Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Should we boycott the corporate media?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:44 PM
Original message
Poll question: Should we boycott the corporate media?
I have boycotted religiously since the election, and fairly strictly for months before then. I'm calmer, more focused, and more energized because of it. But is it a good tactic?

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm not going to should on anybody
but I've been avoiding them since 11/2/04 and I have no plan to turn any of those bastards back on.

Jon Stewart was right. They're not simply laughably incompetent; they're hurting us.

There's no way I'm going to deliver a warm body to their sponsors, and there's no way I'm going to keep raising my blood pressure over their lies of ommission.

To hell with the lot of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
15. Same with me
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 01:12 AM by FreedomAngel82
Only news I get is online from here and Yahoo. For other stuff I watch the Daily show. I forgot AAR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
givemebackmycountry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. Little or no difference...
Too many McGriddle eaters will miss their Micheal Jackson updates, or "Access Hollywood" minutes.

Boycotting them will do little.

Pounding them relentlessly and threatening to boycott their advertisers (and letting their advertisers know this) may do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. Isolated and Naive are what.....
Corporate News imbibers are. I don't have the stomach for it. I find the shrill hyperbole toxic, and see no benefit whatsoever in abusing my thought processes with garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. I already am. I have no need to be lied to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moggie12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. I picked "other"
If watching it isn't good for your emotional well-being, then by all means don't. However, I hope you'll still try to influence it, by joining in efforts to boycott Fox advertisers, for example, or by writing e-mails to stations when someone here on DU requests people do so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Absoutely
I'm dependent on others to tell me what to e-mail about, however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moggie12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes, that's a problem!
I've put a few posts up over the past two weeks or so: One was asking everybody to e-mail CNN thanking them for having Boxer on and letting her talk at length. Thursday I did one asking everybody to e-mail Chris Matthews asking him to talk about the neoconservatives and how they're driving Bush's foreign policy (since Tweety is hosting tomorrow night's Iraqi election extravaganza on MSNBC).

Got a good response on the Boxer one -- about 40 people did it. Less than 10 did the Matthews one. Kinda bummed me out since I think a targeted approach might have some impact (a station getting 100 or more e-mails on one subject might take notice).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Acryliccalico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
7. Yes! They have to "STOP HURTING AMERICA"
:kick: :kick: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElectroPrincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
9. Am I the only one who does NOT care about either
the Michael Jackson or Robert Blake criminal cases?

I don't give a damn ... not at all. Yet the MSM forces this crap on us. It's a game with me for as soon as either one of these topics come on the TV, I run to change the channel or turn off my TV.

I don't want to know. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. It is part of their
plan to distract us from the real issues that matter to our lives, because if people did look at those issues in any kind of a logical way, they would vote Dem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #9
29. I don't care about them, either
I also change the channel when either one of those subjects come on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. What does that mean? No TV, radio, newspapers, or movies ever again?
and what about the internet? Most of us use ISPs owned by huge corporations. You obviously aren't boycotting that or you wouldn't be posting online.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proudbluestater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. "Most of us use ISPs owned by huge corporations." We do?
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 02:51 AM by proudbluestater
Hmmm, I use a local ISP for $9.95 a month. I don't know too many people still using AOL for twice the price.

If you're referring to cable channels and their cable modems, that's a different story. The cable companies themselves don't tell each cable channel how to report.

At home I have a satellite dish. It provides me with two very progressive channels not found on most cable, so I can skip all the propaganda and watch the shows the government doesn't want me to see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. a local ISP?
Who owns it? Do you imagine the company isn't incorporated? Your satellite service, either Direct TV or Dish TV, is also corporate owned. You aren't boycotting it at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 05:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. life is rarely an all or nothing thing. chill.
:smoke:

i'd settle for forward progress than the false choice of perfection or apathy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. Rupert Murdoch
My point was boycotting corporate media is absurd. It is not possible unless one resolves to remain uninformed. This is a corporate run society. Those are the facts.
Direct TV is certainly no purer than your local cable company. Rupert Murdoch is chairman of the board. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=DTV
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. there's dish network. and then there's basic broadcast (which is free)
and then there's those old gigantic style personal satellite dishes. there's options out there. no one twists anyone's arm to get 200+ channels to watch. (besides, i'd probably deal with my local cable company over direct tv just to avoid rupert.) are they perfect? no, but nothing ever is.

but that's the thing, why chase perfect purity? no one is advocating that here. why are you contesting the effort is useless? should we all give up and languish because perfection is unattainable? that's an absurdly strict standard -- i hope you aren't so strict with yourself in everyday life. just moving in the right direction is good enough. it isn't nearly as hard as one thinks to make a positive difference in your daily activities. you just have to be able to have perspective, need to be able to forgive lack of perfection.

honestly, it's not like you are suggesting "all options have 6 degrees of separation from corporate media, therefore are all equal, therefore equally bad, so there's no hope, might as well sit down and wallow in misery" are you? you must admit that there are degrees of good and bad choices, even when it comes to personal consumption of media.

so i repeat, chill. :smoke: this boycott idea ain't so gloom and doom as you think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. your viewing habits are your choice

Frankly I don't see what the point is or that it makes any difference. Apparently it makes you feel better, which is great. I object to the idea that there is any virtue or point is promoting this as some sort of social movement, which was the intent of the original post. You do whatever you want, but when you suggest others do the same on a discussion board, I have a right to point out what I see as a lack of coherence in the scheme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #10
18. It's about content - ISP's have virtually no control over content
on the internet. But the large corporations that own most of the mainstream media outlets do have control over the content of those media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pam-Moby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
11. We need to target their advertisers
and eventually we will start to bring them to their knees and then they will have to start listening to the public and start reporting the truth!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ragin_acadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. yes, yes, yes!!!!!!!!!!!!
pam-moby, you are absolutely right!!!!!!!!!

for the rest of the people reading this thread:

television does not make a profit when you merely keep your couch cushions warm. the moment you go to get a bowl of Tostitos(TM), Coca-Cola(TM), use a Gillette(TM) nail-file, or re-lace your Nike's(TM), the television station makes their profit. Television profits by justifying their advertising fees by the size of their audience, and the manner of exploitation inherent in the demographic content of their audience.

watch as much tv as you like. watch fox news or cnn 24/7. get as pissed off as you like at their partisan coverage.

just don't put another corporate product in your fridge, pantry, medicine cabinet, or on your body. buy organic, it does exist, buy mom & pop, it does exist (actually, neither exists at mal-wart, but what the hell, don't shop there either)

that's how we will break the corporate stranglehold on our government and our news. put proctor/gamble/gillette(TM), and RJR/Nabisco in the poor house, THEN WE WILL HAVE TAKEN THIS COUNTRY BACK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
13. Only watch if someone on is worthwhile....otherwise,
The boycott has been on for me since end of primaries 2004.

The televised media has gotten too big for its britches...the anchornewsreaders are believing that they are more important and know more than the expert guests they are interviewing. The arrogant and sanctimonious manner in which they deliver opinion disguised as news is truly sickening!

The Presstitutes have got to go. Same can be said of the political pundits. I am tired of hearing what they have to say...cause the are always wrong.

Also need endless polls during election seasons banished. The polls are nothing but opinion creators and pushers who lead the sheeps straight for the cliff.

When I watch any news...whatever they report, I just believe the opposite. Amazing how well that works!

CNN is becoming the worse....but they are all bad. What's worse is that CNN is still called the most liberal television cable news channel. How sad is that?

And the whole stable of NewsAnchor (if you want to call it news as opposed to propaganda) at CNN? They have got to go!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberty Belle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
14. This only works if you TELL the media you're boycotting--& why!
I recommend sending a copy of your letter to the Chief Financial Officer, the CEO, and the public relations/media relations person at each of the networks--and the parent companies. If anyone wants this info, I can track it down and post it. You can usually find this info by going to the parent company's website and looking for investor relations info.

Also if people would sell their stock in the parent companies-- Disney (ABC), Viacom (CBS), General Electric (NBC), Time-Warner (CNN), and News-Corp (Fox)--and inform the company why, it would make an economic impact. Don't forget about calling any mutual funds you have to see if they own stock in these companies, too.

Sinclair Broadcasting stock went down 17% as a result of the flap over the anti-Kerry program it planned to air, and it backed down.

Economic pressure CAN work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McKenzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
19. The boycott of Barclays Bank 18 years ago worked
There was a student boycott as a means of protesting over the bank's involvement with the apartheid regime. It worked after Barclays saw their share of student accounts halve. So boycotts can work in some cases, particularly if they are focussed.

The same sort of approach might have an effect on television companies. They rely on advertising income so a drop in viewer numbers would make any given company less attractive for marketting purposes.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to distinguish between the good guys and the bad guys these days in the commercial world. That's a corollary to corporate expansion where a parent company owns a load of subsidiaries. But that's another debate altogether.

I would start with boycotting virtually all television companies. First, there is the economic rationale as mentioned above. My second reason is a tad more partisan...I think television is a cancer, a view that is shared by people who are far more qualified to comment with authority on the subject than I am. Taking the idiot box tv out of daily use would allow people to develop critical thinking rather than the brainwashing that teevee actually engenders. Then we might just get critical debate on a whole range of issues.

Anyway, at least we are talking about this which is a good thing. The malign influence of the media underpins a lot of our current problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ikojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 05:24 AM
Response to Original message
20. The right boycotted the media and called them
liberal and that led to them becoming very conservative and pro Bush.

I think when we speak of the media we should not use the words mainstream bur rather conservative. Only when we begin using the word conservative with the same invective and disgust as the pugs use liberal will it begin to have the same reputation as something to be avoided.

There is nothing mainstream about state sponsored media and state sponsored news. That's exactly what we currently have in the US. To act as if it is not so is naive in the extreme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. You know, you have a point
I've heard Ed Shultz use the term "righties" like a swear word. I think we need to take it all the way and start using"conservative" that way, and in all contexts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 05:58 AM
Response to Original message
22. sure, why not? spares my blood pressure.
if you are calmer, more focused, and more energized because of boycotting it then it is a fantastic tactic. not only do you feel you are doing something positive in a passive manner, it keeps you healthy and vital so that you can put creative energies in helping us survive the next four years. if doing this alleviates sullenness, hopelessness, and depression for even 10% of us progressives then it is worth doing because it improves the lives of that many people.

personally and strategically it is a great tactic. energizes the base, raises spirits, and denies more control to corporate media. there's no downside, so why not do it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
26. I have since dec.11th.2000
It is a sacrifice we may have to make to put an end to something that will put an end to this planet.Yes I miss a few shows on t.v.The news paper you can get free because people throw it away when they are done with it.I get my news here and from work of mouth by people I know aren't getting paid to fabricate and distort reality.Do the math if everyone that cared stopped thier cable and satalite it would stop this madness .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
27. It's not enough to just stop watching,
You must let them and the advertisers know that you no longer watch
their crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
31. You bet




Graphic from TurnOffYourTV.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Decisive
answer! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Delete
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 09:34 PM by senseandsensibility
Dupe!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC