• Narrow screen resolution
  • Wide screen resolution
  • Auto width resolution
  • Increase font size
  • Decrease font size
  • Default font size

Right Side News

Friday
Dec 05th
Home arrow Culture Wars arrow "Media Reform" Targets Conservatives
"Media Reform" Targets Conservatives PDF Print E-mail

June 3, 2008
cliff-kincaid-small.jpgBy Cliff Kincaid

Led by a Muslim Democrat, members of the Federal Communications Commission, and Bill Moyers, Phil Donahue, and Dan Rather, a well-funded campaign to move the media in a more left-wing direction will gather in Minneapolis from June 6-8. Thousands of “progressive” activists are expected to attend. Accuracy in Media will cover the event.


Moyers recently achieved notoriety for using his public television program to give a national platform to Barack Obama’s controversial former pastor Jeremiah Wright, while Donahue, who began his career as a tabloid TV talk-show host, recently completed an anti-Iraq War film. Donahue and his former MSNBC sidekick, Jeff Cohen, the founder of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting who is now a university professor, continue to travel around the country insisting that the media are too right-wing.

Dan Rather, of course, is the disgraced former CBS Evening News anchorman who used phony documents in an effort to smear President Bush before the 2004 election. He left CBS News and sued the network after this debacle, claiming he was treated unfairly. Rather now anchors “Dan Rather Reports” on a little-watched cable channel, HDNet.

Ironically, Rather is appearing on a panel at the National Conference for Media Reform that is supposed to unveil a “Big Media Hall of Shame.” Presumably, the inductees will be conservative media voices.

At the opening session of the conference, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Mn.), the first Muslim elected to Congress, will discuss the “opportunity to wrest control of media access and distribution from the few to the many,” according to the official conference program. This is liberal doublespeak for using the power of the federal government to hand over more media properties to liberals.

However, as the Moyers example suggests, they already have access, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayers, to 350 television stations affiliated with the Public Broadcasting Service. The 860 stations affiliated with National Public Radio are also regarded as reliable outlets for liberal or “progressive” opinion. Pacifica Radio, an openly “progressive” radio network, includes five stations owned by the Pacifica Foundation, one associate station, and 132 affiliates. Pacifica has also received taxpayer funding.

In addition, they have MSNBC, the evening news programs of the three broadcasting networks, and most of the national press.

In Minneapolis, the conference has the support of AM 950, KNTF, “The Voice of Minnesota,” which is a home for Air America Radio, the liberal network that went through bankruptcy and was bailed out by a wealthy liberal family that includes former Democratic politician Mark Green.

But this is not enough media control and reach to satisfy them. The “progressives” are angry that since the deregulation of the media, beginning in the 1980s, the liberal media monopoly has been challenged and that talk radio and cable news have found that there is a receptive audience for conservative programming. 

In order to counter this conservative trend, “progressive” groups have proposed to stop the process of media deregulation, which included the FCC’s decision to abolish the Fairness Doctrine, and force broadcasters to limit or even eliminate airtime for conservatives and put more left-wingers on the air.   

As AIM has documented in the book, “The Death of Talk Radio?,” and in a TV advertisement, the movement to control the content of the media is a real danger to the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech. But the Broadcaster Freedom Act, which would stop the return of the Fairness Doctrine, is being bottled up by congressional liberals, who don’t want it to come up for a vote.

As a result, if Obama captures the White House and gets the opportunity to appoint the FCC chairman, liberals would then have a 3-2 majority capable of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine through administrative action, without the need for congressional approval. A new Fairness Doctrine could be challenged in the courts but the U.S. Supreme Court previously upheld it. In the meantime, as court battles proceed, conservatives could be forced off the air by liberal FCC bureaucrats exercising arbitrary power in the name of fairness.

The potential danger has already been dramatized by the coordinated effort of the radical Muslim group CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) to force conservative broadcaster Michael Savage off the air through an advertiser boycott. With a federal Fairness Doctrine in place, these groups could go straight to the FCC with their complaints and get bureaucrats to fine, punish or revoke the licenses of conservative broadcasters. Conservative complaints about liberal media bias would, of course, be dismissed out of hand.   

Ominously, one of the featured speakers at the National Conference for Media Reform is Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), a prominent opponent of media deregulation who backs Barack Obama for president. Dorgan wants more FCC oversight over and control of the media.

Equally serious, a session on “Standing Up Against Hate Speech” in the media will feature Mark Kappelhoff, Chief of the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, and representatives of various Hispanic and civil rights organizations. Their task will be, according to the conference program, to use the “verifiable data that links hate speech to hate crimes” and come up with “strategies and solutions” to muzzle or remove offending radio and TV hosts and programs from the air. They usually define “hate speech” as being commentary or news coverage that is critical of illegal aliens or minority groups. Indeed, the term “illegal alien” is even considered to be offensive.

Of particular interest is the panel, “Media Policy in a New Congress and Administration,” featuring two members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Jonathan S. Adelstein and Michael J. Copps, with comments also from Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.). Doyle was among the liberal politicians who erroneously accused conservative radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh in a piece of legislation (H. Con. Res. 221) of calling combat troops opposed to the Iraq War “phony soldiers.” The bill reflects the intent of liberal legislators to monitor and control the content of what is said on the air.

“Holding local broadcast stations accountable at the FCC” is the name of another panel at the Minneapolis conference.

In one of the most bizarre panels and workshops, “Owning Our Own and Reaching the Masses,” somebody who goes by the name “stic.man” of a hip-hop group called “dead prez” is one of the listed speakers. One of the group’s songs is titled, “Revolutionary But Gangsta,” and their website features an obscene gesture. Stic.man is supposed to be an expert on the dangers of “corporate media.”

Randall Pinkston of CBS News will be appearing on a panel devoted to how the FCC can “put consumer and citizen interests first,” while another session is on “Purple Politics Coverage of LGBT Issues in the Media.” LGBT refer to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. One of the panel members is from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, which exists to silence criticism of the homosexual lifestyle in the media.

Some of the financial support for the conference is being concealed under a reference in the conference guide to anonymous “public charities, private foundations and individual donors,” but in the past the event has been generously subsidized by the Open Society Institute of leftist billionaire George Soros, another Obama supporter.

This year, the official conference sponsor, known as the “Free Press,” acknowledges funders that include the Wallace Global Fund, an entity named after Henry A. Wallace, the “progressive” former vice-president under FDR who was dumped from the ticket and was ostracized even by Democrats at the time for his pro-communist views.

The 2007 National Conference for Media Reform, also covered by Accuracy in Media, included members of the Revolutionary Communist party and other Marxist groups.

Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Sphere: Related Content
Trackback(0)
Comments (2)Add Comment
...
written by Peter, June 04, 2008
John, you state nothing more than a desire to have opinions you disagree with censored. You are missing the obvious concept of the free market. Every business entity whether sole proprietor or corporation risks money, time, equipment, ideas, and creates a product or service. The business entity's profit comes from income which is in direct proportion to the benefit the product or service provides people. Ever hear of Air America? The conservative shows thrive in finances and in the arena of ideas, and the liberal shows fail precisely because the ideas themselves are failing ideas. Still, there are liberals broadcasting. Since you are one, maybe you should get someone else to change the station on your radio since you can't seem to do it for yourself. The only threat to democracy is liberal Marxism which is what you advocate when you say every idea has to be acceptable to everyone.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by John, June 03, 2008
Broadcasters make a deal when they obtain - for free - a license to broadcast in a community. In exchange for the opportunity to make millions of dollars, the broadcasters must serve the public interest - the public interest of all of the people, not just a targeted slice of audience most likely to buy their product. It should not be solely about corporations willing to shell out millions to market their message and to keep business-friendly politicians in office.
It should also be about revealing the information that Enron, Bear Stearns, Halliburton and other corporations would prefer to hide.

Critics will argue that there is so much information available in these modern times, people can easily find an opposing point of view to Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly or the rest, somewhere other than radio. But commuters who are stuck in traffic for hours every day own these airwaves, too.

Why must they go online when they get home just to hear the other side? Why should traveling salesman and long-haul truckers, who can drive across several states without hearing any progressive point of view, have to pay hundreds of dollars for satellite radio to replace what they already own for free? Why should rural communities, which depend first on AM radio for their information and who are lucky to get low-speed Internet access, be deprived of any political balance on their own airwaves?

We have allowed policy-makers in this country to create a so-called marketplace to promote one message almost exclusively over another.

But there really is no marketplace at all. Anybody can start a new coffee shop across from Starbucks and compete for business. But almost nobody can just start a new radio station to compete for listeners; the airwaves are limited, and the frequencies are already taken - mostly by big corporations.

Considering a 2003 Gallup poll showing that 22 percent of Americans get their information from talk radio, we're not just talking about what is fair play; we are talking about a threat to the democracy we hold dear.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5

Write comment
quote
bold
italicize
underline
strike
url
image
quote
quote
smile
wink
laugh
grin
angry
sad
shocked
cool
tongue
kiss
cry
smaller | bigger

busy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Free Newsletter



Lost Password? No account yet? Register

buy structured settlement
Convert 8mm Film to DVD
braille exit signs - Great source for all types of Braille signs including ADA accessible signs.
Dallas Divorce Lawyer
erase bad credit
Virgo Personality
press release distribution - Distribute Press Releases to Journalists at Newspapers, Magazines, TV and Radio.