|
I didn't see it in the thread, but I think its important to mention Clear Channel. They're a large media/advertising company who, through various subsidiaries controls a lot of the right wing programming. I didn't know this, but they were bought out by Bain a few years ago. I'm curious as to how conservative-minded the owners of that company are, and I'm sure that plays a part in the large disparity b/w progressive and conservative media. I might do an effort post on them in a day or so, if I've got time.
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2012 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
Those are all excellent points. I knew about their billboards and all the lawsuits stemming from them (sup, ex-Alaska Goon! I'm in Fairbanks), but I didn't realize they were prominent in the UK. I should have figured as much. Most of my work focuses on the distribution of goods and services, and I see the distribution of information being a key factor in what influences our political culture. It's not that there isn't a market or an audience for progressive media, it's that the progressives do not control any means of distribution. And media covers a lot of territory such as radio, television, and advertising. It's good business for any multimedia company be involved in as many aspects as you can, such as Clear Channel. Between that ruling Flamingliberal mentioned as well as the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, it became much easier for the moneyed elite to control the flow of information. And now that I've got a back injury and will be incapacitated for awhile, I'll be able to make an effort post detailing the company and its tactics. Or goto TCC and do a trip report on some wicked painkillers.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2012 09:51
|
|
|
GoatSeeGuy posted:The Mays family that built Clear Channel were old school Texas republicans but these days the company is far more concerned with running things cheaply vs. pushing ideology. While I agree that they'd rather run things cheaply, I think that's because it has become much easier for them to push their ideology. That conservative mentality is doing great on its own and doesn't need much more help in spreading, although that's not to say Clear Channel is just sitting on the sidelines. They lobby for further deregulation/privatization of the airwaves, they've supported SOPA and PIPA, extended the Bush tax cuts, and helped ruin the USPS. And this has just been in the last few years alone. The Mays' personal donations go to the likes of Romney and Perry. The majority of the PAC spending has gone to Repubs this year, but 2008-2010 they gave more to the dems. You ask me, they're hedging their bets by sticking with establishment republicans and democrats. Before all of that was able to occur, a lot of our laws regarding media had to change. This is especially true in the 90s, because as we all know that's when Al Gore created the internet. So in 1996 the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed and signed into law. The idea was to foster competition by deregulation, and allow companies to emerge in the dot com era. What it actually did was give the large media companies a chance to become media empires. The large national companies bought out the smaller, local broadcasting stations in order to save money with syndicated shows that had a national appeal. This also cut costs by nixing local programming, or at least cutting it down to just local news. Another piece of legislation that played an important role in shaping our media culture is the Fairness Doctrine. The FCC used this to ensure that opposing views on controversial topics would get equal airtime by broadcasters. While technically violating first amendment rights, its intention was to force broadcasters to inform the public on both sides of an issue, instead of just hearing what the broadcaster wants to say about it. For example, I couldn't just say abortion is evil, I'd have to allot time for someone who said abortion is okay. It is much more cost effective to have one person speaking on one side of the issue than having two people with opposing views. This law was gutted in 1987 which paved the way for the right wing rhetoric we see today. So now you have media companies that can say whatever they want, and are able to use a variety of platforms from which to get your attention. This is when and how Clear Channel put itself on the national stage. In addition to buying out local affiliates and replacing their programming with syndicated shows such as Limbaugh and Friends, they were acquiring the outdoor advertising companies such as ABC and Universal Outdoor. Then in 2001 they purchased a conglomerate of billboard companies owned by GE and renamed it to Clear Channel Outdoor. So if you are listening to some am talk radio on your way to work and being bombarded by outdoor advertisements you are not only hearing what clear channel has to say, but you are looking at what they want you to see. As been said before, a lot of these right wing commentators were radio hosts before, and are most likely doing their current gigs solely for the money. I think due to the ability for companies like Clear Channel and Fox to control the streams of information, we are hearing what the heads of those companies think. Unfortunately, forcing them to speak honestly or to have a critical discussion violates their god given rights to be dipshits.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2012 23:10
|
|