Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Over the past 50 years nearly all the media has been purchased by mega corporations and the uber-wealthy.
They now have the ability to mold and shape the news into any form and ideology they desire.
When the United States was formed, freedom of the press was recognized as a cornerstone of Democracy, as it provided the people with the information they needed to make the decisions to govern themselves.
Today the corporate owned media controls the news and thereby controls opinions and education.
Should the US pass laws making it illegal for large corporations with conflicts of interest to own media?
We need more government owned media to counteract the corrosive effect of private media with a corporate agenda. We could start with full government funding of NPR and NPTV to provide completely unbiased reporting and editing.
We need more government owned media to counteract the corrosive effect of private media with a corporate agenda. We could start with full government funding of NPR and NPTV to provide completely unbiased reporting and editing.
Name a single government controlled media that was EVER unbiased.
[quote=jimhcom;21361148]Over the past 50 years nearly all the media has been purchased by mega corporations and the uber-wealthy.
They now have the ability to mold and shape the news into any form and ideology they desire.
When the United States was formed, freedom of the press was recognized as a cornerstone of Democracy, as it provided the people with the information they needed to make the decisions to govern themselves.
Today the corporate owned media controls the news and thereby controls opinions and education. Should the US pass laws making it illegal for large corporations with conflicts of interest to own media?[/QUOTE]
Yes, I agree with that.
I look back fondly on Walter Cronkite, and the news of that era, which just stated what happened every day and left us to discuss and form our own opinions about the events of the day.
It's too bad that the younger people grew up with corporate media and will never know 'true' reporting; reporting without an agenda...
Over the past 50 years nearly all the media has been purchased by mega corporations and the uber-wealthy.
They now have the ability to mold and shape the news into any form and ideology they desire.
When the United States was formed, freedom of the press was recognized as a cornerstone of Democracy, as it provided the people with the information they needed to make the decisions to govern themselves.
Today the corporate owned media controls the news and thereby controls opinions and education. Should the US pass laws making it illegal for large corporations with conflicts of interest to own media?[/QUOTE]
Yes, I agree with that.
I look back fondly on Walter Cronkite, and the news of that era, which just stated what happened every day and left us to discuss and form our own opinions about the events of the day.
It's too bad that the younger people grew up with corporate media and will never know 'true' reporting; reporting without an agenda...
Jeez, I had no idea CBS wasn't a corporation in the 60's!
Over the past 50 years nearly all the media has been purchased by mega corporations and the uber-wealthy.
They now have the ability to mold and shape the news into any form and ideology they desire.
When the United States was formed, freedom of the press was recognized as a cornerstone of Democracy, as it provided the people with the information they needed to make the decisions to govern themselves.
Today the corporate owned media controls the news and thereby controls opinions and education.
Should the US pass laws making it illegal for large corporations with conflicts of interest to own media?
Hmm, I don't know. I must think about it.
I will say that, back in my youth, we certainly got our news from 'big corporations', which is what CBS, NBC and ABC were considered. However, the news section of each company (both radio and TV) prided itself on being 'independent' of the parent corporation (which is why so many people trusted people like Walter Cronkite, Frank Reynolds, Huntley and Brinkley, etc).
I used to read the Wall Street Journal. Back in the day, it was literally a "Wall Street" paper, and focused almost exclusively on business matters, with the odd 'news piece' and editorial concerning politics, etc, thrown in.
However, after Mr. Murdoch's News Corporation bought a controlling interest, the paper changed, and now has more mainstream news and a slant towards the right. It is not the same as it was, and I quit reading it a year or so ago.
I miss the days when most major cities had competing newspapers, all privately owned, with morning and evening deliveries.
Yet, in some ways, the 'press' is as free as it ever was. Thanks to the Internet revolution, you have a lot more choices. Maybe the vast array of choices is why so many outlets are choosing to focus on a target audience, rather than strive to be utterly 'non-partisan' in delivering 'news'.
I believe the UK has some type of law you are suggesting. I wonder how it works. Part of the problem would be defining 'conflict of interest', I suppose.
There is no such thing as an unbiased opinion, and there never will be. Instead of calling for the government to pass more laws that cost money (that we don't have) to enforce, why don't people just watch MSNBC and Fox back to back? Get both sides of the bias and make your own decision from there.
hnsq -
My suggestion is very sane. What is insane is trusting privately held corporate media to report anything but self serving propaganda. Governments may be occasionally inept but the corporatists are continuously inimical to any threat to their primary monopoly on information.
I'll be happy if we can just ban pharmaceutical advertising. There is no reason for folks to "ask their doctor" about any drug. If the doctor treating you thinks it's warranted, they will bring it up. We don't need people who feel a little unhappy running to their doctors and asking for anti-depressants, and that's what we have now.
I think THAT alone is responsible for our government problems. Because those drugs keep people tame.
Somehow, in the last few decades, people have decided that if they're depressed, they either need to get more depressed or take a pill.
NO, your other option is to open a can of whoop-ass on what is depressing you, and take care of it. Nobody does that anymore, and yet people wonder why. People wonder WHY our government and big corporations have gotten away with so much.
Social engineering, which comes from corporations owning the news, and pharmaceuticals. Call me crazy, but that's my theory.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
