More evidence of the pathetic state of our media

I am watching Real Sports With Bryant Gumble on HBO. This is a show that usually covers sports with some sort of social implication but not usually a politically hardhitting way. It even has the god awful Bernard Goldberg. This week though they are spending half the hour on a story about asmtha and sports. So far, pretty usual, but then they take on the Bush Administration. It is the type of hard hitting report complete with documents and interviews showing the connection between the Bush Administration and polluters. It is a damning report.

So why isn't this on Dateline (which has 3 hours a week) or 20/20 and PrimeTime Live (2 hours a week)? If you take out 60 Minutes there is literally no place on standard TV where these types of reports are regularly aired. It isn't as if these reports can't be done, it is that they won't be done. We shouldn't have to watch HBO (Real Sports) or MTV whose True Life did a wonderful hour on living on the minimum wage to see reports like these. It wasn't always this way. Our parents and grandparents used to watch the likes of Murrow and Cronkite doing documentaries on racism and poverty. This was back before there were literally whole stations devoted to news. Imagine a CNN or MSNBC that devoted just 2 hours a day (1/12 of the total programing) to programs such as those. It might even make up for providing platforms for the likes of Ann Coulter and Glen Beck.

The networks have some of the most valueable realestate in America. The get it for free. We shouldn't have to go to pay TV to find hardhitting stories about our government.

should buy the media outlets.

that's the only way to get the truth out consistently.

Pay tv certainly hasn't taken up the slack, and citizen journalists can't do it all. Not to mention the ongoing assault on 'net neutrality.

Has everyone here called their Reps in support of HR 550?

Have you seen the following (I haven't checked all the links lately, pardon if any have expired)?

FCC Plans Relaxation of Media Ownership Rules, Watchdogs Say
John Byrne
Published: Wednesday May 31, 2006
Move to allow more consolidation could come as soon as June 15.

The Federal Communications Commission is poised to propose new media ownership rules that will allow media companies to own newspapers, television and radio stations in the same city, according to media watchdog groups.

The proposed rule would dissolve a longstanding policy that prohibited corporations from owning a television station and a daily newspaper in the same market. The "cross ownership" rule, promulgated in 1975, was enacted to ensure media diversity.

Individuals close to the Commission say the FCC will propose relaxing media ownership rules, possibly as soon as June 15 when the Commission next meets, the media watchdog Center for Media and Democracy says.

"All indications are that the next time the FCC meets – now that they have a full commission – we expect to see media ownership come up, and we think it will be the cross ownership rule," said spokesman Craig Aaron.

More at: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/FCC_plans_relaxation_of_media_ownership_0531.html

and

http://www.boingboing.net/2006/06/20/la_times_censors_new.html :
LA Times Censors Newsroom Internet Feed 

Peacefire, an anti-censorware site, says that journalists at the LA Times have told them that the LA Times has begun to censor the Internet feed in its newsroom. LA Observed says that the Times told them it uses Websense to restrict reporters' access to the Internet <http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/06/friday_deskclearing_5.html> , and that peacefire.org is blocked in the newsroom, along with many other sites.
This is the first example I've heard of a Western newspaper censoring its reporters' Internet feeds. The companies that sell censorware services deliver a notoriously biased and Orwellian system. For example, sites like Peacefire and Boing Boing, which report on the bad judgement in these services and expose their technical failings, are classed as "proxy avoidance."
Once you start writing checks to these companies, they stop letting you see the sites that tell you why you should stop.
Some of these companies also provide censorship services to repressive governments, like those in China and Syria. A company called SmartFilter <http://www.boingboing.net/censorroute.html> provides such services to several governments; they offered to stop censoring Boing Boing if we would accept a secret deal to restructure our site to make it easier for them to block parts of it.
The LA Times has previously reported favorably <http://www.peacefire.org/archives/latimes.on.cybersitter.txt> on Peacefire's groundbreaking efforts to expose the corruption and bias in censorware companies. Now that the Times's reporters can no longer visit Peacefire's website, I suppose we shouldn't expect more articles on those lines.
(snip)
Link <http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/06/protecting_reporters_from.html>

At least now, the journalists know something about what it is that’s being censored. What will we do when it gets to the point that censorship is excercised more surgically — e.g., just blocking certain stories rather than whole website?

I was flipping channels and saw the promo. I was honestly more interested in the piece on Martina Navatarova but the asmetha story turned out to be the real reason to watch. I am not the hugest sports fan and frankly never would have suspected I would see such a hard hitting story. I do fear for us under coroporate media but it isn't simply the ownership which is the problem. After all, in the 1950's only two companies owned all the TV networks and they covered stories quite well, it is the ethics that are the real problem.