Billionaire consolidation of media should be challenged as a violation of the first amendment. It clearly spits in the face of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Are there any grassroots efforts to make this happen? It needs to be considered (or reconsidered) by the Supreme Court.
The battle was lost during the Reagan administration.
My late colleague Dick Sippel was the lone administrative law judge who fought (and mainly lost) the fight in broadcast media at the FCC. He retired in 2018, and has passed away.
I have suggested many times that investors like unions and broadcasters like Thom et all try to do takeovers (hostile or otherwise) of papers and broadcast outlets.
In September 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved the transfer of over 200 broadcast licenses to a group controlled by Alexander Soros, the son of billionaire investor George Soros.
Alexander Soros serves as a trustee for the Fund for Policy Reform, the nonprofit entity that now holds the controlling interest in Audacy Inc., the second-largest radio broadcaster in the United States
A Battle was lost during Reagan and things have gone generally downhill since. But the fight is on-going and things could get better (or worse). The so should be actively engaged by the public.
Right now, there's a major consolidation of TV station ownership being pushed through (use a non-Google search engine to find info on Nexstar/Tegna). Also with Warner Brothers, which controls CNN is being sold (possibly to Paramount/Ellisons)
Free Press, Media and Democracy Project, Democracy Forward are fighting this and other aspects of the ownership. (Note: FreePress.net not Bari Weiss's outfit)
Here is the problem with that idea Jonathan, and I like it very much, however all that the 1
st Amendment has to say about speech is that CONGRESS shall make no abridging the right of speech.
IOW, it says nothing about speech other than congress shall make no laws. If congress were to pass such a law, and it would not happen in this congress, nor would it be signed by Trump, then the law itself would be a violation of the 1st Amendment
Well, it's time for a new amendment. Jill Lepore's latest book was all about how we grow complacent with the current set of amendments, assuming they are set in stone. What needs to happen is an affront that gets under the skin of MAGA as well, which does happen from time to time in the free speech world. I agree though... we're a bit late. This congress, and certainly not Trump, will not allow any such thing. We need this at the top of the priority queue when this current fascist iteration is done (if we survive), to prevent the next grift / MAGA 2.0.
I am very much in favor of considering other amendments. Getting rid of the loophole in the 13th Amendment (which allows prisoners to be slaves) woudl be a good start. Constraint on pardon power? Term limits for SCOTUS.
I agree, but do you know the [process for amending the constitution?
The U.S. Constitution provides a rigorous two-stage amendment process under Article V, requiring high consensus to ensure stability. Amendments must be proposed either by a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, or by a convention called for by two-thirds of state legislatures. Ratification requires approval by three-fourths of state legislatures or special state conventions.
Now try to do that with the current configuration of congress.
BTW, the Right Wing has been trying to amend the constitution and call a constitutional convention for at least 5 decades, but they stopped since Trump was elected.
It would require 34 states to ratify an amendment. 27 states have Republican governors, 28 states have Republican legislatures and there a 23 Republican Trifectas. Thus no amendment from liberals, progresssives, the left would even get past congress much less ratified.
Yes. Since the ERA failed, we've had a defeatist attitude that it just isn't possible which is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
And that's also why I listed the slavery loophole first. It has been removed at the state level in Utah and Nebraska (but failed in California). And if people want to fight it, it is a fight we should welcome.
Just as an aside, I have read Article V of the constitution and I can count. Not sure why you started with the number of Republican governors because I don't think they have any role in it but please correct me if I am wrong.
But, even if it were not possible for the next decade or two, some fights are worth fighting. No
Fox has been the subject of litigation, including challenges to some of its licences. The FCC has a special bar association and some lawyers make a living taking challenge cases. https://www.fcba.org/
In many cases there are contests re licences.
Before a lawyer would take a case, especially on a coingent fee, would analyize odds of success.
While the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are the primary enforcers of federal antitrust laws like the Sherman Act, the FCC has independent authority to prevent "undue concentration of economic power" in the communications sector.
Of course, these days, Trump controls the FCC but that doesn't mean objections can't be litigated.
Legal and Ethical Complaints: A disciplinary complaint was filed with the D.C. Bar's Disciplinary Council, alleging "egregious misconduct" and arguing that Carr's actions, such as threatening to hold up mergers or pull licenses, violated his ethical obligations as a lawyer and potentially constituted extortion or conspiracy to deprive others of constitutional rights.
Congressional Action: Democratic leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have called for an Inspector General investigation into whether Carr's actions constitute illegal, unconstitutional, or improper use of his office.
Tough to tell from the FCC website how many cases are active.
When I was a member of the ABA House of Delegates, we'd get fights fer and 'gainst takeovers of the entire industry. Several delegates were mambers of the FCC bar, who went on to become officials. Sipple and I were officers of another orgaization, so he'd educate me.
At the federal level ethics complaints are handled by the OGE (office of government ethics) and ot the office of special counsel. A complaint was probably filed at the FCC also.
What is disinformation Daniel. You always jump in with some bullshit, and never explain yourself.
If you are talking about the 1st Amendment. I quoted it, is the 1st Amendment disinformation
Yep objections can be litigated, in a Trump friendly court, and who would file, only the aggrieved party can file, isn't that what Standing means?
If you don't have standing you can't file. In other words Colbert or Kimmel would have had to file, with their resources? I guess they could be up a go fund me page And file against the government which has infinite resources or against a network that also has infinite resources and can take legal expenses as a tax deduction.
Live in reality Daniel, well you did dip your toe, acknowledging that Trump controls the FCC.
But that being so, the rest of your rant is irrelevant.
The Trump regime violates the law, many times a day, with no consquences. Who is going to stop him? Pam Bondi, Noem, Homan, Gabbard?
Here is a sample:
More than 400 judges across the United States have ruled at least 4,421 times since October that the Trump administration is detaining immigrants unlawfully, according to a review by Reuters. The number of people in ICE detention reached about 68,000 this month, up about 75% from when Trump took office last year. Nate Raymond, Kristina Cooke, and Brad
Heath report.
The Trump administration has violated 52 orders from federal judges in the District of New Jersey since Dec. 5, all in cases where immigrants are challenging the legality of their detention, according to a court-ordered review. The review found that detainees were transferred 17 times despite court orders prohibiting them from being moved. Mattathias Schwartz, Zach Montague, and Luis Ferre-Sadurni report for the New York Times.
Defense lawyers have created a case tracker, sponsored by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to “spotlight the unusual cases being prosecuted by the Department of Justice,” Steven Salky, a lawyer in Washington, D.C., said. The tracker also monitors cases where government charges of resisting federal law enforcement have been undercut by videos and eyewitness accounts from protestors. “This tracker is an essential tool for an era where federal overreach has become the standard operating procedure," said NACDL Executive Director Lisa Wayne. Carrie Johnson reports for NPR.
If I were you Daniel, I would stop trying to fuck with me.
Max Schumacher: You need me. You need me badly. Because I'm your last contact with human reality. I love you. And that painful, decaying love is the only thing between you and the shrieking nothingness you live the rest of the day.
Max Schumacher: It's too late, Diana. There's nothing left in you that I can live with. You're one of Howard's humanoids. If I stay with you, I'll be destroyed. Like Howard Beale was destroyed. Like Laureen Hobbs was destroyed. Like everything you and the institution of television touch is destroyed. You're television incarnate, Diana: Indifferent to suffering; insensitive to joy. All of life is reduced to the common rubble of banality. War, murder, death are all the same to you as bottles of beer. And the daily business of life is a corrupt comedy. You even shatter the sensations of time and space into split seconds and instant replays. YOU'RE MADNESS, Diana. Virulent madness. And everything you touch dies with you. But not me. Not as long as I can feel pleasure, and pain... and love.
[Kisses her]
Max Schumacher: And it's a happy ending: Wayward husband comes to his senses, returns to his wife, with whom he has established a long and sustaining love. Heartless young woman left alone in her arctic desolation. Music up with a swell; final commercial. And here are a few scenes from next week's show.
To inject a little fuel for what we are all very much concerned about. The New York Daily News came out yesterday and called this administration. :"THE MOST POWERFUL CRIME SYNDICATE IN HISTORY" Since that is out there,maybe all the historical data we like to get into the weeds with should just comedown to " The Fourth Reich has Arrived" Trump is a "Nazi"
Freedom of speech has been replaced with freedom of money, so it sucks to be you if you are not rich. The internet gives independent journalists the opportunity to cover real news honestly, if they don't get arrested for it (Don Lemon, Georgia Fort).
One good thing is that travel-time is not what it used to be. We can ditch live radio for audio books, music, or podcasts on your phone or a memory stick.
Being trapped in my car with Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and "MAGA" calling-in is a damn nightmare. Let's save our brains.
Did you notice it's the OLD billionaires buying the mainstream?
Once the right fully takes over traditional TV, it should eventually die of natural causes along with the audience they draw. My resistance was strong until covid. Home computer, WIFI, and podcasts---had to have them. Now curating the good ones is the problem.
They have been playing some good internet protest songs at the rallies. The frogs and unicorns like to dance. See you in the streets.
Ever since Citizens United, it is now possible to monopolize our government and our entire economy. I applaud Thom for reminding us that Democrats enabled this mess either via direct policy, like Clinton, or by not trying to restore policies that stymie the creation of an American oligarchy, like Obama didn't when Dems owned both houses.
Matt Stoller's entire life has been devoted to playing the Monopoly game for real - encouraging "Go directly to jail. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200." and preventing buying up entire blocks to monopolize rents. Sadly, our legislators do not subscribe to Matt's Substack, BIG.
Communication monopolies used to be illegal and should be again. Channels like FoxNews appeal to people who "can't handle the truth." So, they mock the truth and provide "alternative facts" that reduce viewer stress. The New CBS is an alternative scheme that just edits out the stressful truths so as not to trigger stress in the first place. In both cases, their "news" actually primes the emotional pump for rage. Once enraged, critical reasoning goes into standby. Once that happens, the masses will believe lies like immigrants are eating their neighbor's dogs, and raping their daughters.
"The Federal Communications Commission sets limits on the number of broadcast stations – radio and TV – an entity can own. As required by Congress, the FCC reviews most of its media ownership rules every four years to determine whether the rules are in the public interest and to repeal or modify any regulation it determines does not meet this criteria."
I found it very telling that Fox (cable) news did not livestream Pam Bondi's congressional temper tantrum.
Apparently, even they realized that this was not a good look for the administration, albeit because it was about Epstein and their audience isn't buying the party's line ("nothing to see here"). Bondi's performance made her a ventriloquist dummy -- and must have pleased her audience of one. Another chink in what seemed to be the impenetrable armor of the propaganda machine holding the MAGA crowd in lockstep.
Colbert is spot on. It is become clear that the media takeover is not just to re-write reality, and misdirect the population, but increasingly in order to ensure that their audience of one, Trump, is never subject to criticism & insult or has to face reality. He gets to live in his deranged mind and bubble, reinforced as soon as he lets go of posting and takes a break to watch t.v.
"If ever there was a time ripe for revisiting the laws and rules that gave us the relatively unbiased media landscape ..."
It was 1996. Clinton has a lot to answer for.
From inside my bubble, it looks like the billionaire oligarchs have taken over, the American experiment is on its way out, and we need to put up a fight. When I venture outside my bubble, most people don't care about the experiment and never have, as long as their gas costs less than $2 a gallon. Comfortable and myopic, they don't resist domination, they accept it as "the way it is, don't fight it," or they secretly agree that this is a better way, or they actively cheer on setting fire to the whole thing.
Most people don't care if those at the top must play their "mine is bigger than yours," or "nah nah, I've got more than you have."
They want a fair wage for their labor so they can have adequate food, shelter, and enough security to enjoy their family, friends, and nature. But there are sick individuals in the world who will never think they have enough and therefore take whatever they can from the rest of us. We're running out of ways to stop them since they've bought the justice system and the government.
I was watching the protests in Argentina on a podcast video. A new law is weakening workers' rights. The new law increases the workday to 12 hours from 8 hours and allows employers to pay in kind. Paying workers with food and shelter is the definition of slavery! Surprisingly, one of my sons was picking up his boy that we were watching for the day and said, "I would go for that." It sounds so much simpler than what we have to do to get food and shelter.” This son is often sarcastic and has a quirky sense of humor. But I know what he has been through and know there was some truth in what he said.
The only power I have is my vote and my purse. I will no longer watch anything on CBS, and I will not subscribe to Paramount+ and I am going to convince my wife to unsubcribe to Netflix (which actually sucks, since I can never find anything on it worth my time to watch)
Thank you, Professor Hartmann, for this clear and chilling explanation of how these outrageous radical right wing monstrosities were birthed. May we rise to undo this web of deceit.
Fortunately there is still good journalism in our mass media and Thom provides his contribution to it. It's my opinion that The Washington Post still has some good pieces along with some slanted towards the administration. For example, a Wash Post story today listed the prominent men and one woman who are paying the price for their relationships with Epstein. Thus good stuff. I'm a bit biased, if a story doesn't start with the premise that Trump is a dishonest pedophile thieving SOB serial rapist criminal - I jump the conclusion that the author and outlet are favoring him. That's poor objective reasoning, however trump is a knave a cur an eater of broken meats one who would be a bawd in way of good service.
Have any of you ever read Allen Drury's book series beginning with Advise and Consent? When I was in high school my very favorite cousin, a psychologist whose page I joined, recommended them to me. I was going down a red pathway that I didn't understand but i read that entire series, at least twice. The third time I read it I realized it was too 'red' for me but his conclusions and they way he described our government taught me a great deal. I'm so glad I'm blue.
When historians analyze this dark time I believe the willingness of the billionaire class to manipulate media and intentionally mislead citizens for their own greed will go down as one of the most destructive and despicable displays of villainy. I appreciate you pointing out that citizen action has made and can make a difference against these immoral actors.
Billionaire consolidation of media should be challenged as a violation of the first amendment. It clearly spits in the face of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Are there any grassroots efforts to make this happen? It needs to be considered (or reconsidered) by the Supreme Court.
The battle was lost during the Reagan administration.
My late colleague Dick Sippel was the lone administrative law judge who fought (and mainly lost) the fight in broadcast media at the FCC. He retired in 2018, and has passed away.
I have suggested many times that investors like unions and broadcasters like Thom et all try to do takeovers (hostile or otherwise) of papers and broadcast outlets.
In September 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved the transfer of over 200 broadcast licenses to a group controlled by Alexander Soros, the son of billionaire investor George Soros.
Alexander Soros serves as a trustee for the Fund for Policy Reform, the nonprofit entity that now holds the controlling interest in Audacy Inc., the second-largest radio broadcaster in the United States
A Battle was lost during Reagan and things have gone generally downhill since. But the fight is on-going and things could get better (or worse). The so should be actively engaged by the public.
Right now, there's a major consolidation of TV station ownership being pushed through (use a non-Google search engine to find info on Nexstar/Tegna). Also with Warner Brothers, which controls CNN is being sold (possibly to Paramount/Ellisons)
Free Press, Media and Democracy Project, Democracy Forward are fighting this and other aspects of the ownership. (Note: FreePress.net not Bari Weiss's outfit)
See my comments below. Lawyers specalize in this stuff.
Here is the problem with that idea Jonathan, and I like it very much, however all that the 1
st Amendment has to say about speech is that CONGRESS shall make no abridging the right of speech.
IOW, it says nothing about speech other than congress shall make no laws. If congress were to pass such a law, and it would not happen in this congress, nor would it be signed by Trump, then the law itself would be a violation of the 1st Amendment
Well, it's time for a new amendment. Jill Lepore's latest book was all about how we grow complacent with the current set of amendments, assuming they are set in stone. What needs to happen is an affront that gets under the skin of MAGA as well, which does happen from time to time in the free speech world. I agree though... we're a bit late. This congress, and certainly not Trump, will not allow any such thing. We need this at the top of the priority queue when this current fascist iteration is done (if we survive), to prevent the next grift / MAGA 2.0.
I am very much in favor of considering other amendments. Getting rid of the loophole in the 13th Amendment (which allows prisoners to be slaves) woudl be a good start. Constraint on pardon power? Term limits for SCOTUS.
I agree, but do you know the [process for amending the constitution?
The U.S. Constitution provides a rigorous two-stage amendment process under Article V, requiring high consensus to ensure stability. Amendments must be proposed either by a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, or by a convention called for by two-thirds of state legislatures. Ratification requires approval by three-fourths of state legislatures or special state conventions.
Now try to do that with the current configuration of congress.
BTW, the Right Wing has been trying to amend the constitution and call a constitutional convention for at least 5 decades, but they stopped since Trump was elected.
It would require 34 states to ratify an amendment. 27 states have Republican governors, 28 states have Republican legislatures and there a 23 Republican Trifectas. Thus no amendment from liberals, progresssives, the left would even get past congress much less ratified.
Yes. Since the ERA failed, we've had a defeatist attitude that it just isn't possible which is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
And that's also why I listed the slavery loophole first. It has been removed at the state level in Utah and Nebraska (but failed in California). And if people want to fight it, it is a fight we should welcome.
https://humantraffickingsearch.org/efforts-by-states-to-eliminate-the-exception-allowing-slavery-or-involuntary-servitude-as-punishment-for-a-crime/
Just as an aside, I have read Article V of the constitution and I can count. Not sure why you started with the number of Republican governors because I don't think they have any role in it but please correct me if I am wrong.
But, even if it were not possible for the next decade or two, some fights are worth fighting. No
Fox has been the subject of litigation, including challenges to some of its licences. The FCC has a special bar association and some lawyers make a living taking challenge cases. https://www.fcba.org/
In many cases there are contests re licences.
Before a lawyer would take a case, especially on a coingent fee, would analyize odds of success.
There are organizations who will pay legal fees (and other costs) even if odds of success are low.
They filed this 236-page regulatory filing for example:
https://www.freepress.net/download/redacted-copy-nxst-tgna-petition-deny-pdf
https://cordcuttersnews.com/free-press-and-unions-ask-the-fcc-not-to-approve-nexstars-acquisition-of-local-abc-cbs-fox-and-nbc-stations/
Not saying it would be easy but let's not assume there wouldn't be lawyers who represent the case.
You must be new. I post stuff from Common Cause, Public Citizen, others almost daily.
With stuff like FCC, there is a special bar -- only some lawyers are qualified.
As usual, misinformation.
While the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are the primary enforcers of federal antitrust laws like the Sherman Act, the FCC has independent authority to prevent "undue concentration of economic power" in the communications sector.
Of course, these days, Trump controls the FCC but that doesn't mean objections can't be litigated.
From AI Overview concerning Brendan Carr:
Legal and Ethical Complaints: A disciplinary complaint was filed with the D.C. Bar's Disciplinary Council, alleging "egregious misconduct" and arguing that Carr's actions, such as threatening to hold up mergers or pull licenses, violated his ethical obligations as a lawyer and potentially constituted extortion or conspiracy to deprive others of constitutional rights.
Congressional Action: Democratic leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have called for an Inspector General investigation into whether Carr's actions constitute illegal, unconstitutional, or improper use of his office.
Maybe just doing a Wikipedia search on Carr could reveal some baggage. Call his office and let them know we know exactly what he is up to.
https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
Obviously the FCC has blocked access.
Tough to tell from the FCC website how many cases are active.
When I was a member of the ABA House of Delegates, we'd get fights fer and 'gainst takeovers of the entire industry. Several delegates were mambers of the FCC bar, who went on to become officials. Sipple and I were officers of another orgaization, so he'd educate me.
At the federal level ethics complaints are handled by the OGE (office of government ethics) and ot the office of special counsel. A complaint was probably filed at the FCC also.
What is disinformation Daniel. You always jump in with some bullshit, and never explain yourself.
If you are talking about the 1st Amendment. I quoted it, is the 1st Amendment disinformation
Yep objections can be litigated, in a Trump friendly court, and who would file, only the aggrieved party can file, isn't that what Standing means?
If you don't have standing you can't file. In other words Colbert or Kimmel would have had to file, with their resources? I guess they could be up a go fund me page And file against the government which has infinite resources or against a network that also has infinite resources and can take legal expenses as a tax deduction.
Live in reality Daniel, well you did dip your toe, acknowledging that Trump controls the FCC.
But that being so, the rest of your rant is irrelevant.
The Trump regime violates the law, many times a day, with no consquences. Who is going to stop him? Pam Bondi, Noem, Homan, Gabbard?
Here is a sample:
More than 400 judges across the United States have ruled at least 4,421 times since October that the Trump administration is detaining immigrants unlawfully, according to a review by Reuters. The number of people in ICE detention reached about 68,000 this month, up about 75% from when Trump took office last year. Nate Raymond, Kristina Cooke, and Brad
Heath report.
The Trump administration has violated 52 orders from federal judges in the District of New Jersey since Dec. 5, all in cases where immigrants are challenging the legality of their detention, according to a court-ordered review. The review found that detainees were transferred 17 times despite court orders prohibiting them from being moved. Mattathias Schwartz, Zach Montague, and Luis Ferre-Sadurni report for the New York Times.
Defense lawyers have created a case tracker, sponsored by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to “spotlight the unusual cases being prosecuted by the Department of Justice,” Steven Salky, a lawyer in Washington, D.C., said. The tracker also monitors cases where government charges of resisting federal law enforcement have been undercut by videos and eyewitness accounts from protestors. “This tracker is an essential tool for an era where federal overreach has become the standard operating procedure," said NACDL Executive Director Lisa Wayne. Carrie Johnson reports for NPR.
If I were you Daniel, I would stop trying to fuck with me.
William,thanks for the info. Going to break it down into 8 talking points. This absolute disregard for the law is " Nazi" style politics.
Idiot.FCC.
Stupid fuck, Brendan Carr
You are lost. Yet pontificate. The FCC has limited speech since 1934.
Great, sir ... VOTE.
Reminded me of this Max quote in "Network."
Max Schumacher: You need me. You need me badly. Because I'm your last contact with human reality. I love you. And that painful, decaying love is the only thing between you and the shrieking nothingness you live the rest of the day.
Diana Christensen: [hesitatingly] Then, don't leave me.
Max Schumacher: It's too late, Diana. There's nothing left in you that I can live with. You're one of Howard's humanoids. If I stay with you, I'll be destroyed. Like Howard Beale was destroyed. Like Laureen Hobbs was destroyed. Like everything you and the institution of television touch is destroyed. You're television incarnate, Diana: Indifferent to suffering; insensitive to joy. All of life is reduced to the common rubble of banality. War, murder, death are all the same to you as bottles of beer. And the daily business of life is a corrupt comedy. You even shatter the sensations of time and space into split seconds and instant replays. YOU'RE MADNESS, Diana. Virulent madness. And everything you touch dies with you. But not me. Not as long as I can feel pleasure, and pain... and love.
[Kisses her]
Max Schumacher: And it's a happy ending: Wayward husband comes to his senses, returns to his wife, with whom he has established a long and sustaining love. Heartless young woman left alone in her arctic desolation. Music up with a swell; final commercial. And here are a few scenes from next week's show.
[Picks up his suitcases and leaves]
To inject a little fuel for what we are all very much concerned about. The New York Daily News came out yesterday and called this administration. :"THE MOST POWERFUL CRIME SYNDICATE IN HISTORY" Since that is out there,maybe all the historical data we like to get into the weeds with should just comedown to " The Fourth Reich has Arrived" Trump is a "Nazi"
Freedom of speech has been replaced with freedom of money, so it sucks to be you if you are not rich. The internet gives independent journalists the opportunity to cover real news honestly, if they don't get arrested for it (Don Lemon, Georgia Fort).
According to them, speech = money. See Citizens' United.
See the USA in your Chevrolet.....
One good thing is that travel-time is not what it used to be. We can ditch live radio for audio books, music, or podcasts on your phone or a memory stick.
Being trapped in my car with Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and "MAGA" calling-in is a damn nightmare. Let's save our brains.
Did you notice it's the OLD billionaires buying the mainstream?
Once the right fully takes over traditional TV, it should eventually die of natural causes along with the audience they draw. My resistance was strong until covid. Home computer, WIFI, and podcasts---had to have them. Now curating the good ones is the problem.
They have been playing some good internet protest songs at the rallies. The frogs and unicorns like to dance. See you in the streets.
In my discussion groups, they ain't buyin' nothin'.
Ever since Citizens United, it is now possible to monopolize our government and our entire economy. I applaud Thom for reminding us that Democrats enabled this mess either via direct policy, like Clinton, or by not trying to restore policies that stymie the creation of an American oligarchy, like Obama didn't when Dems owned both houses.
Matt Stoller's entire life has been devoted to playing the Monopoly game for real - encouraging "Go directly to jail. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200." and preventing buying up entire blocks to monopolize rents. Sadly, our legislators do not subscribe to Matt's Substack, BIG.
Communication monopolies used to be illegal and should be again. Channels like FoxNews appeal to people who "can't handle the truth." So, they mock the truth and provide "alternative facts" that reduce viewer stress. The New CBS is an alternative scheme that just edits out the stressful truths so as not to trigger stress in the first place. In both cases, their "news" actually primes the emotional pump for rage. Once enraged, critical reasoning goes into standby. Once that happens, the masses will believe lies like immigrants are eating their neighbor's dogs, and raping their daughters.
Long before this kid was born, Ralph Nader, many others.
I refered to the FCC Act above. The 1934 version has been excised from the website, probabky by order of the Fuhrer. Here are the rules, circa 2020. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/fccs-review-broadcast-ownership-rules
"The Federal Communications Commission sets limits on the number of broadcast stations – radio and TV – an entity can own. As required by Congress, the FCC reviews most of its media ownership rules every four years to determine whether the rules are in the public interest and to repeal or modify any regulation it determines does not meet this criteria."
I found it very telling that Fox (cable) news did not livestream Pam Bondi's congressional temper tantrum.
Apparently, even they realized that this was not a good look for the administration, albeit because it was about Epstein and their audience isn't buying the party's line ("nothing to see here"). Bondi's performance made her a ventriloquist dummy -- and must have pleased her audience of one. Another chink in what seemed to be the impenetrable armor of the propaganda machine holding the MAGA crowd in lockstep.
Colbert is spot on. It is become clear that the media takeover is not just to re-write reality, and misdirect the population, but increasingly in order to ensure that their audience of one, Trump, is never subject to criticism & insult or has to face reality. He gets to live in his deranged mind and bubble, reinforced as soon as he lets go of posting and takes a break to watch t.v.
"If ever there was a time ripe for revisiting the laws and rules that gave us the relatively unbiased media landscape ..."
It was 1996. Clinton has a lot to answer for.
From inside my bubble, it looks like the billionaire oligarchs have taken over, the American experiment is on its way out, and we need to put up a fight. When I venture outside my bubble, most people don't care about the experiment and never have, as long as their gas costs less than $2 a gallon. Comfortable and myopic, they don't resist domination, they accept it as "the way it is, don't fight it," or they secretly agree that this is a better way, or they actively cheer on setting fire to the whole thing.
Most people don't care if those at the top must play their "mine is bigger than yours," or "nah nah, I've got more than you have."
They want a fair wage for their labor so they can have adequate food, shelter, and enough security to enjoy their family, friends, and nature. But there are sick individuals in the world who will never think they have enough and therefore take whatever they can from the rest of us. We're running out of ways to stop them since they've bought the justice system and the government.
I was watching the protests in Argentina on a podcast video. A new law is weakening workers' rights. The new law increases the workday to 12 hours from 8 hours and allows employers to pay in kind. Paying workers with food and shelter is the definition of slavery! Surprisingly, one of my sons was picking up his boy that we were watching for the day and said, "I would go for that." It sounds so much simpler than what we have to do to get food and shelter.” This son is often sarcastic and has a quirky sense of humor. But I know what he has been through and know there was some truth in what he said.
The only power I have is my vote and my purse. I will no longer watch anything on CBS, and I will not subscribe to Paramount+ and I am going to convince my wife to unsubcribe to Netflix (which actually sucks, since I can never find anything on it worth my time to watch)
Don't forget your voice. It is important to express yourself (which you did here) in whatever ways you think will have an impact.
Shareholders potentially can bring derivitive actions.
Violations can be reprted to the FCC.
Thank you, Professor Hartmann, for this clear and chilling explanation of how these outrageous radical right wing monstrosities were birthed. May we rise to undo this web of deceit.
Some Teddy Roosevelt style trust busting would support the 1st Amendment’s intent.
Fortunately there is still good journalism in our mass media and Thom provides his contribution to it. It's my opinion that The Washington Post still has some good pieces along with some slanted towards the administration. For example, a Wash Post story today listed the prominent men and one woman who are paying the price for their relationships with Epstein. Thus good stuff. I'm a bit biased, if a story doesn't start with the premise that Trump is a dishonest pedophile thieving SOB serial rapist criminal - I jump the conclusion that the author and outlet are favoring him. That's poor objective reasoning, however trump is a knave a cur an eater of broken meats one who would be a bawd in way of good service.
Have any of you ever read Allen Drury's book series beginning with Advise and Consent? When I was in high school my very favorite cousin, a psychologist whose page I joined, recommended them to me. I was going down a red pathway that I didn't understand but i read that entire series, at least twice. The third time I read it I realized it was too 'red' for me but his conclusions and they way he described our government taught me a great deal. I'm so glad I'm blue.
When historians analyze this dark time I believe the willingness of the billionaire class to manipulate media and intentionally mislead citizens for their own greed will go down as one of the most destructive and despicable displays of villainy. I appreciate you pointing out that citizen action has made and can make a difference against these immoral actors.