step back and look at the big picture: the media is assassinating Kerry

[Nordic]

they did it to Dean and now they're doing it to Kerry.

It's wrong and we need to call them on it.

I'm tired of hearing about boycotting their sponsors, writing and e-mailing them, all of that stuff that will completely fly under the radar.

We need PR, we need something that will get their attention. We need media stunts.

The people need to know they're being played by the media.

Rove knows what I'm talking about -- they played Dan Rather with the fake memos in order to distract from the Kitty Kelley book. It worked like a dream.

How are we going to do this?

[mitchtv]

1. people need to focus on one business

Like Coors for example not a mega like GE. Or Try Penny's or Walmart, and make an example of them. reatilers are very vulnerable.

[Nordic]

3. ?? talking about their commercial sponsors is a waste of time

commercial sponsors don't really give a shit, they just want to reach as many eyeballs as possible. For them it's strictly about ratings.

They could have a cockfighting show and if it got good ratings they'd advertise on it. They wouldn't care.

I"m talking about doing something that holds a mirror up to the media's face.

I'm talking about tricking them, making fools of them, revealing them for what they really are.

[Suzi Creamcheese]

22. Holding a mirror up to their face?

You've got a lot of spirit in the right place, but you lost me here. What are you talking about?

[Nordic]

27. calling them on their bullshit in a public arena

Sabotaging them somehow. We need a plan.

Sorry, but I'm not in charge. If I was, I'd set one up. :)

[Suzi Creamcheese]

31. OK, thanks for the clarification

[blondeatlast]

23. That requires the luxury of time and energy.

Most of us are involved in the campaign in some way or another.

After the election it may work, especially with a Kerry win, but we can't afford it now.

[barbaraann]

2. I thought Kerry would be prepared for this.

n/t

[Nordic]

5. I think he is, but, gosh, he's not getting any media attention

He can't control the media any more than Dean could.

[tjdee]

8. Well, why the hell not?

That's what I want to know.

I want to know just what the Dem PR people have been doing since 2000--obviously not their jobs.

[mazzarro]

16. The democratic leadership has been completely lacking in

addressing the media control by reThuglican backers/cronies since this became evident during the Clinton lynch fest called Whitewater investigation. This media control/bias was further demonstrated during Al Gore's run for the presidency in 2000. Yet here we are in 2004 and we are still at the mercy of the media moguls. This whole debacle, I presume, is the consequence of the DLC type thinking dominating the DNC. The party leadership has never believed that the rank-and-file democrats know enough to be listened to. The party leadership has never considered the rank-and-file important enough to be informed of what the leadership is attempting to do. All of these because we do not have the mega bucks to throw at them. Unfortunately for the democratic leadership, the rank-and-file is not as docile and subservient as the reThuglican party's. We do not follow sheepishly. We accept varied opinions and even actions within the party but we will demand to be treated like people who have the right and capacity to contribute in significant ways to the decisions that affect us all. We will not be dictated to nor ordered around like the reThuglicans.

[Seabiscuit]

32. The whole problem is

as you said, the consequence of the DLC type thinking dominating the DNC.

Of course, John Kerry represents the DLC at work. The DLC is once again, as it did in 2000 and 2002, leading us down a losing path. Sadly, we don't have anyone representing us. We have John Kerry representing the DLC.

So yeah, I'll vote for "anyone but Bush", but damnit, if Kerry and his DLC cronies blow this election, as they've been blowing their campaign, I'll do my damndest to oust every DLC'er in Washington, including Senator Kerry, and replace them with Dean style progressives.

[blondeatlast]

26. I agree they dropped the ball, and it isn't right, but it means WE

have to pick it up and run with it.

Yes, we have to work harder than volunteers should be expected to, but that's the price we pay.

We may not like it, I sure as hell don't, but if we want Kerry to win, we have to spread the platform and the hope.

And maybe in 2008, a few of US will be steering the campaign the way it ought to be.

[xxqqqzme]

9. they should have been.

If Kerry's people thought he would B treated any differently, by the media, than Gore....they need 2 go.

[tjdee]

4. Why does Kerry's staff get paid?

Why is it that there isn't ONE Democratic strategist who learned from the election of 2000 and what they did to Al Gore?

Why are they acting like they don't know how the media works?

What are these people getting paid for?

My last hope is that I'm an eager beaver and that Kerry and co. have aces up their sleeves for October.

[PermanentRevolution]

11. Well, what are they supposed to do?

They can't FORCE the media into giving favorable coverage, so what is the campaign supposed to do, other than what they're doing now? They're fighting this battle in the field, making as many face-to-face type stops as they can fit in, to take the message straight to voters without media interference.

It doesn't matter how much his people are getting paid, there's NOTHING they can do to affect media coverage. Smears only work for Bush. If Kerry was to start, all we'd be hearing is how the Kerry campaign is hopeless, and resorting to smear tactics without a word of how Bush's entire campaign has been nothing but negative attacks.

Every time Kerry tries to shift focus back to the issues, it gets buried again. Every time Kerry tries to discredit the latest attack on him, it only gives an excuse to keep repeating the accusations more and more. So what, aside from cutting off all contact with the media, is he supposed to do?

He's taking the only option available right now, trying to offset the national news coverage with personal appearances, and trusting his base to keep up efforts to bring in new voters and keep the Demcratic Party energized and fighting. If we start wailing and wringing our hands at the hopelessness of the situation, then we might as well throw in the towel right now.

I keep saying this. Ignore the media. Grassroots mobilization is what's going to win this. The facts are on our side, and we have to take the facts to the people directly.

[tjdee]

19. I don't blame Kerry.

I agree with you, grassroots mobilization is the best way.

However, considering what happened in 2000, it is striking that they are trotting out, basically, the same kind of tired campaign as if this was any other normal campaign. The same boring appearances for their candidate, etc.

I don't know what they could do. But I'm not supposed to be some hotshot campaign manager. I'm very disappointed.

[blondeatlast]

24. Exactly, and well said. We have to concentrate our efforts elsewhere.

The only defense we have right now is grassroots work.

If the campaign leadership is dropping the ball (as I believe they are to some degree), WE have to grab it and run with it.

Talk Kerry up on Iraq, on the deficit, on health care, ad infinitum. People WILL listen, and they are often astonished to hear Kerry's sensible, positive platform, since it hasn't been covered in the media at all.

Let 'em see the platform, and you usually win them over.

We have to stop harping on the media--it's too late for this election.

Let's get our guy in first, then we can shame the attack poodles into doing their jobs.

[Nay]

13. And why hasn't Kerry's staff at least hired pitbulls to fill every

interview show, RW vs. LW show, talking points shows, Face the Nation, etc., instead of PATHETIC ASSHOLES like Daschle, Terry Whats-his-face, etc.??? How hard is to find somebody who can DEBATE ON OUR SIDE??? Even if we have to PAY 'em to do it?? Jeezus. I could do a better job, and I hate arguing politics.

[bain_sidhe]

18. We have them, but DEM pitbulls aren't invited to be on.

Only Repug pitbulls allowed!! We've got Carville, Randi Rhodes, Mike Malloy, and a few others that can "get in their face" for the Dem side of the argument. But they're not invited to be the "dem" rep for those shows. Too "abrasive," donchaknow. There's a REASON that "Hannity and Colmes" exists, and it's NOT to present a balanced view. "Hannity and Colmes" exists for the same reason Democratic pitbulls aren't invited to those talk shows: To perpetuate the perception that Democrats are "wimps" and/or "timid" and/or unable to refute pug talking points.

**Edit because the font size won't work right!**

[Nordic]

25. bing bing bing!!

We have a winner!

You are exactly right, and I LOVE your quote

[blondeatlast]

29. Precisely. Our pit bulls don't bark up the RIGHT tree.

Carville is an entertaining SOB from the word go, but he doesn't tell the attack poodles what they want to hear.

We have let ourselves believe that this is NEWS. It isn't, it's entertainment; hell there's even a new DUer that runs a CNN fan site.

Yep, you heard me: A CNN FAN SITE. That's just WRONG on so many levels.

[amber dog democrat]

6. Thats fine: just as long as it is not the CIA

One right wing assassination is enough. The media can go Cheney itsself.

[liberalnurse]

7. Fly under the radar.....

Go face-to-face with the community.....get people registered to vote and to the polls.

There are other options. We need to do the work....that way we don't owe anyone.

[donheld]

10. Oh you mean

like they assassinated Howard Dean? Why is it so many americans, even progressive ones, don't see this?

:mad::scared:

[Windy]

12. They skewered dean

And they are trying to do it to Kerry. Why? Corporate greed and ratings. Fox has high numbers because all of the bush lemmings watch. They don't bother to read the papers, the web or books. Fox's numbers and advertising revenue are up as a result. Because of Fox, CNN, MSNBC and the regular broadcast media are shifting there leanings to the right of center. Further, as illustrated by Tweety, if you journalistically try and expose the Bush administration for the corrupt war mongering colonialist/fascists that they are, they respond by isolating the media (who has actually done their job) from access to the white house. Through these bullying tactics, the administration ensure that their is a right wing bias. (then they use propaganda via drudge and talk radio to pound it into the lemmings heads that the media is left bias)

How do you combat that?

Its got to be grass roots, door to door, get out the vote as someone else said. Its a tough task.

[grasswire]

14. see the other thread, too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x841339

currently running

[grasswire]

15. here's my post from the other thread

sorry, if this is spamming. I hope the ideas are useful.

I saw the tail end of a discussion on c-span the other day where several retired journos were taking calls. A caller suggested that journos be licensed, or be subject to criminal prosecution when they engage in malfeasance.

Well, this set those old men clucking. They said "we have our own sets of ethics" and ways of policing themselves. Ha!

I do agree that licensing would be difficult and the prospect of criminal prosecution of journalists is terrifying.

There are long-term measures that could work, but they are long-term and we have little time to save ourselves from tyranny. These include Fairness Doctrine, development of liberal news outlets, repeal of decisions that allow mergers, etc.

There are only three things that we can do right now, IMO.

1. Develop the grassroots spreading of news and organize it better. The fliers, the bloggers, the stovepipe that allows citizen researchers to get stories developed that are big enough to be picked up on evening news. If some of that Soros money had been allocated to a team whose task was to reach every corner of the Internet with talking points and daily message, a huge impact would have been made.

2. Infiltrate right-wing talk radio. I saw a strategist say it the other day but can't remember who. He said we ought not to allow the monopoly of the people's air waves by anti-American and anti-democratic values and speech. We need to start listening and start talking back. Get up our nerves and wade in with phone calls.

3. I believe that a Peoples Bill of Rights for White House-Media Transparency is the only way the industry can be regulated without any undue fettering of the press. Other industries are loosely governed by Bills of Rights. Think about the Consumers Bill of Rights as a parallel.

I have begun to draft such a document, and have finished the section dealing with access of journalists to the White House. (The threat of denial of access is the major reason journos give for limp coverage of the administration.)

A bit of history. Until the end of WW2, the authority to credential WH correspondents was in the hands of the peer group itself, the WH Correspondents Association. Then that authority was transferred to the WH press office. The WH has full control over access. Until this presidency, there has been little problem with this system. But now we see a WH that intimidates the press at every turn, threatening and punishing reporters, and ultimately cowing them and skewing reporting. This must end. Authority for credentialing must be returned to the profession itself. The WH press office must have NO AUTHORITY over those who ask questions on behalf of the people.

A parallel. Access of journalists to Congress is codified in law. A People's Bill of Rights for White House-Media Transparency would effect the same protection to White House reporters from intimidation.

Anyway........I'd like to be able to develop the draft fully and to promote the idea widely. Anyone who is interested in the project may DU-mail me.

[mbali]

17. I saw this too - two things caught my ear . . .

1. A caller phoned in to say that the press was being too hard on Kerry. The next caller complained that the press was not being hard enough on Kerry. One of the journalists said, "this is proof that we're doing it right. If you have both sides saying we're doing it wrong, we must be balancing it pretty well."

Bull. The fact that callers on C-Span are arguing both sides of the issue is NOT proof that the press is doing a good job, but this is how the self-satisfied media ALWAYS operates. They engage in some kind of feeding frenzy - usually chewing up the hide of a Democrat - then they have a discussion about whether they did their jobs correctly and then always conclude that they did it just right.

2. It was bizarre listening to these men go on and on about how Rather blew it, blah blah blah, without any discussion of how the rest of the media has been getting a free ride for running with the Swift Boat lies with no corroboration or critical analysis. Their insistence on holding CBS and Dan Rather to a standard that they apply to no other media outlet is appalling.

[Cha]

30. It's Not proof of anything except that this

twit uses two callers to make his case. Which is a pile of burning manure!

The press is out to bring Kerry down because he will break up their monopoly when he gets in and the henchmen have their marching orders.

[roseBudd]

20. WE NEED GUERILLA MARKETING!

We need to use our printers, faxes and office copy machines to create a grassroots flyer campaign.

Go to http://somnamblst.tripod.com to download high res TIF or PDF files for printing. With our printers & Kinkos WE ARE THE MEDIA.

[Pepperbelly]

21. They also did it to Gore and Clinton. nt

[Cha]

28. I don't have to, because

I knew they were going to do that before they started..way back in the primaries!