Why are RW groups that 'fight' 'liberal media bias' fighting against media REFORM? (Part 2)

Yesterday, I noted that several RW groups that accuse the media of having a ‘liberal bias’ are also fighting against reform of the media, pulling out the “Communist” card against people who suggest reform of the forth branch of our government.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=17168&mesg_id=17168

I think that it might be worse then how it is portrayed; I think Accuracy in Media and other media ‘watch’ groups are trying to frame the debate against ANY media reform. As we all know, there is a debate raging on about media consolidation. Accusing “Media Reform” of being a secret Neo-Communist plot, are these groups trying to prevent ANY reform of the media? Including that being against Media Consolidation makes one a Communist?

Why else would these groups, who are constantly whining that the media has a ‘liberal bias’, be opposed to reform of the media?

Those that scream loudest about the "liberal media" are making nice paychecks fronting the institutions that benefit from the consolidation. Where the media entry fee is highest, the Left is almost shut out. Only on the internet where the price of access is cheap, do we have anywhere near parity in our political viewpoints with the Right.

They need the myth that the media is really liberal and biased against them. What better way to defelct any embarressing new stories?

I have seen cons frequently use this tactic...

"You got this from the Washington Post/NYT/MSNBC/CNN?whereever?! That LIBERAL peice of %$@*? LOL!"

OF course the cons never explain how whatever story is wrong. And they frequently use 'sources" with an actual bias, sources witha history of not only being a Republican party mouth peice but also of freqyently being totally wrong in the proccess.

But that doesnt' matter. It's not about being right or wrong. it's about keeping up the ideological armour.

HOWEVER... lets face it, the mdeia is a BUSINESS. It's a few large corporations that protect the status quo and works to frame any debate within acceptable parameters. And it has helped and been helped by t he right wing for years. We would probbaly not be in iraq today if the Media had fact checked even half of what Shrub claimed. We heard from numerouse generals abotu how the war was going to be fought and from numerous pro-war people about why the war should be fought. But I can count the number of anti-war activists interviewed before the war on one hand. (I recall FAIR doing a study of this, of out of over 400 stories in the lead up to the invasion, only three had anyone anti-war)

It' s only now that Shrub has lost so much of his popularity, that the shit cake that is iraq and shrub's legacy can't be spun in a good way that the MSM finds the courage to kick a dead mule and state the obviouse... Shrub is NOT a good president and he's been lying.

The Right Wing would lose out big time if the MSM had to actually be fair and provide all sides of a story and fact check what people said. But they also need to keep the myth that they want the MSM to be fair and provide all sides of a story and fact check what people say.

In short, the right wing is being dishonest about what they really want. Anyone surprised?