RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Excerpt: "Here's the latest case in point. The airwaves belong to all of us, right? They're part of 'the commons' that in theory no private interest should be able to buy or control. Nonetheless, government long ago allowed television and radio stations to use the airwaves for commercial purposes, and the advertising revenues have made those companies fabulously rich."

Bill Moyers. (photo: PBS)
Bill Moyers. (photo: PBS)

Let's Stop Big Media's (B)AD Behavior

By Bill Moyers and Michael Winship, Bill Moyers & Company

30 March 12


ver the years we’ve been reporting on how power is monopolized by the powerful. How corporate lobbyists, for example, far outnumber members of Congress. And how the politicians are so eager to do the bidding of donors that they allow those lobbyists to dictate the law of the land and make a farce of democracy. What we have is much closer to plutocracy, where the massive concentration of wealth at the top is protects and perpetuates itself by controlling the ends and means of politics. This is why so many of us despair over fixing what’s wrong: we elect representatives to change things, and once in office they wind up serving the deep-pocketed donors who put up the money to keep change from happening at all.

Here’s the latest case in point. The airwaves belong to all of us, right? They’re part of "the commons" that in theory no private interest should be able to buy or control. Nonetheless, government long ago allowed television and radio stations to use the airwaves for commercial purposes, and the advertising revenues have made those companies fabulously rich. But part of the deal was that in return for the privilege of reaping a fortune they would respect the public interest in a variety of ways, including covering the local news important to our communities. If they didn’t, they would be denied their license to use the airwaves at all.

Alas, over the years, through one ruse or another, the public has been shafted. We heard the other day of a candidate for office in a Midwest state who complained to the general manager of a TV station that his campaign was not getting any news coverage. "You want coverage?" the broadcaster replied. "Buy some ads and then we’ll talk!"

That pretty well sums up the game. But hold your nose: it gets worse. The media companies and their local stations – including goliaths like CBS and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp – stand to pull in as much as $3 billion this year from political ads. Three billion dollars! And most of that money will pay for airing ugly, toxic negative ads that use special effects, snide jokes and flat out deception to take us to the lowest common denominator of politics.

The FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, which is supposed to make sure the broadcasters don’t completely get away with highway or, rather, airwave robbery has proposed to the broadcasting cartel that stations post on the Web the names of the billionaires, and front organizations – many of them super PACs - paying for campaign ads. It’s simplicity itself: give citizens access online to find out quickly and directly who’s buying our elections. Hardly an unreasonable request, given how much cash the broadcasters make from their free use of the airwaves.

But the broadcasting industry’s response has been a simple, declarative "Not on your life!" It would cost too much money, they claim. Speaking on their behalf, Robert McDowell, currently the only Republican commissioner on the FCC – the other one left to take a job with media monolith Comcast - said the proposal is likely "to be a jobs destroyer" by distracting station employees from doing their regular work. The party line also has been sounded by Jerald Fritz, senior vice president of Allbritton Communications, who told the FCC that making the information available on the Internet "would ultimately lead to a Soviet-style standardization of the way advertising should be sold as determined by the government." We’re not making this up.

Steven Waldman, who was lead author of the report that led to the FCC’s online proposal, quotes a letter from the deans of twelve of our best journalism schools: "Broadcast news organizations depend on, and consistently call for, robust open-record regimes for the institutions they cover; it seems hypocritical for broadcasters to oppose applying the same principles to themselves."

Hypocritical, but consistent with a business that values the almighty dollar over public service. The industry leaves nothing to chance. Through its control of the House of Representatives, it got a piece of legislation passed this past week euphemistically titled the FCC Process Reform Act. George Orwell must be spinning in his grave – this isn’t reform, it’s evisceration.

Not only does the bill remove roadblocks to more media mergers – further reducing competition – it would subject every new rule and every FCC analysis of that rule to years of paper work and judicial review, enabling the industry’s horde of lawyers and lobbyists, "to throw sand in the works at every opportunity" as one expert puts it. There was a noble attempt by California Congresswoman Anna Eshoo to include in this bill an amendment that, like the FCC proposal, called for stations to post on-line who’s putting up the big bucks for political ads. Shocker - it was rejected. Score another one for the plutocrats.

There is some good news. The White House opposes this latest bid by the broadcasting oligarchy to further eviscerate the public interest. And the fate of the House bill in the Senate is uncertain at best. In the meantime, as far as those political ads go, we’re not totally helpless. Here’s what you can do: Under current law, local television stations still have to keep paper files of who’s paying for these political ads, and they have to make those files available to the public if requested. You can even make copies to take away with you. So just go down to your nearest station, politely ask for the records, and then send the data online to the New America Foundation’s Media Policy Initiative or to the organization of investigative journalists called ProPublica. Both have mounted campaigns to get the information online.

Each is pulling together all the information on political ads they get from you and others - crowdsourcing - and making it available to the entire country via the Internet. If you’re a high school teacher or college professor of journalism, have your students do it and maybe give them classroom credit for collecting the data democracy needs to work.

In other words, here’s a way citizens can take action even against the plutocrats who run Big Media and Congress.

Addendum: The media reform advocacy organization Free Press is also conducting station file inspections, and has just published an easy-to-follow guide to how it’s done. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

0 # paulrevere 2012-03-30 22:37
So these sorts of slight of hand utterances about too big a megaphone in the hands of far too few have been going on for decades. WETHEPEOPLE have allowed our duly elected to sell themselves and in consequence, US, right on into a boxed canyon.

With the concentration of power now vested in the modern media, the mere discussion of this predicament is farce.


More mewling by so called watch dogs that will disappear into the cacophony of lies, sex, spin, celebrity worship and 'gee ain't Big Daddy wonderful'BS to the US.

Man...I am so sick of reading pontifications of greed and power exposure...expe ctiing different results...AND I AIN'T EINSTEIN!
+3 # justAnotherPinko 2012-03-30 22:47
This is fine as far as it goes, but what I don't understand is why, since they're public airwaves, can't these companies provide time for political campaign statements from all side for free? Thus cutting out the need for campaigns to raise the countless millions that go to these guys?
+5 # tedrey 2012-03-31 05:31
Thank you for not only pointing out the problem, but also telling us something we can actually do about it. Refreshing!
+1 # reiverpacific 2012-03-31 11:09
It's all reflected in the almost ad infinitum electoral "season" which now seems to run from just post-inaugurati on day day to election day, and this plays directly into the hands of ever more highly-funded PAC', ever at the doors of power lobbyists buying influence and News programming almost entirely devoid of true content as infotainment stuffing between hugely expensive commercials on the owner-media.
The often excellent, content-rich alternative media which has of necessity and thankfully emerged and is still emerging in the US as a result of such monopolistic influence peddling, can't shake a stick at this kind of marketing and "duh" making commercialized nonsense).
In other "Democracies" (which the US is not), for instance the UK, there is a bout two months intensive campaigning, equal air-time limited to a pre-determined amount by statute, then the election and BANG it's over. That would be a good start here; -I mean, how are elected representatives supposed to do their jobs in any meaningful way if they are consciously or unconsciously, concurrently looking over their shoulders and forward to the next election at the same time, and constantly being pestered by well-heeled special interest lobbyists all the time?
Also, the Electoral College system is a joke and flies in the face of the "Equal representation" depending on which state one lives in and should be replaced by a multi-party-acc ess Parliamentary structure.
+5 # treadlightly 2012-03-31 11:14
Bill Moyers is a good man. In this article he is trying to give you and I a way to fight the propaganda machine. That is what television is. Every message is geared towards making you believe that if you aren't living the way all the pretty people in the ads are living then there is something wrong with you. I no longer watch television. I gave it up years ago. My radio is tuned to NPR and everything else I get here online, or from friends.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.