The Race Will Get Close - Why Big Media, Not Strategy, Favors The GOP

I am sure the polls will get very close in the next 60 days. I also predict that when this happens there will be a lot of second guessing of the Obama campaign. In second guessing the Obama campaign, people will simply ignore the obvious bias of the media in covering the RNC while failing to mention such basic facts like John McCain is not proposing any change in policies from George Bush. Or, how Big Media focuses on salacious comments regarding Palin that do not hurt her politically, but ignores her extreme political views.

Why is this? Is it because of the GOP or the Democrats' strategy? No. We need to stop bashing on our own candidates, and stop believing the myth of a liberal media. A liberal media simply does not make sense for the reasons explained below:

First, as the infamous ABC leaked memo shows, the MSM's corporate sponsors require the MSM to oppose liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/air-americas-abc-blackli_b_33123.html

/snip

This week we learned that some 90 major corporations demanded that their ads be pulled from radio stations that run Air America programming, demonstrating the fundamental challenge facing everyone working to promote critical journalism and a vibrant free press.

First off, let's clarify why this is taking place: The crime isn't that Air America is partisan. All or most of these firms advertise on politically conservative talk radio programs and/or stations. And the crime isn't even being "liberal." Some of these advertisers have moderate or liberal executives who donate to Democratic candidates and are far from rabid conservatives.

So what is the problem? While "liberal" Air America clearly favors big D Democrats, unlike virtually all other programming on commercial radio and television, it gives airtime to reports that are critical of corporations and the powerful politicians they keep in Washington.

This is the heart of the problem: Air America commits a crime called journalism. Almost none of the so-called conservative radio shows or networks do any semblance of actual reporting. They merely pontificate -- repeating talking points that seem to be emailed straight from Karl Rove's laptop.

/snip

Second, Barack Obama is an outspoken supporter of a diverse and independent media:

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6570325.html

Q: What prompted you to weigh in on media ownership and diversity at an FCC field hearing in Chicago (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/C ... ) last year?

A: I strongly favor diversity of ownership of outlets and protection against the excessive concentration of power in the hands of any one corporation, interest or small group. I strongly believe that all citizens should be able to receive information from the broadest range of sources. I feel that media consolidation during the Bush administration has had the effect of eliminating a lot of the diversity of information sources available to persons who have to rely on more traditional information sources, such as radio and television broadcasts and newspapers.

Q: What ill effects has the country suffered from media consolidation, if any?

A: This country’s media ownership rules that both chairman Powell and chairman Martin have wanted to dismantle protect us from excessive media concentration. However, even under current rules, the media market is dominated by a handful of firms. The ill effects of consolidation today and continued consolidation are well-documented -- less diversity of opinion, less local news coverage, replication of the same stories across multiple outlets, and others. We can do better.

Q: You co-sponsored the Dorgan bill to block the FCC’s media-ownership change, which Martin has argued was a moderate compromise that took into account the input of opponents to consolidation. Why block it?

A: Chairmen Martin and Powell both argued that their previous effort to deregulate the media market was moderate, as well. Both the courts and a majority of the Senate disagreed the first time. And a few weeks back, the Senate disagreed with chairman Martin again. While he argues that the rule is no longer in the public interest, the public response has heavily weighed in against him. And common sense tells us that the consolidation of outlets in local markets will lead to fewer opportunities for diverse expression of opinions.

/snip

Third, BIG MEDIA is bigger than ever before, and it controls what you see and hear, therefore it controls what you think:

<>

<>

We are more united than we have ever been

Big Media happily covers and repeats charges of liberal bias by the GOP. However, despite liberal outrage over the coverage of Democrats, there is not a peep of coverage of Big Media/Corporate Bias. Why? Because this would expose the lack of diversity and the monopoly held by the media.

Barack Obama has been outspoken in fighting the growth of Big Media. However, his votes, actions and comments on this subject get absolutely no coverage. This is not a coincidence. The media can cover a mayor who has shaken hands with Obama or an alleged affair by Sarah Palin, but it cannot cover the speeches and letters on Obama's senate website.

This is the story that is hiding in plain site, but which Big Media will never touch. Big Media is biased, and it has an economic reason for being biased: Obama will try to stop them from getting bigger.

...it's HOW MUCH MONEY IS MADE FOR THE PARENT COMPANY that might have defense industry interests, labor issues, offshore offices, tax issues, etc..

Hartmann said the other day that even though the country might be split fairly evenly between left and right, there are more than 1000 right wing radio stations and only 60-70 progressive ones.

Even if we are just responding to them, the fact of the matter is that Big Media drives our debate. We are not talking about McCain, Obama or Biden. Instead, we are all fixated on Palin, because that is all we here in the media. However, her positions and issues are relatively simple. She is extremely right wing. Its not too complicated. However, since everyone is fixated on her, even DUers do nothing but talk on her.

This is why it will be tough to win. The media drives the debate and how we think.

Reagan beat Carter: Bad economy for incumbent party
Clinton beat Pres Bush41: Bad economy for incumbent party
Clinton beat War Hero Dole: good economy for incumbent party.

Times are different. Our democracy is at risk more than ever before:

1980 - 50 Media Companies owned a majority of media

1992 - 14 Media companies owned a majority of media.

1996 - 10 Media companies owned a majority of media.

2008 - 5 Media companies owned a majority of media.

Thus, only 5 companies control what people see and hear, thus they control what people think.