The Treasonous Corporate Media and why and how we should fight back while we still can

Many members of DU and bloggers at other progressive boards oftentimes throw their hands up in the air as to what the answers are in reference to what can be done about the Corporate media as it continues to propagandize our elections.

The task of holding this media accountable simply seems too large a task for any one of us, and I am sad to say that yes, IT IS. However, I believe that IF we operate in concert (as the media itself does), there are some things that we can do to minimize the influence of the media in various ways.

I stated in a prior thread that the Media Whores stroll the Blogosphere to note our reactions as vocal progressives (and conservatives as well, as the media also troll those sites) have to Corporate news stories. Some of these media operatives also stroll for interesting stories or to find items that will bolster their claims, including blogger statements that support their narratives. Here's that thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6578594&mesg_id=6578594

This is not an unverifiable fact, as one only has to remember the primaries and the various "gates" that the media publicized as time went on. Many were pulled straight off of this and other blogs.

If these operatives find enough doom and gloom in reference to some of Obama's stances, they will publicize that very phenomenon and hope to make it grow. Our media desperately seek disenchantment from the base against Obama. It helps them do their job, and the louder that type of a chorus grows, the better they can publicize those criticism of Obama for their own use; to discourage the base's enthusiasm, to reduce contributions to Obama (especially since he relies on us for his campaign's operations) and hope to affect the November turn out, one of the underplayed key by the media to a Democratic win on election day.

Of course many here will say that they cannot have blind faith in Obama, and that it is their right to criticize, and will become indignant of this post. I want to reassure these folks that I agree with their notion and I heartily understand that they certainly do have that right, and to say otherwise would be wrong. HOWEVER, those same posters should be reminded that in their so choosing to publicly question Obama for his stances, they cannot ignore the fact that they are indeed aiding the Corporate Media in their attempts to defeat our nominee. This is simply a negative side effect that comes with the territory or public criticism of the Democratic nominee during this election season, and it should not simply be forgotten as comments are made.....in particular by those poster who somehow believe that anything that they say on a posting board has absolutely no effect on anything; please know that you are incorrect in your assessment as to what power your voice has in any room.

The Progressive FISA reaction as it related to Obama's stance was an example of the Media Hoes using our reaction to their benefit to further paint Obama as a flip flopper. In other words, whatever the intent was, the consequences are more often not controlled by those individually posting, period.

The Whores are currently on the Blog stroll attempting to find our displeasure in the statements that Obama came out with a couple of days ago on offshore drilling, as they would love this issue to come to the forefront, and would love as many of our documented displeasure of Obama on this issue. Those are the facts, even if many don't like to hear it.

So the question I pose is, as Bloggers, what exactly do we want to do and what exactly can we do to influence the Corporate Media in order to win the elections, instead of it being the other way around, where the Corporate Media uses us to their end?

First, make sure that you are signed up with the ability to "DIGG" web articles that allow this function. Once you are signed up for this capability, you can choose to stay signed up, meaning each time you "Digg", you don't have to do anything but that. You can also choose to comment at the Digg site or not to.

Some Website allow you to recommend or "Buzz" up and article. The idea behind doing so allows the article to float to the top of that particular website giving it increased prominence. The more increased Prominence an article has, the more likely the Media Whores will feel compelled to report on it. If they choose to ignore an article that has gotten Blog prominence, then their job becomes more difficult in attempting to hide their pro McCain agenda. And that is what our job must be, to make it harder for the media to use their bias to build narratives that are negative to our Nominee.

Next--Please do not discount the power of voices united on any issue. Although many here don't believe that sending emails to television political shows work in discouraging the media's blatant bias; I ferociously disagree. Emails en-masse sent on any given issue or article or program do work. The problem is that the offender has to get enough of this mail for it to have any influence. In other-words, singularly we can do very little, but together we can make a much bigger difference. If you become irritated, do something about it; WRITE!

Some often suggest Boycotting networks as a better method of expressing discontent with Television political programming. I believe that this may or may not work, depending on how many participate and it appears that one needs many more people to get this done than to effect a story line by writing to those perpetuating untruths as well as those attempting to help us guard against reporting bias of our candidate (watchdog groups such as Media Matters, FAIR, and a few others can be very helpful and should not be discounted).

It is very important that we remain mindful that this election may be our very last chance to use ourselves as a positive viable tools that can make a difference in an election. If John McCain prevails, I predict that the Internet will be dealt with in a way that it will be minimized of its influence to as little as possible, which will result in the Corporate Media having an even greater hand at keeping a lid on any push against what has increasingly become a Fascist Corporate Authoritarian government exerting its unchecked rule over our increasingly shrinking democracy.

Accordingly per the constitution, the Press was always meant to be truly free, and not bought and paid for. Please know that we are the last hope in bringing back what should have always been, but appears to be disappearing. Without sounding too grandiose, please understand that without our consorted efforts, America stands to lose, and lose big and for a long, long time.


(edited to add): Youtube is also a place where we can effectively affect certain outcomes in reference to publicizing the item--Certainly rating UP the videos that we like in how they promote our candidate and disparage the opposition is something to do.....but also keep in mind that rating videos DOWN that we don't want to become popular is also something to do that is effective. If enough of us get into this as a regular practice, it will help matters, as opposed to making them worse. When going to the Video forum at DU, also go to the youtube link where you can show your like or dislike for the video. Last thing to remember, most times a view is not counted unless you watch the video all the way through or to a certain point (usually 2/3).

importance of taking action. Even if you think it doesn't mean much. There IS power in numbers.

and we collectively have been paying for it ever since.

the DIGG feature for the first time today.

And WHERE did you get your new avatar? :rofl: I love it!

It's a FrenchieCat! :rofl:

That's why in addition to doing more about the Treasonous Corporate Media we have to help Obama on the ground all that we can.

jefferson_dem (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-03-08 02:34 PM
Original message

"The largest field operation in the history of American politics", from Obama HQ
"The largest field operation in the history of American politics"
from Obama HQ by Christopher Hass

This is what a ground game looks like:

The election site FiveThirtyEight reports today:

In Alaska, Obama has four field offices open (Juneau, Fairbanks, Anchorage, Palmer) to McCain’s none. In Montana, Obama had six offices to McCain’s none in July ...

In Virginia, Obama has a 20-6 field office edge, with as many as 60 expected to be open in the near future ... in each of Florida and Pennsylvania Obama is expected to have a minimum of 200 paid organizers.

In Wisconsin, Obama has 15 offices open now, with 24 expected to be open by mid-August. The staffers are directly paid by Obama’s “Campaign for Change” organization. By contrast, Republicans have five party offices open that handle both McCain field work as well as the state leg. races, which somewhat dilutes the effort.

Already there is staff on the ground in traditional battleground states, as well as a number of nontraditional ones. Current plans call for large-scale operations in at least 22 states, with medium operations in many, many others. But paid staff are just one small part of what campaign manager David Plouffe has described as "the persuasion army."

From the July 19th edition of the Boston Globe:

"The climate has made millions of Americans who haven't been involved in a political campaign ever in their lifetimes very active," said. "We estimate that 70 percent of our grass-roots volunteers haven't worked in a campaign before. . . . We're somewhere just shy of 2 million volunteers, and we think we can potentially triple that on Election Day."

That would mean 6 million volunteers. For comparison, about 116 million people voted in the 2004 presidential election.

The Obama-Clinton battle set primary turnout records in state after state, and Hildebrand expects more of the same in November: "We think the turnout will be beyond record turnout, and if we're effective, we will have done two additional things - brought in millions of new people who are registered to vote and we will increase the percentage of registered voters who will turn out."

To accomplish that, Obama's campaign is assembling what would be the largest field operation in the history of American politics. Advertising and campaign communications will be important and debate performances will be critical, but the Obama campaign is investing heavily in the importance of organizing voters and getting them to the polls on Nov. 4.

... "This allows us to increase the volume of voters we're talking to and have it be done with people who live in their community," Hildebrand said.

Veteran Democratic operative John Sasso of Massachusetts said that level of organization is "unprecedented on the Democratic side." The Obama model, particularly in its use of the Internet as an organizing tool, is a significant upgrade, he said.

"People tend to believe information delivered by people they know and who live in their neighborhood more than an ad they see on television or what some third party from out of their state is telling them," said Sasso, who supported Clinton in the primaries and has played key roles in many presidential campaigns. "It can really change the electoral map."

Throughout the day today, we'll be looking at some of the many events that have been going on across the country as we begin to build out our ground operation. In many places, there are already staff and offices that you can connect with. No matter where you live, you can sign-up for updates on campaign activities in your area and connect with grassroots supporters in your community.

"There is no better way to reach to voters than through face to face contact. What began in Iowa and South Carolina is now being replicated across the country. The largest field operation in the history of American politics presents an unprecedented opportunity for ordinary people to get involved."

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupda...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6580488

But for some of us sitting in very blue districts of very blue states without the time and/or capital available to travel elsewhere, phone banking and blogging in an effective manner are both things to do that should be done.

Blogging is an art that comes with tools. We should all maximize what we are given so that we can create the best masterpiece for the upcoming election - A WIN! :hi:

take us to help facilitate a WIN for our Democratic Candidate Obama:hi:

We are DemocraticUnderground after all:patriot: :party:

he has more than enough criticism to handle from the media and the McCain campaign. The last thing he needs is to also have to fight the base while attempting to maximize who will be voting for him.

With a roll of the tongue.

Corrrrect, as usual, madame chat.

:patriot:

computer beyond the realm of this here forum. :hi:

although I'm not familiar with DIGG.

Thanks for the thread, FrenchieCat

Kicked and recommended.

One can digg or Bury a story. Burying a story, such as a negative one in reference to our nominee means that this story is buried down instead of allowed to float to the top in terms of prominence.

Obama direct. Here should be the place to push our candidate across the finish line. The best post I have read in ages.

Certainly rating UP the videos that we like in how they promote our candidate and disparage the opposition is something to do.....but also keep in mind that rating videos DOWN that we don't want to become popular is also something to do that is effective. If enough of us get into this as a regular practice, it will help matters, as opposed to making them worse.

In fact, I believe that I have time to "edit" and so I shall.

I am always thinking that complaining about our candidate here only helps the other side yet didn't know how to tell people to stop doing that since they are exercising their right to complain. I do think it would be better to present a strong, more unified front to the other side and their media 'hoes! We simply must win the WH, and both super-majorities!

we are in "the urgency of now".

This should not be simply written off......as it is the truth.

I don't want to go back into time, somewhere in the future,
and have to think.....only IF we would have....
in otherwords, woulda/coulda/shoulda sooner than we realize won't matter any longer.

until our party is in power. Hopefully, that will be in the near future! I haven't slept well since 2001...I remember the day I realized that * and Co. were the Y2K we were warned about!

Those are very helpful suggestions. That is why I think it is a mistake to assume that the Democrats can simply hire a Karl Rove clone, and do the same thing to McCain that he is doing to Obama or that Bush did to Kerry. Big Media is the GOP's home turf. We still have to play the game, but Democrats needs to win the election in alternative venues such as on the ground or through alternative media.

It is hard to believe, but Big Media is growing bigger due to GOP control of the FCC:

<>

As a result, most media (not just the news channels) are controlled by just five corporations:

<>

I really do believe that.

Wish I could recommend more than once!!

These are organizations that were created specifically to help us keep our eye on the media, and kick them in their pants when required (which is constantly). Some are well known and some are not. Please note that writing to these organizations with your complaints can be helpful, and I note that I have had some success in getting them to follow-up on certain incidents thereby shaming the media for a microsecond.

Please bookmark this thread, or create a list in your email contact address book. I have done this myself, and labeled the list "real journalists".

American Journalism Review editor@ajr.org
Columbia journalism Review editors@cjr.org
Committee of Concerned Journalists ccj@concernedjournalists.org
FAIR fair@fair.org
Institute of Public Accuracy dcinstitute@igc.org
journal of Mass Media Ethics WilkinsL@missouri.edu
Media Matters mm-tips@mediamatters.org

Each of these groups has a website, and you can sign up for their regular emails.
FAIR and Media Matters and Columbia Journalism Review are all good ones to belong to.
They will print articles rebutting nonsense from the media regularily. Some of the rebuts could stem from a story that you yourself submitted. If any people send an email about the same issue,
they will certainly start their own investigative process, which is what we should want. They need more weight in this fight to restore our free press, and the more attention we give them, the more powerful they can become in our fight.

WHEN YOU GET PISSED AT THE MEDIA, PRINT OR OTHERWISE, EMAIL THESE VARIOUS GROUPS WITH THE PROGRAM OR STORY, THE GIST OF THE STORY, AND WHY YOU OBJECT. THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE THERE FOR, SO YOU ARE NOT "DISTURBING" THEM WHEN YOU WRITE.

sorry I am on my out so this is rushed- but what about an alert system on the front page of DU which rates the journalists and broadcasters -- something easy to find and use. criteria could be more about accurate and truthful reporting -- using good sources, etc and the low rates would be for puppeting, talking point stupidity.

kind of like the "terror" levels, only for msm.

this way we can put all of our eyeballs (industry term where they count viewership) to work collectively for truth.

I am sure I will be flamed for this and accused of trying to invoke censorship. So be it. I think censorship of lies is a good thing. It also empowers us as a group in their eyes.

Any takers?

If they can find a topic, like FISA, to use to divide some of us for supporting Obama, then they can use that issue to split some supporters off of his base of support.
They whittle us down by looking for controversial topics like that.
Just like the off-shore drilling issue.
They hope to use it to whittle some more Obama supporters off of his base of support.

The more they look for controversial wedge-issues like that, the more they can whittle away at Obama's base.

They don't need to blast Obama out of the water, they just need to whittle his base down by 5% or 8% in order for McCain to gain a narrow victory this fall.
With the voting issues surrounding our votes being counted to begin with anyway, they hope to discourage as many of Obama's supporters from going out and supporting him.
The media is not on our side.

Giving Obama some money is one way to support Obama, but also "keeping the faith" and not criticizing Obama on every wedge issue that pops up is another.
Talking to friends and relatives is another way to increase Obama's base of supporters.
Instead of whining about our candidate, we need to rally around him.

Tom Brokaw even mentioned on MTP today that Bloggers were probably renegating against Obama's Offshore Drilling statement of possible consideration (he simply called it a "shift") all over the blogs.

However, I can say that in reality, we are not.....and thank goodness for that. Because if we were, again, we would only be making the opposition's job that much easier.

I'm sure the media will be disappointed in that occurence.

if we disagree with Obama.

I understand the reasoning, but that opens the door to a potential atmosphere of paranoia that has no place in Democratic politics.

Obama did flip flop on FISA - and when many thousands of people on his own website called him on it, Obama himself praised them for voicing their concerns.

But the bigger issue to me is this. If Obama is elected, he will undoubtedly do many other things as President that I will disagree with, and his entire first term would be but a run-up to his second. So going by your reasoning, we should keep our mouths shut and our heads down for four whole years? Because that would be taking it to its logical conclusion, one that I cannot agree with.

Going along to get along has never gotten anyone in the whole history of the world anywhere. As Democrats, I believe we should be holding our candidates to high standards and loudly calling the MSM on their deficiencies instead of meekly allowing them to define us.

however I will quote the operative words that you yourself used in establishing what is important in the larger scheme of things: "If Obama is elected".

If he is not, than none of what you say following that quote of yours really matters much, now does it? Cause as you know, President McCain will not only not hear your critiques, he will soundly silence them for good, or at least for a long, long time.

And so my point was, at the end of the day, it is certainly your choice, and for me to put it any other way would be out of line on my part.

that your method will help get him elected.

But - even if it would - I believe it is too high a price to pay. You cannot control what posters say and to even hint that we should be careful what we say I find disturbing.

simply because you believe that criticism has greater weight on you personal conciensce then does winning the White House.

Are you offering an alternative manner of combatting the media, and electing our nominee? Or are you only here to disagree with one point that I made while ignoring the rest....kind of like McCain attempting to get voters to dislike Obama yet failing to offer a plan of his own for voters to get behind.

as far as your last line, like you, I can also say what I feel, which is your whole point, not so much mine. I am only asking that folks think about all of the consequences of their messages when they post, not simply for their own satisfaction of saying what they are thinking (because this election is about all of us, not just individual self).

In addition, there are folks who will make their position known respectfully and thoughtfully, and avoid becoming a broken record stuck on only one portion of the song being sung. I believe that what I am suggesting is for all reading my post determine where they are on this and then act accordingly. I am only offering food for thought.

I do thank you for the discussion, and I certainly understand where you stand. I believe that you have made yourself clear.

I had a fight with someone over exactly this stuff while you were gone. I missed you.

Thank you so much for saying that! :hi: