Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Media sets Democrats agenda

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 06:06 PM
Original message
Media sets Democrats agenda
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 06:31 PM by happydreams
The Media influencing OUR politics.


I am so sick and tired of having the corporate fascist loving media set the agenda for debate in OUR politics. The ease with which they do it is sickening.

On Nov 7th we were all happy to see a check on Bush's dictatorial powers. But it pissed me off how the Press, the Press that cheerlead the Iraq war and never asked Bush a question he couldn't evade easily, tell us who the Speaker of the House was going to be BEFORE the election and long before the decision. "First woman speaker....most likely candidate..."blah, blah, blah-&**&^%,blah.

The power of the first message is a strong one indeed. We saw it in 2000 when Bush took on that Presidential aura before the final decision. In my research I found the case of Senator LaFollete, a populist democrat, who was misquoted in an AP article in 1918 that destroyed his career. He was depicted as soft on defense. AP even apologized but the damage was done. LaFollete's real crime was revealing the concentration of media ownership by the banking industry. His career had been impeccable up to that point, he never recovered and the Captain's of Conciousness never forgot how easy it is to manage the public's perceptions, time and again they would use the "soft on defense" tactic against the democrats.



You can see the after effects of the Press setting the agenda by the uphill battle people here at DU are now fighting who want to even suggest that other options beside Pelosi are possible. Those who "attack" the idea of Pelosi as a shoo-in are "divisive, extreme, etc.; thus feeding into the fears of the "divided Left" syndrome.

Maybe Pelosi should be the next Speaker and maybe she shouldn't. That is not the issue. It just would sure be nice to know that the discussion began on a tabula rasa and not as a reaction to a pre-set agenda of a Press that, along with Bush, is largely responsible for the Iraq horror and, by way of parenthesis, similarly interested in keeping its own fat out of the fire when the cooking begins.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes. First, we need to have a hearing on the impact of media ..
on elections and the process in general. We can get several media experts to testify before the committee, I am sure. After a thorough hearing, we would need to pass some sort of legislation to make sure the media has not become too big and inefficient to serve the people. Too many newspapers and TV networks in just a few hands is not healthy. Yes, that should be investigated. I wonder how the media would report it??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Lots of fun. It's all about keeping people informed of the power of
Media in shaping events before they happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Well, guess who will chair that committee come January? And why do you think
the corporate media has kept up a drumbeat against Kerry since June 2003?

Now Kerry has subpoena power.


Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"

Commission Decision May Violate Laws Protecting Small Businesses; Kerry to File Resolution of Disapproval

Monday, June 2, 2003

WASHINGTON - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.
Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said:

"Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

"Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #5
21. Thanks for digging that up
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think you're right about the MSM setting things up that favor their
points of view and that just pay off for them.

The people have very little political say-so anymore and I still don't think our votes are even being fairly counted. I think the WWW is scaring the hell out of the MSM and the crooked self-serving politicians at this stage! Now is not the time to ease off on demanding that our country be a nation of laws as the founders intended, instead of a nation of rich men and an entitled ruling class.

I don't trust the media any more than I trust George Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. The Internet is giving them one helluva fight. I hope we
can eventually get to where they won't be setting the agenda. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. OMG did you see tweety yesterday. Yelling that the Dems better do something!
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 07:23 PM by xultar
What is he on crack? Dems aren't even in charge yet and the MSM is accusing us of not doing anything.

The MSM has fanned the flames since the results came in on Tuesday. I can't believe people are buying the MSM bullshit. We didn't even get a week to enjoy the win.

And the shit with Reid. They knew that before Tuesday they tried to peddle it a while back. Why are they bringing it up now?

Come on people. WAKE UP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. Fuck corporate media. Neither they nor the republicans get to set OUR agenda.
We need to stop giving them any attention at all. Viewership and ratings are all that they understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Blah blah Making-too-much-sense-again blahde blah blah
Hey there porphyrian. Thanks for those kicks today and for your Media thread earlier. I missed all the stuff you were commenting on but got the point. And was surprised that the Hartmann show/thread sank so quick....

.... because those issues IMHO are top of the heap, Hartmann articulates/educates so well and RE: the Euphemedia (as DUer Senator aptly calls it) there were many many many posts immediately after Nov. 7 criticizing corpomedia power and influence on our lives and on our elections.

The dots connect..............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Eh, what are you gonna do...?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. You already said, dear P, and those rants had all the right energy behind 'em
Use our attention/eyeball/purchasing power. It's time we start gettin that concept.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
35. Does that go for Keith Olberman too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
8. The problem: here you are preaching to the choir.
Most of the people who hang around this place already know this.
What do we do for solutions?
How do we pull it off?
The warm stream media have their cake, now, and can still eat it. They are pretty much all owned by right wing, corporate types, or traded on wall street, and their only objective is making money-not watch dogging the crooks.
They are kept whores who will bite, without paying a price, anyone they or their masters deem profitable-in any sense of the word-to be bite-able.

What to do? How about convincing the dnc, and contributing money to make it happen, to buy a cable network or create one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I'm not so sure. Alot of people jumped on the Pelosi bandwagon
without thinking about how she was the Press's darling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
11. Of course the media has an impact on the less informed...
but smart DUers...nah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
12. The fascist media are getting their last licks in before we investigate them
The MSM are simply taking potshots at Dems because now they can. Come January 3, they won't be able to get away with such shenanigans because the Dems in the House will be on their collective asses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I can't wait. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. You are kidding, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CorpGovActivist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
16. Going Public: New Strategies of Presidential Leadership, by Samuel Kernell
This is a great read for anyone struggling to come to grips with the interplay of the public sector and the Fourth Estate in modern times: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=going+public+samuel+kernell

From my own firsthand experience, I can tell you that there *are* still true, genuine, "gumshoe" journalists with old-fashioned sensibilities and a strong work ethic (some of them have even embraced the new media and technology tools).

The concepts discussed in this book (and others like it) are equally applicable to the message makers at the DNC, or a candidate for Speaker of the House, etc.

It's easy to condemn the MSM - and to portray them as monolithic. It's harder to empathize with the pressures many of them face, especially in a day and age where falling for one bogus story can shatter a career.

Of course, there are also the Watergate Wannabes - who think they can get a magic scoop, win a Pulitzer, and become the next Woodward overnight (without investing the hard work).

Interesting thread you started here!

- Dave
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. The decisions on what is printed is not the journalists; it is their
corporate/conservative heads. It takes an horrendous situation like the Iraq disaster to spur some semblance of criticism, but the inertia of conservatism reasserts itself once the crisis passes. They are already working to frame the discussion in a way to preserve the status quo.

We are going to go extinct if we do not deal with the root causes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
18. Are you even attempting to hint
that a woman is good enough to be minority speaker but NOT good enough to be majority speaker?

Because I do not appreciate that.

This is NOT a tabula rasa. Pelosi is the speaker. She held the job in bad times and you want to pull it out from under her in good? Stuff it in an orifice.

Not having cable, truly disliking Couric, and pissed at ABC over Path to 9/11, all the news morons the rest of you addle your brains with are mostly strangers to me. And I NEVER consider their opinions as worth spit.

They're trying to set the agenda? Good for them. They've done so well in the past.

But, so far as I'm concerned, if they are talking of Pelosi as a done deal, it may be the first time in a decade that they are dealing with the real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. You missed my point. It has nothing to do with Pelosi per se
It is all about the Press setting the agenda. I like Pelosi and most certainly think a woman's place is in the House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. You missed mine. Pelosi is not a good example.
She gets it because she earned it in the trenches.

But thank you for your concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
22. As a sidelight to yor topic, I've recently been thinking about
subliminal/paraliminal disinformation campaigns. They plant little "errors," little factoids, that get a life of their own. Pretty soon "everyone knows" something that isn't true, but they couldn't tell you where they got the information. Examples--Foley misidentified as a Democrat onscreen on Fox while the page scandal was being discussed. The ABC story that Abramoff is gonna name some dems. Even if he never does, people will retain the factoid that he did. Where did they hear that? They don't know. What Dems? They don't know. But they're pretty sure there were some. They know they heard it somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #22
30. You mean like... "No one here at the White House is saying Saddam caused 9-11".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. Yeah--but I read that as
no one here at the White House is saying SADDAM CAUSED 9-11!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #22
33. Yes, this is new. The "mistakes" that seemingly always are negative
to Democrats. The little bits of what in an earlier time would have been seen as gossip, unverified allowed to show up on the cables where they are picked up by the Pundits who then confront Democrats with the gossip they are forced to defend when they might not have even heard about it if they are too busy to watch the media.

Lack of fact checking as "infotainment" takes over the cables makes it hard to separate intertainment from news and news from intertainment.

Even newspapers allowing reporters to have liberal use of "unidentified sources" in an article has lead to disinformation and misinformation getting out there which can influence opinion. Both WaPo and NYT's will have a whole article based on one "unidentified source" after another and how is the public to know the credibility of "Senior white house official who refused to be identified," or "Official involved in the investigation who refused to be identified."

Networks still have more oversight and regulation than the cables and even then "standards" have become so lax that one must even be suspect of what's planted there.

When Government and Industry can produce Virtual News Releases with fake Health Affairs reporters shilling for Pharma Companies without the viewing public aware of the source, then we have a public who is prey to constant disinformation.

The Telecom Act of '96 needs to be reviewed and changed so that these monopolies of giant corporations owning all outlets in a market can be broken up. And, we need some standards for our airwaves by bring back the "Fairness Doctrine" with some revisions. Right now the Cables are running wild with too little regulation. We survived fine with the "Fairness Doctrine." And one wonders why it was so important for Reagan Corporatists to get rid of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
23. The press is a big part of the problem.
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 10:18 PM by BattyDem
Instead of reporting the facts to keep the populace informed, they have consistently dispensed biased information and partisan spin. They TELL us what to think, instead of simply giving us the facts so we can make our own decisions. The general message is "Republicans are good, strong, intelligent people with family values; Democrats are evil, weak, stupid people who want to destroy American families." They have become nothing more than a propaganda machine and it's hurting our democracy.

There is no "free press" in the mainstream media because it's all owned by corporations who have bills before Congress. The media has an agenda: they support Republican policies because Republican policies support corporations. It's all about profit. Even the war. When a corporation is both a media company and a defense contractor, there is a huge conflict of interest ... and they make sure the "reporting" serves their interests. Propaganda, whether it be political or corporate, should not be masquerading as news.

However, despite the major problems with the media, I don't believe the press is responsible for naming Pelosi as the Speaker of the House. Whenever a minority party becomes the majority, those in the minority leadership positions (like Pelosi and Reid) almost always maintain their leadership positions ... and rightfully so. They EARNED their jobs because they put up with a lot of crap as the minority leaders. While it's true that the press tends to define Democrats instead of allowing Democrats to define themselves, they are not defining our leaders - they are simply acknowledging the reality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GymGeekAus Donating Member (285 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
24. It's subliminal. How many have noticed this phenom this week?
The Democrats in the House are picking their second-in-command, and the media's coverage of it has been, well shall we say, outlandish.

I saw headlines that made my head spin. I had no idea there were knife fights breaking out in Congress, blood stained all over the floor of that noble chamber. "Bloody battle in Dems House Leadership" or something like that. Or "Bickering Dems Lose Focus". Everywhere I turned, the act of having a vote was being directly equated with mortal combat. And being elevated to the utmost importance, too--you'd think there was no greater vote in the history of American democracy. I personally think last week's vote by the electorate was much more historic.

Remember, the Republicans split 25-24 on their minority leadership position this week. Right? And they selected a man who they previously removed from his leadership position because he made some downright offensive, racist remarks about segregation. Oh yeah. To suggest that Strom Thurmond had the vision to take this country where it needed to be during the civil rights movement is completely insane and racist. No media color on their coverage of that story, though. Yeah, Trent Lott is their boy, official racist nutjob of the GOP, back in the saddle. By the skin of his teeth too, almost lost the vote. How's that for a "bloody battle" or "retaining focus."

I hoped the GOP would re-invent itself, but I guess they're just going to go with what they know. Stay the course.

But back to whipping each other into a frenzy about a job that most of us don't even know what it entails--House Majority Leader.

Whatever!

And no, there's no media bias out there we're not all fully aware of, is there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #24
34. And, I noticed that MSNBC referred to Lott's "downfall" constantly in a
feature yesterday and yet they never said his downfall was do to his "Racist Comment." Conveniently leaving that out as if "well everyone knows about that" was very clever of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
25. So, have you written your reps yet? Here's a form:
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 11:04 PM by snot
Feel free to borrow/modify this form:

Dear ____________:

I am writing to urge you to prioritize two issues for action, because I believe those two issues are critical to everything else we care about:

1. Election reform – We need to restore 100% accountability and transparency with paper ballots and with tabulation conducted by truly independent, bi-partisan agencies; and

2. Media reform – We need to restore and even strengthen restrictions on the consolidation of media ownership, reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine, and ensure internet neutrality.

This country will not truly be governed by the people again unless and until we accomplish those two goals. I would add that a third goal must also be to ensure that every child has access to a good, free public gradeschool and highschool education and an affordable college education.

For me, as important as so many other issues are today, those three far outrank them, since unless we address those three, all else we achieve will remain at risk.

Thank you again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:11 AM
Response to Original message
27. You are Correct
The simple reality of the fact is that the Press is called the Fourth Estate for a reason. I don't think that there will be much debate that they have grossly failed the American people the last 20 years or so. A cursory look at the way the press has conducted itself since the Iran-Contra scandal to Bill Clinton to the passes the Bush administration has been allowed, will reveal that something is very wrong with our media in this country. Investigative journalism, responsible reporting, have gone out of the window in the interest of promoting sensational bologna that have no real bearing on the long term issues that are confronting America. In the wake of revelations brought forward in the Downing Street Minutes, the media instead reporting on the idiotic run-away bride. However, that is only part of the problem.

Another aspect, which you touched on in your post, is that the media is influencing our politics. Since I am of the camp that believes that the media has become dominated by right-wing ideologues I believe that the media is acting in its own best interests rather than the interests of the nation. The right-wing fluff of a myth that the media is liberally biased should have long ago been put to rest, but in the upside-down world of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Candy Crowley, and Bill O'Reilly, there is a bias against those now proved stalwarts of honesty and conservatism, the Republicans. (Surely, you know that I jest...) The Republicans in the Capital and on the television have a strong interest in influencing what should rightly be Democratic policies. What am I getting at exactly?

Well, since the media has a vested SELF-interest in defining the debate, like the Republicans, Democrats across the spectrum -- progressives, liberals, moderates, and conservatives -- should be asking themselves why right-wing personalities are so concerned with influencing Democratic policies. This whole issue goes hand-in-hand with a problem that the Democrats in Congress only now seem to be waking up to; that is, so long as we allow Republicans to define the debate with wedge issues in the like, they are in control of the public discourse. It seems that those of the progressive branch in our party would instantly know how to respond to these regressive techniques. The reaction is that there should be NO reaction. Democrats need to learn to get ahead of the issues, get in front of them, and define the debate before Republicans and their allies in the media attempt to define their positions before the body politic.

If Democrats begin to behave in a proactive manner rather than reactive the national conversation on such pressing matters as Iraq, health-care, education, right to choice, civil rights, and any other manner of issues would be redefined. Furthermore, I also believe that Democrats as a whole are more in line with the views of the mainstream American than either the media or Republicans would have the American people believe. Republicans have continually charged over the last couple of years that Democrats have no plans, but many of us here have rightly debated those plans. Nonetheless, it is not enough that DUers -- who are rightly defined as political junkies -- debate those plans. If the Democrats in Congress really want to connect with the American people they need to bring those plans forward.

I always thought that the idea of Newt Gingrich proposing a Contract with America was a bit of hogwash. Why? Simple. It was more of a case of dictation than anything else. He didn't bother to see what the American people wanted and what direction the American people wanted to take this country. This was evident in the witch hunt of President William Jefferson Clinton. It was even more telling that the media played such a huge role in that sensationalist nonsense. Poles indicated that the American people did not want to impeach President Clinton, but the media and Congressional Republicans chose to do so anyway. Why? Because the whole idea of a Contract with America was never based on the wishes of the American people. It was based on the wishes of right-wing ideologues far too influenced by partisan pressure and opinion than by the views of the people they were supposed to represent. However, Democrats have the chance to change all of that now.

Democrats need to initiate a Conversation with America. Remember the old town-hall style meetings that were quite dominant in the northeastern United States? That is precisely what Democrats need to be doing when in recess from Congress. They need to engage the American people in a conversation about what direction Americans want this country to take in regards to both foreign and domestic policy. If, IF, they do this they can begin to cement a permanent majority, so long as they enact the recommendations of those they represent, their employers. The incoming Democratic leadership is fond of saying they want a transparent government. While this is a fine idea, a noble one, it is not enough. Transparency must be linked with engaging conversation.

If Democrats go out among the people by making their government more accessible to them it is going to be in stark contrast to the policies that Republicans have followed on issues from Terri Schiavo to stem cell research to implementing the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Whereas Americans voted Republicans out of office because they didn't seem to care what people thought, I believe that Americans would vote Democrats back into office because they ENGAGE them in CONVERSATION, not dictatorial contracts. Americans will see that Democrats really are trying to do what is best for them and in that way there will be a firewall, a buffer, put in place that will make a joke of the right-wing spin espoused by the media and Congressional Republicans who do not have the American people's interests at heart.

No longer will it be as easy for the media to influence Democratic policies or to define the debate, because the debate will be going on among the American people like it does in the micro-society of DU. By employing this proactive and populist tactics, Democrats will be going a long way in not only obtaining a lengthy majority, but staying in touch with their constituents and not falling into the pitfalls of power. Democrats can make themselves the representatives of the American people who are largely middle-class, tax paying, law-abiding people who want to do the right thing. The label of tax-and-spend liberals will be hard to place on Democrats if conversations are dominated by the proactive actions and legislation of Democrats rather than the half-truths and outright lies spewed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh.

Well... I hope that I really gave your post a response it deserves. I think you have hit on something, and I think that it is important that Democrats stop letting the media influence their actions and policies. I think it's important that Democrats begin to define the debate, initiate a Conversation with America, and get back to a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

PS: I think I just wrote the rough draft for my next article... Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #27
38. Thanks for the input. Good luck on your article. I think
this issue is very important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dchill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
28. Yes. And, who do you think...
"gave" us Hillary as our "front-runner" for '08? Right again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
29. yep, push the spin. catapulting the buckets full of
shit.
Another day today like all the days of the past quarter century.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
31. I refuse to let the corporate media LIE to me anymore!
And I refuse to let them tell me what to think!

We should ALL kick them to the curb with a full on boycott. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. We must stop consuming their product.
It doesn't matter that they use the Nielsens to determine their own self-worth. If no one but those monitored by the Nielsens is watching, their message is irrelevant. They are irrelevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
37. Pelosi and Reid should get them on a short leash
and the rest of our Dems in Congress need to practice message discipline and do the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
39. Dead right on the media aanalysis, happydreams.
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 Apr 19th 2024, 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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