The TV news stranglehold by the right wing finally makes sense.

[Cleita]

On "The Ring of Fire" this afternoon, they brought up that the reason everything we see on the television is RW propaganda is because the big advertising dollars like from PHARMA and other industries won't pay for programs that have left wing pundits and spin (the truth actually). So they don't care if the numbers are low. They just want to make sure that what news does get aired is favorable to their interests.

I actually did a Nielson Family survey a couple of months ago for a week. I think they didn't like what I was watching because it was all things like the Comedy Channel, the SciFi channel, HBO and LinkTV. Then I dissed CNN and the other cable shows in a place you can write your views in. I said that I used to watch CNN all the time until it became the Bush propaganda channel. They didn't ask me to do another survey, but I get it now.

:grr:

So what do we have to do to bring real news back to television? We need a law that says advertisers can't determine the content of any news programs, or better yet, maybe we can convince HBO to use one of their channels to put up commercial free twenty four hour news as part of their package. I would pay extra. I know it would be bad for the poor who can't afford HBO, but maybe those of us better off could adopt a viewer or viewers like DUers are adopted by other DUers to get a gold star. We have to do something about this awful situation.

[havocmom]

1. One thing to do, which works for the RW, is let advertisers know

we won't support them with our business if they support RW propaganda programing.

LOTS of letters to LOTS of advertisers, followed up by drops in sales, will change the way TV looks. They are corporate, but they worship the bottom line. If advertisers get beat up in the market place for sponsoring bad programming, it will start to change.

[blm]

2. It's the drop in sales for a PROLONGED PERIOD as the ONLY way to get

their attention, because they save a ton of money on Bush's taxbreaks alone, so it would really have to be a sustained effort to finally hurt them even a little.

[havocmom]

4. Yep. So make your purchases carefully

and let companies know why you buy what you do and why you don't buy from companies that sponser propaganda.

Hey, we managed without grapes...

[NinetySix]

6. Part of the trouble with that is who the advertisers are....

How do we boycott McDonnel Douglas or Boeing or the Government of Saudi Arabia? Ever buy a 747 or a barrel of oil? These groups contribute big bucks to the advertising coffers of the "news" channels. Do they pay the same rate as every other advertiser for their airtime, or do they chip in more for added influence? No way to know for sure, but so long as "news" relies on corporate underwriting, it will remain filtered information rather than unadulterated fact. Investigative journalism and contextual analysis may well be dead in the media which rely upon corporate good will for their funding -- another reason PBS's neck is never allowed to stray far from the block.

[blm]

3. That's what happened to newspapers for the most part, too.

.

[KoKo]

5. I remember when Pharma/Food Co's like Kraft/Hallmark and others used

to produce quality programming. Even the Soaps were sponsered by Proctor and Gamble and Ivory Soap. At that time the thought was "Mainstream" programming to get your brand accepted by people. And to do it the Sponsers had to abide by old Network Guidelines like (do not show "thighs" or couples in a "double bed" and make sure that everything is "clean" because Moms get upset with their kiddies hearing stuff they ask questions about.

Well...times changed and tastes change and the little old ladies of the networks (Censors) who had problems with "thigh views" and "tastefulness" went the way of the times...then Reagan through out the "Fairness Doctrine" and when "Cable" came on companies had a much broader group to attract and nudity and whatever was the way to go. After all...when you broaden the landscape for advertising and have folks who want info...you "go with the flow."

Some parts of the old...I wish could come back. But, there would be a HUGE argument on DU even about what "tasteful" is. And, if one has the right to know which new drug could possibly save their lives or the lives of their loved ones. PROBLEM IS...most of the Big Pharma ads and others today, may do more harm than good. But the Cables and Networks don't have staff to screen what we see and the public doesn't cry out for it...

So we have "Flow Control/Osteoporosis/Viagra/Diabetes (with a very large, overweight man talking about how he monitors himself) and Heart Attacks and Breast Cancer and whatever all we suffer from" bombarding us 24/7.

Fear tactics with medical statements not "peer reviewed" as to their accuracy..not screened and everyone wants the BIG FAST BUCK and it's all Sports and Teams and who is winning.

:shrug: