Bernie Sanders Calls For A Democratic Fox News (5-7-16)

[Bernie93]

[link:

|

[SFnomad]

1. Why do we need to stoop to the Faux "News" level by lying and creating a propaganda news outlet?

The truth should be enough.

[Cal33]

13. Bernie didn't mean that we should lie like Fox News. He meant that Democrats should have

a news media of their own, as powerful as Fox News. We'll be telling the truth, and also
pointing out their propaganda and lies each time they make them, and then some.

I've been advocating this several times in the last few years. Dems weren't interested.
We have nothing to compete against the Republicans with in this area. No wonder
they win so often, even when they have nothing to offer the American people but
trouble. They can cheat and lie, and there's nothing that we can do about them. It's
like a boxer fighting his opponent with one hand tied behind his back.

Here's the link written back in January, 2016. I had gone somewhat into detail:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016141074

[brooklynite]

19. If you have a network that's telling the truth, it doesn't have to be "Democratic"

I think too many people on Democratic side are as desirous for media that doesn't challenge their preconceptions as the Republicans are.

Consider how many people say they watch TYT on Primary nights; how does a liberal voice make the facts of who won and who lost any different?

[AgingAmerican]

20. It's called 'messaging'

[uponit7771]

58. That's all Sanders has is messaging, not practical policies and the network like that would be no

... better than the messaging FAUX news

[Armstead]

24. What doesn't get covered or talked about....and different opinions than...

the combination of NY/DC cocktail party chatter and shameless hucksterism and shallow pandering that currently passes for journalism.

Did you ever watch Bill Moyers? He and his staff were journalists with a point of view -- but they also covered the news seriously. And Moyers himself often interviewed or led discussions with GOPers and otehr right wingers that were civil discussions that were actually informative too -- not just battling talking points.

[Adrahil]

32. I like Moyers.

I don't always agree with him, though I often do. But he has his own editorial control. I, for one, do not want Debbie Wasser-Schultz deciding what gets on DNC-TV. It's a terrible idea.

[Armstead]

36. I think what Sanders was referring to (not well stated) was....

a news channel that has that level of depth and a basically liberal/progressive perspective

Anything with any journalistic standards, and not locked into the current corporate frame, would be an improvement.

I actually miss Al jahzeera America...Wish they'd had more time to develop.

[Adrahil]

39. I'd be for that.... but party funding is a bad idea.

Party funding means party editorial control. Don't want that.

Al-J A was kinda doomed from the start. I thought they were pretty decent, but they were hurt by the name. Yeah, it's xenophobic, but there ya go.

[Armstead]

42. A democratic party backed thing would be a bad...But I don't think that's what he meant...

In fact, considering his attitude towards the Democratic Establishment I'd fairly certain it isn't.

I think he was referring to an independent network that would be a counterpoint to Fix news

[Adrahil]

52. But that is exactly what he said

"...the Democrat Party, for a start, starts funding the equivalent of Fox Television"

Though perhaps he mispoke. If he did, I wish he would clarify it.

[Armstead]

53. Here's some info

2005

http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-media-ownership-and-telecommunications/

BERNIE SANDERS ON MEDIA OWNERSHIP & TELECOMMUNICATIONS
In the United States today, six media conglomerates control almost all forms of mainstream media. Consequently, fewer and fewer people are determining what we watch, hear, and read — compromising our access to accurate and unbiased information.

According to Bernie Sanders, this violates the core principles of American government as “we cannot live in a vibrant democracy unless people get divergent sources of information.” To combat this problem, Bernie has consistently called out media conglomerates on their dishonest practices. He has fought for affordable cable television prices, supports net neutrality, and wants to protect and encourage independent news sources across all media platforms.

Media Consolidation: We should discourage media market consolidation and create space for diverse and substantive journalism, while encouraging competition between cable companies in order to lower prices. We should buttress and support local, independent media outlets.

Internet Access & Net Neutrality: The Internet should be free and open, and Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their networks equally, without prioritizing some customers, sites, or services over others.


Media Consolidation

Broadcasting and telecommunications services in the U.S. are largely controlled by six corporate conglomerates: Disney, CBS, News Corp., Viacom, Time Warner, and Comcast. The case is similar when it comes to print media and radio. Gannett Company, for example, owns over 1,000 newspapers and 600 magazines nationwide, including USA Today. iHeartMedia (formerly ClearChannel) owns 850 radio stations in the U.S. alone.

When these corporations absorb or overshadow smaller communications outlets, it limits variety and diversity in the content we consume. This lack of diversity and overarching media control by a few owners even concerns President Barack Obama and former President Jimmy Carter.

Why does this matter? As civil and human rights coalition The Leadership Conference puts it, “access to the media by the broadest sector of society is crucial to ensuring that diverse viewpoints are presented to the American people, and that all sectors of society are accurately depicted.”

But there aren’t just six TV networks! I have hundreds of different news channels and shows to choose from.
True, but more than 90 percent of these different channels — whether they report news, broadcast sports, or re-run sitcoms — are subsidiaries of the same six networks. For example, in the past ten years alone, Disney has acquired more than five different media outlets including Pixar Animation and Marvel Studios.



Wow, how did only a handful of corporations get a hold of all the major networks?
When President Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law, it eased restrictions on media cross-ownership so that one company — or person — could own multiple media businesses (like broadcast stations, cable stations, newspapers, and websites). Though the law was intended to increase competition by reducing regulation, it instead “allowed large corporations to strengthen their dominance through mergers and buyouts.”

But just because these networks and stations are all owned by the same people, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re biased, right?
While the jury is still out on the effects of media selection bias, there is research that points to its occurrence and influence. Additionally, the Pew Research Center has shown how the current media landscape contributes to political polarization. Community-based media outlets are directly impacted with limited local control over programming decisions and independently produced programming.

So what does Bernie have to say about it?
Bernie has argued that this current situation is antithetical to the pillars of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press guaranteed by the First Amendment:

“In my view, it will be very dangerous for our country and communities around America when one company is able to own a local newspaper, television station and radio station. Opposing points of view won’t be heard and our democracy will suffer.”

He has been consistently outspoken against media consolidation and has “long fought against the unfair prices of our nation’s large cable TV monopolies that raise rates on consumers year after year, and often reduce channels available under basic cable packages.”



Has Bernie tried to do anything about it?
Bernie has consistently opposed media consolidation including, voting against the Telecommunications Act of 1996 mentioned above. Each time the FCC has tried to weaken media ownership regulations, Bernie has been on the front lines fighting for stronger protections for diversity in media.


Internet Access & Net Neutrality

In 2011, the United Nations declared access to the Internet to be a human right. Not only is it the largest source of global information exchange, our economy relies on it. After all, you’re on this site learning about Bernie’s positions and policies right now. And the fact that it’s completely decentralized is what makes it so useful.

Everyone knows the Internet is great. What does it have to do with politics?
There’s something called “net neutrality,” which refers to the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their communications networks on an equal basis. That means that ISPs should not charge different rates to different customers or content-providers and should not give certain data special priority over their networks while interfering with the transmission of other information.

OK, but what’s wrong with that? It is their Internet, right?
Nope. It’s ours.

See, advocates argue that permitting preferential treatment of web traffic would put newer Internet companies at a disadvantage and threaten innovation. This is a fundamental free speech issue that could give corporations even more control over our access to information.

Want to know more about the case for net neutrality? Check out this video:


So where does Bernie stand on the issue?
Bernie has consistently fought to maintain the Internet as an affordable service with free access.


Want to learn more about his position? Learn more about Bernie’s record and proposed policies privacy & digital rights.

Democracy Now

We turn now to Congress member Bernie Sanders, who came here to the University of Illinois for a conference on freedom of the press this week and talked about his own experiences with public broadcasting.

REP. BERNIE SANDERS: If you are concerned about the environment, if you are concerned about women’s rights, health care, foreign policy, Iraq, the economy, if you are concerned about any of those issues, you must be concerned about the media. And what people like Bob and John Nichols and others have been saying for years, which I fully agree with, is we have got to make corporate control over the media a political issue in the same way that health care and education and Iraq is a political issue. And that means that when somebody runs for office and comes before you and they talk about the issues, you raise your hand and say, what are you going to do about corporate control over the media? And after the candidate recovers after his fall on the ground, he or she will start responding, but we have got to make it a political issue, because it is as important or more important than any other issue that we talk about.

Let me begin by telling you how I first recognized that media was a huge issue. Way back in the 1970s before I became Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, I did a little bit of independent writing. And I did a video, if you like, not quite a film, on the life of Eugene Victor Debs, who some of you know was one of great labor and socialist heroes in America. And I did it because nobody in Vermont, none of the kids, and kids in America today do not know who Debs was, as they do not know the names of many great American heroes. We did the video, and it was not very sophisticated, but it was a fairly — I thought it was a fairly good video, done for a few thousand dollars. And we took it to our local public television station. And we said, "Here is a video, and we would like you to run it." And they looked at it. One month went by, two months went by, and three months went by, and then they finally wrote back and said, "Sorry, Mr. Sanders, we cannot use your video, because it doesn’t tell both sides of the story." Because as you know, on all programming that you see on public television, you always hear the socialist and capitalist point of view, the progressive and conservative. That’s the way it is. So they couldn’t put it on. Well, that got me a little bit upset.

And it turned out that in Vermont there were other people who were not necessarily political, but they were local filmmakers, Vermont filmmakers, and they were unable to get their films on Vermont public television. The result of that is we started a little bit of a movement, and we put pressure on our local public television station. And the outcome of it was one of the great nights of my life that I will never forget. The University of Vermont, which owned the public television station agreed to negotiate with us, and we worked out a town meeting of the air on prime time, three hours, prime time Vermont public television, to discuss what should public television in Vermont be. So, we had about 15 people from the establishment, who thought the status quo was good, and we brought 15 people who wanted change. And the guy who was moderating it opened up the phone lines. And this is the truth: so many phone calls came in that the phone line to that station in Winooski, Vermont actually broke down.

So, I got the clue that media was an important issue, and as Bob mentioned, I think our office held the very first town meeting on corporate control over the media a number of years ago. Jeff Cohen, who is one of the founders of FAIR, came to Vermont, and Bob McChesney and John Nichols have been up. We held a meeting with Michael Copps, who on media consolidation has been doing an outstanding job as a member of the FCC. We had 600 people coming out to St. Michael’s College to discuss that issue. So anyone who tells you that media is not an important issue is missing the boat completely. It is enormously important, and the people of America want serious discussion and resolution on the issue.

Now, let me tell you why the perspective that I can bring in with a very distinguished panel is that of a politician, an elected official, who tries to use his office to educate and organize, as well as to pass legislation and do the things the members of Congress do. And let me tell you some of the concerns that I have with what’s going on in the media today. Am I concerned that when I am asked to speak about an issue like Iraq, I get six seconds to respond? Yep. I’m concerned. Because I can’t, and you can’t, and our panelists can’t, and nobody can discuss an issue intelligently in a six-second sound bite, which is what dominates television, which is the most important medium in our country. Am I concerned that, by definition, corporately-owned media is pro-corporate? Yeah, I am very concerned about that. We see the manifestations of that all over the place. We saw the difference between how the corporate media treated a moderate Democrat like Bill Clinton, as opposed to a conservative Republican like George Bush. We saw how they covered the lead up and the war in Iraq so that millions of Americans, in order to get unbiased news, had to go to the CBC in Canada or the BBC. Am I concerned about that? I sure am. Am I concerned that the media seems to think that one of the major issues facing civilization today is the Michael Jackson case? Or maybe — break it to you: Britney Spears is pregnant! It’s true. And we’ll have many months of discussion about that or the local trials or the horrible crimes. Am I concerned about that? I sure am.

But of all those concerns and many more, let me tell you what my deeper concern is. My concern is not just what the media reports or discusses and the slants that it has on the issues — that’s important — but the deeper concern is what the media does not talk about.

[Adrahil]

54. Yeah, that's great. Do you accept he actually SAID it? NT

[Armstead]

55. Yeah he did. I think he misspoke. Trying to pack a lot into a short statement

Watch the top video from 2005. It's short and gives some context to the present campaign.

[Adrahil]

57. Fair enough. Thanks! NT

[Fast Walker 52]

43. yeah, I agree

[still_one]

45. Exactly.

[workinclasszero]

37. Yup. Fox "news" is a lie machine and Sanders's wants one of his own?

Its already been invented anyway...its reddit+DU+JPR.

[Skwmom]

2. We already have it. It is called MSNBC and CNN.

If Bernie really set down and spent a few days watching them, he would realize that.

What we need is an HONEST non corporate news channel.

[NurseJackie]

3. Well, until then you've always got "Russia Today" (RT) ... that seems to be popular with you guys.

I keep seeing that "Russia Today" green logo on the ticker-scroller line of the videos you guys frequently post... so I think it's safe to assume it's a source that you guys trust.

What we need is an HONEST non corporate news channel.

Well ... good news! Russia Today "is a Russian government-funded television network that runs cable and satellite television channels directed to audiences outside of Russia as well as providing Internet content in various languages, including Russian."

Only ...

RT has been called a propaganda outlet for the Russian government[10][11][12] and its foreign policy[10][12][13][14] by news reporters,[15] including former RT reporters.[16][17][18] RT has also been accused of spreading disinformation.[19][20][21][22] The United Kingdom media regulator, Ofcom, has repeatedly found RT to have breached rules on impartiality, and of broadcasting "materially misleading" content.[23][24][25] RT states that it offers a Russian perspective on global events.[3]

... so that kinda sucks.

[Fast Walker 52]

46. No single news source is trustworthy, and RT has some propaganda elements

Mainstream US news is filled with propaganda too.

RT does have some stories that are neglected by other outlets.

[B Calm]

5. Could have fooled me, they are mouth pieces for Trump

and Hillary.

[Skwmom]

12. Yes, they built Trump up BUT they favor Hillary. They have attacked Trump but never Hillary.

On Morning Joe they will say a few things only to give Camp Clinton soundbites to sell the media hates me b.s. meme to her supporters

[Cal33]

14. Hi mom: Juse read the post right above yours. I've tried several times to get Dems.

interested in having a news media of our own -- few members every replied! Sure
it's a mighty big job ahead. But we've got to start somewhere.

[Skwmom]

15. The current group that controls the Democratic Party are happy with MSNBC and CNN.

[Cal33]

18. These are the Third-Way Democrats. MSNBC and CNN are part of the Main Stream Media, controlled

by Corporate America. Progressives are certainly not happy with them.

[Armstead]

25. Bernie knows all about media bias...He has been fighting for media reform for years

[GreatGazoo]

4. kick

[KingFlorez]

6. Isn't news supposed to be news?

Calling for a propaganda outlet is really playing into what is wrong with the system. If you need a network to prop you up, then you are not a real leader.

[Armstead]

26. This.............

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511918911#post24

[Adrahil]

7. SO... a party-funded propaganda outlet.

What could go wrong?

That's a terrible idea Bernie. Terrible.

[AgingAmerican]

21. FOX isn't funded by the GOP

Please tell us what would 'go wrong' with our own media messaging outlet...

[Adrahil]

29. Really? heh. Wow.

I woulda thought that almost everyone here would see a problem with a politically-funded propaganda network.

Perhaps we can call it the "Ministry of Truth."

Mike Pence actually proposed a governmental new agency (under his control) here in Indiana last year. He was rightly raked over the coals for it.

[AgingAmerican]

33. IT wouldn't be politically funded.

So please tell us what would 'go wrong' with our own media messaging outlet? Not a government funded news agency, not a 'ministry of truth'. Nothing government funded or connected.

Please stop trying to skirt the issue and answer the question.

[Adrahil]

35. Did you hear the quote?

He said he wanted the Democratic party to fund it. It was in the Maddow interview linked above.

I'm all for a private network representing our side. Bring it on.

[Armstead]

27. This

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511918911#post24

[nolawarlock]

8. So this recent addition to the Democratic Party ...

... believes that there should be a Democratic-focussed propaganda media machine?

How about just reporting the news?

[seabeyond]

9. "Democratic-focused propaganda media machine" His 70's flirt with communist phase is kickin' in. Nt

[Bjorn Against]

11. And your McCarthyist phase is kicking in

[AgingAmerican]

22. You sound right out of the 1950s

[Armstead]

30. yes it was a cloe call -- We almost succumbed to the Red Menace

[ContinentalOp]

10. Is he aware of what year it is?

His "break up the banks" mantra made me wonder if he thought it was still 2008. Then he started talking up the old Howard Dean 50 state strategy from 2006. But a call for a Democratic Fox News sounds like something people on the left were talking about around 2000 before Current TV, Air America, and the popularity of MSNBC. Maybe he's moving backwards in time. It's like the Curious Case of Bernie Button!

[Armstead]

31. better than trying to take us back to faux nostalgia for the 90's

[Cheese Sandwich]

16. MSNBC already is the Democrats' Fox News

[Fast Walker 52]

38. Bullshit... it's only liberal for about 2 hours a night

Morning Joe is on even longer than that and is conservative-leaning crap.

[Maedhros]

49. "Democrat" is not equivalent to "Liberal"

Democrats are Big Finance, Republicans are Big Oil. They are fighting over places at the feeding trough.

[goldent]

17. You have to get people to watch it.

I think that was the problem with "Air America" that was supposed to counter right-wing talk radio.

[Tarc]

23. The media should be independent of any political party, we're not the USSR

creating Pravda here.

[wendylaroux]

28. how about just an opinion free network?

just give us the facts,we can take it from there.

[Fast Walker 52]

40. that's almost impossible since so many things can be slanted... even prioritization of stories

can be biased.

[wendylaroux]

48. I can dream.

[LaydeeBug]

34. I agree that we need a left leaning channel...Fox news distorts things

I need news channels to tell the truth, and uncover facts instead of just covering the news.

Man! Wouldn't it be *great* if Bernie could help spearhead something like this in the upcoming administration?

[Fast Walker 52]

41. Not his best idea... but I think I know what he meant. We have very little left-leaning coverage

in the country.

[CrowCityDem]

44. They tried with Air America. It didn't work, because progressives don't listen to as much groupthink

[Juicy_Bellows]

47. I love the message but reality in America won't tolerate it.

We seem to want to know the latest deets on celebrity ass size and who is schlepping who. Policy discussion is boring and dull and we can't be bothered with facts. TPTB have fought long and hard to make media what it is and that is the appeal to the lowest common denominator. Keep 'em dumb and panicked - it's the American way.

[Maedhros]

50. I actually take issue with Bernie on this.

We need non-partisan news, with actual objective journalism and not "infotainment."

[TheBlackAdder]

51. A Democratic News Network that makes shit up? Prereq is a lot of stupid and angry sheeple.

[Armstead]

56. Some Context Here

This is what he was saying in 2005 about the media. Still relevant today....Difference now is that Bernie has at least brought these issues into the political debate as a candidate.

The question now is do we stash them back in the closet once the campaign is done?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511929343


-------------------------
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-media-ownership-and-telecommunications/

BERNIE SANDERS ON MEDIA OWNERSHIP & TELECOMMUNICATIONS
In the United States today, six media conglomerates control almost all forms of mainstream media. Consequently, fewer and fewer people are determining what we watch, hear, and read — compromising our access to accurate and unbiased information.

According to Bernie Sanders, this violates the core principles of American government as “we cannot live in a vibrant democracy unless people get divergent sources of information.” To combat this problem, Bernie has consistently called out media conglomerates on their dishonest practices. He has fought for affordable cable television prices, supports net neutrality, and wants to protect and encourage independent news sources across all media platforms.

Media Consolidation: We should discourage media market consolidation and create space for diverse and substantive journalism, while encouraging competition between cable companies in order to lower prices. We should buttress and support local, independent media outlets.

Internet Access & Net Neutrality: The Internet should be free and open, and Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their networks equally, without prioritizing some customers, sites, or services over others.


Media Consolidation

Broadcasting and telecommunications services in the U.S. are largely controlled by six corporate conglomerates: Disney, CBS, News Corp., Viacom, Time Warner, and Comcast. The case is similar when it comes to print media and radio. Gannett Company, for example, owns over 1,000 newspapers and 600 magazines nationwide, including USA Today. iHeartMedia (formerly ClearChannel) owns 850 radio stations in the U.S. alone.

When these corporations absorb or overshadow smaller communications outlets, it limits variety and diversity in the content we consume. This lack of diversity and overarching media control by a few owners even concerns President Barack Obama and former President Jimmy Carter.

Why does this matter? As civil and human rights coalition The Leadership Conference puts it, “access to the media by the broadest sector of society is crucial to ensuring that diverse viewpoints are presented to the American people, and that all sectors of society are accurately depicted.”

But there aren’t just six TV networks! I have hundreds of different news channels and shows to choose from.
True, but more than 90 percent of these different channels — whether they report news, broadcast sports, or re-run sitcoms — are subsidiaries of the same six networks. For example, in the past ten years alone, Disney has acquired more than five different media outlets including Pixar Animation and Marvel Studios.



Wow, how did only a handful of corporations get a hold of all the major networks?
When President Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law, it eased restrictions on media cross-ownership so that one company — or person — could own multiple media businesses (like broadcast stations, cable stations, newspapers, and websites). Though the law was intended to increase competition by reducing regulation, it instead “allowed large corporations to strengthen their dominance through mergers and buyouts.”

But just because these networks and stations are all owned by the same people, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re biased, right?
While the jury is still out on the effects of media selection bias, there is research that points to its occurrence and influence. Additionally, the Pew Research Center has shown how the current media landscape contributes to political polarization. Community-based media outlets are directly impacted with limited local control over programming decisions and independently produced programming.

So what does Bernie have to say about it?
Bernie has argued that this current situation is antithetical to the pillars of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press guaranteed by the First Amendment:

“In my view, it will be very dangerous for our country and communities around America when one company is able to own a local newspaper, television station and radio station. Opposing points of view won’t be heard and our democracy will suffer.”

He has been consistently outspoken against media consolidation and has “long fought against the unfair prices of our nation’s large cable TV monopolies that raise rates on consumers year after year, and often reduce channels available under basic cable packages.”



Has Bernie tried to do anything about it?
Bernie has consistently opposed media consolidation including, voting against the Telecommunications Act of 1996 mentioned above. Each time the FCC has tried to weaken media ownership regulations, Bernie has been on the front lines fighting for stronger protections for diversity in media.


Internet Access & Net Neutrality

In 2011, the United Nations declared access to the Internet to be a human right. Not only is it the largest source of global information exchange, our economy relies on it. After all, you’re on this site learning about Bernie’s positions and policies right now. And the fact that it’s completely decentralized is what makes it so useful.

Everyone knows the Internet is great. What does it have to do with politics?
There’s something called “net neutrality,” which refers to the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their communications networks on an equal basis. That means that ISPs should not charge different rates to different customers or content-providers and should not give certain data special priority over their networks while interfering with the transmission of other information.

OK, but what’s wrong with that? It is their Internet, right?
Nope. It’s ours.

See, advocates argue that permitting preferential treatment of web traffic would put newer Internet companies at a disadvantage and threaten innovation. This is a fundamental free speech issue that could give corporations even more control over our access to information.

Want to know more about the case for net neutrality? Check out this video:


So where does Bernie stand on the issue?
Bernie has consistently fought to maintain the Internet as an affordable service with free access.


Want to learn more about his position? Learn more about Bernie’s record and proposed policies privacy & digital rights.

Democracy Now

We turn now to Congress member Bernie Sanders, who came here to the University of Illinois for a conference on freedom of the press this week and talked about his own experiences with public broadcasting.

REP. BERNIE SANDERS: If you are concerned about the environment, if you are concerned about women’s rights, health care, foreign policy, Iraq, the economy, if you are concerned about any of those issues, you must be concerned about the media. And what people like Bob and John Nichols and others have been saying for years, which I fully agree with, is we have got to make corporate control over the media a political issue in the same way that health care and education and Iraq is a political issue. And that means that when somebody runs for office and comes before you and they talk about the issues, you raise your hand and say, what are you going to do about corporate control over the media? And after the candidate recovers after his fall on the ground, he or she will start responding, but we have got to make it a political issue, because it is as important or more important than any other issue that we talk about.

Let me begin by telling you how I first recognized that media was a huge issue. Way back in the 1970s before I became Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, I did a little bit of independent writing. And I did a video, if you like, not quite a film, on the life of Eugene Victor Debs, who some of you know was one of great labor and socialist heroes in America. And I did it because nobody in Vermont, none of the kids, and kids in America today do not know who Debs was, as they do not know the names of many great American heroes. We did the video, and it was not very sophisticated, but it was a fairly — I thought it was a fairly good video, done for a few thousand dollars. And we took it to our local public television station. And we said, "Here is a video, and we would like you to run it." And they looked at it. One month went by, two months went by, and three months went by, and then they finally wrote back and said, "Sorry, Mr. Sanders, we cannot use your video, because it doesn’t tell both sides of the story." Because as you know, on all programming that you see on public television, you always hear the socialist and capitalist point of view, the progressive and conservative. That’s the way it is. So they couldn’t put it on. Well, that got me a little bit upset.

And it turned out that in Vermont there were other people who were not necessarily political, but they were local filmmakers, Vermont filmmakers, and they were unable to get their films on Vermont public television. The result of that is we started a little bit of a movement, and we put pressure on our local public television station. And the outcome of it was one of the great nights of my life that I will never forget. The University of Vermont, which owned the public television station agreed to negotiate with us, and we worked out a town meeting of the air on prime time, three hours, prime time Vermont public television, to discuss what should public television in Vermont be. So, we had about 15 people from the establishment, who thought the status quo was good, and we brought 15 people who wanted change. And the guy who was moderating it opened up the phone lines. And this is the truth: so many phone calls came in that the phone line to that station in Winooski, Vermont actually broke down.

So, I got the clue that media was an important issue, and as Bob mentioned, I think our office held the very first town meeting on corporate control over the media a number of years ago. Jeff Cohen, who is one of the founders of FAIR, came to Vermont, and Bob McChesney and John Nichols have been up. We held a meeting with Michael Copps, who on media consolidation has been doing an outstanding job as a member of the FCC. We had 600 people coming out to St. Michael’s College to discuss that issue. So anyone who tells you that media is not an important issue is missing the boat completely. It is enormously important, and the people of America want serious discussion and resolution on the issue.

Now, let me tell you why the perspective that I can bring in with a very distinguished panel is that of a politician, an elected official, who tries to use his office to educate and organize, as well as to pass legislation and do the things the members of Congress do. And let me tell you some of the concerns that I have with what’s going on in the media today. Am I concerned that when I am asked to speak about an issue like Iraq, I get six seconds to respond? Yep. I’m concerned. Because I can’t, and you can’t, and our panelists can’t, and nobody can discuss an issue intelligently in a six-second sound bite, which is what dominates television, which is the most important medium in our country. Am I concerned that, by definition, corporately-owned media is pro-corporate? Yeah, I am very concerned about that. We see the manifestations of that all over the place. We saw the difference between how the corporate media treated a moderate Democrat like Bill Clinton, as opposed to a conservative Republican like George Bush. We saw how they covered the lead up and the war in Iraq so that millions of Americans, in order to get unbiased news, had to go to the CBC in Canada or the BBC. Am I concerned about that? I sure am. Am I concerned that the media seems to think that one of the major issues facing civilization today is the Michael Jackson case? Or maybe — break it to you: Britney Spears is pregnant! It’s true. And we’ll have many months of discussion about that or the local trials or the horrible crimes. Am I concerned about that? I sure am.

But of all those concerns and many more, let me tell you what my deeper concern is. My concern is not just what the media reports or discusses and the slants that it has on the issues — that’s important — but the deeper concern is what the media does not talk about.