Activism Discussion: #Government Subsidized Journalism Is Fair & Balanced

#Government Subsidized Journalism Is Fair & Balanced
Posts: 15

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Dänk_666?=
2010-06-14 17:01:36 EST
The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it"
by subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.

Here is an example of how government-subsidized journalism works in
Mexico:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Bordering on Chaos" by Andres Oppenheimer, Little, Brown and Company,
1996

[Excerpts from pages 131-136]

"In the months preceding the [1994] elections, Televisa gave most of
its airtime to the [Ernesto] Zedillo [PRI] campaign. Meanwhile, it
equated coverage of Zedillo's main rivals, the center-right National
Action Party (PAN) and the center-left Party of the Democratic
Revolution (PRD), with that of some half a dozen minuscule parties,
many of which had been created by the government for the purpose of
splitting the legitimate opposition vote."

"What was even more telling was the amount of time that Televisa was
giving to tiny political parties, most of which were financed by the
government and had never won more than 1% of the vote in a national
election. Televisa's top news program had devoted more time to each
of the candidates of the Green Environmental Party of Mexico (PVEM),
the Mexican Democratic Party (PDM), and the Authentic Party of the
Mexican Revolution (PARM) than to [Cuauhtémoc] Cárdenas or [Diego]
Fernández de Cevallos [PAN]. If you watched Televisa without knowing
much about Mexico, you would have concluded that any of the three
small parties was more important than Cárdenas' PRD, which according
to government critics had won as many votes as Salinas -- if not more
-- in the murky 1988 presidential elections."

"Post-election television coverage studies left little doubt about
Televisa’s manipulation of the news. In addition to giving Zedillo
eight times more airtime than any of his adversaries, the network
seemed to consciously play opposition candidates up or down according
to the PRI's daily needs. After giving scant coverage to the Cárdenas
campaign for several months, Televisa suddenly began to prop up the
center-left candidate two weeks before the elections. In the final
week of the campaign, Cárdenas got 6.1 minutes of airtime on '24
Horas,' much more than Fernández de Cevallos' 3.2 minutes. The other
five leading television news programs on both networks showed a
similar -- and equally sudden -- pattern of increased coverage of
Cárdenas. It wasn't a last-minute act of repentance: By then,
Cárdenas had fallen far behind in the polls. Fernández de Cevallos
was the biggest threat to the Zedillo campaign."

"While the total readership of Mexican newspapers was relatively small
-- Mexico City’s 23 daily newspapers, of which only half a dozen had a
real readership, had a combined circulation of few than 500,000 copies
-- newspaper coverage of the election wasn't left to chance either.
Early in the presidential race, the ruling party had secretly paid
millions to Mexico's largest dailies to publish Zedillo campaign
propaganda disguised as news."

"Through the separate 'convenios,' or secret contracts with
newspapers, the PRI had paid about $800,000 each to Mexico’s largest
newspapers -- including the pro-government dailies Excelsior and El
Universal, and the leftist opposition daily La Jornada -- to regularly
carry Zedillo campaign news on their front pages. In addition,
various PRI state governments signed their own convenios with the same
newspapers to obtain sympathetic coverage for their local candidates,
in effect elevating to about $3 million the figure each of the
newspapers was getting from various government and party agencies."

"Reporters weren't terribly upset about these deals: About 10% of each
contract went directly to the reporters covering the campaign --
meaning that a journalist covering Zedillo got about an $80,000
commission, not bad in a country where most reporters made a miserable
salary of $12,000 a year. Considering the fat checks the publishers
and a few chosen reporters were getting, it was not surprising that
few would blow the whistle on the deals, which were common knowledge
in the newsrooms."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Eddie Haskell
2010-06-14 17:28:29 EST

"D\ufffdnk 666" <dank420@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:afdbb3eb-2516-4ce2-8466-fabd78d8a196@j12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it"
> by subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.

Oh, my god. A liberal newspaper bailout.

-Eddie Haskell



Sage2
2010-06-14 20:35:21 EST
On Jun 14, 2:01 pm, Dänk 666 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it"
> by subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
>
> Here is an example of how government-subsidized journalism works in
> Mexico:


Propaganda paid for by any Government is merely that ; "
PROPAGANDA " !!
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> "Bordering on Chaos" by Andres Oppenheimer, Little, Brown and Company,
> 1996
>
> [Excerpts from pages 131-136]
>
> "In the months preceding the [1994] elections, Televisa gave most of
> its airtime to the [Ernesto] Zedillo [PRI] campaign.  Meanwhile, it
> equated coverage of Zedillo's main rivals, the center-right National
> Action Party (PAN) and the center-left Party of the Democratic
> Revolution (PRD), with that of some half a dozen minuscule parties,
> many of which had been created by the government for the purpose of
> splitting the legitimate opposition vote."
>
> "What was even more telling was the amount of time that Televisa was
> giving to tiny political parties, most of which were financed by the
> government and had never won more than 1% of the vote in a national
> election.  Televisa's top news program had devoted more time to each
> of the candidates of the Green Environmental Party of Mexico (PVEM),
> the Mexican Democratic Party (PDM), and the Authentic Party of the
> Mexican Revolution (PARM) than to [Cuauhtémoc] Cárdenas or [Diego]
> Fernández de Cevallos [PAN].  If you watched Televisa without knowing
> much about Mexico, you would have concluded that any of the three
> small parties was more important than Cárdenas' PRD, which according
> to government critics had won as many votes as Salinas -- if not more
> -- in the murky 1988 presidential elections."
>
> "Post-election television coverage studies left little doubt about
> Televisa’s manipulation of the news.  In addition to giving Zedillo
> eight times more airtime than any of his adversaries, the network
> seemed to consciously play opposition candidates up or down according
> to the PRI's daily needs.  After giving scant coverage to the Cárdenas
> campaign for several months, Televisa suddenly began to prop up the
> center-left candidate two weeks before the elections.  In the final
> week of the campaign, Cárdenas got 6.1 minutes of airtime on '24
> Horas,' much more than Fernández de Cevallos' 3.2 minutes.  The other
> five leading television news programs on both networks showed a
> similar -- and equally sudden -- pattern of increased coverage of
> Cárdenas.  It wasn't a last-minute act of repentance: By then,
> Cárdenas had fallen far behind in the polls.  Fernández de Cevallos
> was the biggest threat to the Zedillo campaign."
>
> "While the total readership of Mexican newspapers was relatively small
> -- Mexico City’s 23 daily newspapers, of which only half a dozen had a
> real readership, had a combined circulation of few than 500,000 copies
> -- newspaper coverage of the election wasn't left to chance either.
> Early in the presidential race, the ruling party had secretly paid
> millions to Mexico's largest dailies to publish Zedillo campaign
> propaganda disguised as news."
>
> "Through the separate 'convenios,' or secret contracts with
> newspapers, the PRI had paid about $800,000 each to Mexico’s largest
> newspapers -- including the pro-government dailies Excelsior and El
> Universal, and the leftist opposition daily La Jornada -- to regularly
> carry Zedillo campaign news on their front pages.  In addition,
> various PRI state governments signed their own convenios with the same
> newspapers to obtain sympathetic coverage for their local candidates,
> in effect elevating to about $3 million the figure each of the
> newspapers was getting from various government and party agencies."
>
> "Reporters weren't terribly upset about these deals: About 10% of each
> contract went directly to the reporters covering the campaign --
> meaning that a journalist covering Zedillo got about an $80,000
> commission, not bad in a country where most reporters made a miserable
> salary of $12,000 a year.  Considering the fat checks the publishers
> and a few chosen reporters were getting, it was not surprising that
> few would blow the whistle on the deals, which were common knowledge
> in the newsrooms."
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


5511 Dead, 644 Since 1/20/09
2010-06-14 21:46:49 EST
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:28:29 -0500, Eddie Haskell wrote:

> "Dänk 666" <dank420@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
> news:afdbb3eb-2516-4ce2-8466-
f*6@j12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it" by
>> subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
>> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
>
> Oh, my god. A liberal newspaper bailout.
>
> -Eddie Haskell

Danky is snivelling about a trial balloon the admin sent up last January
and promptly abandoned because there was a generally negative reaction.

Dänk_666?=
2010-06-14 22:40:08 EST
On Jun 14, 7:46 pm, "5511 Dead, 644 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:28:29 -0500, Eddie Haskell wrote:
> > "Dänk 666" <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:afdbb3eb-2516-4ce2-8466-
>
> fabd78d8a...@j12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it" by
> >> subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
> >> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
>
> > Oh, my god. A liberal newspaper bailout.
>
> > -Eddie Haskell
>
> Danky is snivelling about a trial balloon the admin sent up last January
> and promptly abandoned because there was a generally negative reaction.

And if Bush had sent up a similar 'trial balloon,' you would still be
having conniption fits about it today.

Ray Fischer
2010-06-15 02:51:07 EST
Sage2 <wisdom812@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 14, 2:01\ufffdpm, D\ufffdnk 666 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it"
>> by subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
>> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
>>
>> Here is an example of how government-subsidized journalism works in
>> Mexico:
>
> Propaganda paid for by any Government is merely that ; "
>PROPAGANDA " !!

Subsidizing journalism is not paying for propaganda.

--
Ray Fischer
r*r@sonic.net


China Blue Aster
2010-06-15 04:21:23 EST
In article <e0abc976-d043-47d0-8198-cbf6b5c9e238@q39g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
D\ufffdnk 666 <dank420@rocketmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 14, 7:46\ufffdpm, "5511 Dead, 644 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:28:29 -0500, Eddie Haskell wrote:
> > > "D\ufffdnk 666" <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:afdbb3eb-2516-4ce2-8466-
> >
> > fabd78d8a...@j12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > >> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it" by
> > >> subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
> > >> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
> >
> > > Oh, my god. A liberal newspaper bailout.
> >
> > > -Eddie Haskell
> >
> > Danky is snivelling about a trial balloon the admin sent up last January
> > and promptly abandoned because there was a generally negative reaction.
>
> And if Bush had sent up a similar 'trial balloon,' you would still be
> having conniption fits about it today.

Congress and Bush did subsidise journalism. Bush's interference with PBS had
more to do documentaries and not the daily and weekly journalism.

--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be.
Silver silverware - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. We support you, Sarah.

5511 Dead, 644 Since 1/20/09
2010-06-15 10:37:22 EST
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 01:21:23 -0700, China Blue Aster wrote:

> In article
> <e0abc976-d043-47d0-8198-cbf6b5c9e238@q39g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> Dänk 666 <dank420@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 14, 7:46 pm, "5511 Dead, 644 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:28:29 -0500, Eddie Haskell wrote:
>> > > "Dänk 666" <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:afdbb3eb-2516-4ce2-8466-
>> >
>> > fabd78d8a...@j12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > >> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know
>> > >> it" by subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to
>> > >> provide the public with in-depth reporting that truthful and
>> > >> unbiased.
>> >
>> > > Oh, my god. A liberal newspaper bailout.
>> >
>> > > -Eddie Haskell
>> >
>> > Danky is snivelling about a trial balloon the admin sent up last
>> > January and promptly abandoned because there was a generally negative
>> > reaction.
>>
>> And if Bush had sent up a similar 'trial balloon,' you would still be
>> having conniption fits about it today.

Actually, the administration DID send local news stations two minute
"segments" representing the administration point of view and encouraged
local stations to run them as news. A disgracefully high number did.

>
> Congress and Bush did subsidise journalism. Bush's interference with PBS
> had more to do documentaries and not the daily and weekly journalism.


Eddie Haskell
2010-06-15 14:02:54 EST

"D\ufffdnk 666" <dank420@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:e0abc976-d043-47d0-8198-cbf6b5c9e238@q39g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 14, 7:46 pm, "5511 Dead, 644 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:28:29 -0500, Eddie Haskell wrote:
> > "D\ufffdnk 666" <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:afdbb3eb-2516-4ce2-8466-
>
> fabd78d8a...@j12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it" by
> >> subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
> >> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
>
> > Oh, my god. A liberal newspaper bailout.
>
> > -Eddie Haskell
>
> Danky is snivelling about a trial balloon the admin sent up last January
> and promptly abandoned because there was a generally negative reaction.

> And if Bush had sent up a similar 'trial balloon,' you would still be
> having conniption fits about it today.

Damn good point. Him, along with the entire MSM.

-Eddie Haskell



Dänk_666?=
2010-06-15 20:25:32 EST
On Jun 15, 12:51 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> Sage2  <wisdom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jun 14, 2:01 pm, D nk 666 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> >> The Obama administration proposes to "save journalism as we know it"
> >> by subsidizing newspapers and other media, ostensibly to provide the
> >> public with in-depth reporting that truthful and unbiased.
>
> >> Here is an example of how government-subsidized journalism works in
> >> Mexico:
>
> >              Propaganda paid for by any Government is merely that ; "
> >PROPAGANDA " !!
>
> Subsidizing journalism is not paying for propaganda.

Yes it is, since journalists who report negative things about the
government or the ruling party will see their subsidies cut off.
Subsidizing journalism turns journalists into whores.

Back to Mexico. The Mexican government used to subsidize newsprint
(the paper used to print newspapers), and had a monopoly on its
production. Newspapers that reported on government corruption saw
their supply of newsprint cut off.

There is no need to subsidize journalism, since there has always been
a market for accurate information on current events. The advertiser-
sponsored model has been a failure; as people came to expect to
receive news for free, the quality declined accordingly. While major
newspapers still provide excellent reporting, they can't compete with
advertiser-sponsored cable news channels such as Fox and MSNBC, and
they certainly can't expect to charge for their newspapers and
websites when pirates repost their articles to the Internet where
everyone can read them for free.

When you buy a copy of the New York Times, you are paying for the
services of hundreds of investigative reporters whose jobs are to
listen to all sides of a story and dig up facts and determine who is
telling the truth. When you watch MSNBC for free, you are listening
to one side of a story, the side that General Electric wants you to
hear. Sometimes General Electric may not have an opinion on a
particular subject, so defers to MSNBC's corporate sponsors.
Naturally, MSNBC never reports anything negative about GE or its
sponsors. And this is the crap you leftards want to subsidize.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron