas.
For example, it's time for those who believe in Al Gore (count
us in the millions) to demand that CNN, FOX, CNBC, MSNBC,
et al stop promoting their obvious political bias and ideological
agenda by dismissing Gore's speeches against the current administration.
They are there to cover the news, and Mr. Gore's speeches
and statements were and are newsworthy. It isn't a matter
of choice for these TV stations to decide for us whether Al
Gore is worthy of factual coverage or not. It's not their
job to dismiss him in tone or by innuendo. I reserve the right
to do that (or not to) myself after I have heard the most
complete and comprehensive coverage of the speech.
What about the OJ trials? (Which I won't force anyone to
relive so I won't expand upon them). Suffice to say there
were other things happening in the world at the time. Gary
Condit's political life was ruined needlessly. So what if
he isn't very likable? At the time his constituents were perfectly
happy with his record. They voted him out based solely on
the TV news media treating his passing involvement with Chandra
Levy as if he was already her convicted murderer. Just as
they ruined Richard Jewel's life who was, in fact, a heroic
man who probably saved many people's lives yet the mainstream
media treated him as if he was a terrorist of the same ilk
as Timothy McVeigh. They should have questioned the FBI tactics
and they should have been professional enough not to stalk
Mr. Jewel or convey their obvious prejudices against him.
They should have given a balanced story, protecting Mr. Jewel's
rights as best they could, instead of violating every law
as well as violating plain decency.
And their coverage of the Washington DC sniper could appear
to be criminal if one thinks about what it means to aid and
abet a murderer. If having every talking head and self-appointed
pundit spewing opinions as if they knew what they were talking
about isn't playing right into the fantasies of this murderer,
then what is? Does the American public need to hear 24 hour
reporting about how there's no new news or developments, but
still the TV media stay on the story by putting on every possible
"expert" theory they can to cram down our throats?
Oh! - and lest I forget, can We the People, via one or all
of these online organizations please pressure the TV media
into getting rid of the damn tickers! If it's newsworthy enough
to make it onto the ticker, then it must be newsworthy enough
for them to do what they are paid for and report it.
|
