|Media Consolidation: More Choices or More BullPoop?
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||MattLiarLauer [ Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:48 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Media Consolidation: More Choices or More BullPoop?|
Is There Anything Wrong With This Picture:
ABC - Owned by Movie Studio Disney which also owns Disney Family Channel (formerly Rev Pat Robertson owned The Family Channel / Disney-MGM Theme Parks & a host of other cable channels and media whatnot.
CBS - Owned by media syndicator Viacom which also owns Paramount Studios / King World Productions / Kings Island Theme Parks / UPN /Simon & Schuser Publishing & a host of other cable channels and media whatnot. TOP $$$$ Earner in its so-called stable of talent, David Letterman earns a reported $35 million / yr for his 2nd place latenight kiss rearend show.
CNN - Owned by AOL - Time - Warner (even though they dropped AOL from the name after a few years) which also owns TBS / TNN / TCM / WB Network (Kiss The Frog, Baby) / The Atlanta Braves Baseball Team / New Line Cinema / Warner Books / Warner Music and a host of other cable channels and media whatnot.
FOX - Owned by News Corporation which also owns, FOX Television / FOX News Channel / a slew of newspapers around the world and a host of other cable channels and media whatnot in the USA and around the world.
NBC - Who has hit the jackpot in more ways than one is Owned by GE which also owns Universal Studios (which was bought by NBC back in April 2004) /USA Networks - Studios USA & QVC (Universal bought from Barry Diller) / CNBC / MSNBC / Universal Theme Parks / Sci-Fi Channel / Telemundo and a host of other cable channels and media whatnot. TOP $$$$ Earner in its stable of so-called talent, Katie "Perky" Couric earns $65 Million in her current 4 1/2 year deal which expires next year. That breaks down to reported $65,000/day! At least TODAY is in 1st place in the weekday morning gabfests but it is also celeb driven and kiss rearend journalism. Rumors are that Viacom or Disney want to scoup her up. The network with the deepest pocketd may get her.
Does anybody see the problem with this picture? More and more consolidation means less and less objectivity by media. The CEOs of these companies may say it's good for business and good for the viewer but it is not. I've seen Michael Eisner, Jack Welch (former CEO of GE) and Teddy Turner say it time and time again. Each one of these men has had their own problem with shareholders and board of directors and a public who is tired of getting a constant dose of rearend kissing news and celeb driven entertainment/gossip.
|Author:||Jesse [ Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:58 pm ]|
Everything is wrong with that picture!
|Author:||Catherine [ Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:05 pm ]|
But is there anything that can be done about it?
This is CAPITALISM...supposedly, but somehow...it's not the way things are supposed to be!
Does Monopoly sound like a better word?
|Author:||MattLiarLauer [ Sun Jan 23, 2005 4:36 pm ]|
|Post subject:||US Media Sucks & Will Only Get Worse|
No, I do not want there to be a monoply but there should be objective and hard-hitting reporting of the news. At the rate media/entertainment companies are being bought up, there just may be only a handful of companies we get tv and/or print news from. NBC is a media company and its parent company (GE) is a defense/aerospace contractor as well. Do you think NBC is gonna report something very critical about any industry or government entity GE has contracts with? We certainly don't get objectivity in reporting anymore. I guess they think they might get sued if they do. FOXNews claims to be "Fair and Balanced" and that is a crock.
When I watch any of the networks or cable news/information channels I see journalists kissing the rear of their guests (athletes, celebs & politicians) and asking leading questions or questions where they know what answer the guest is gonna give. This is passed off onto us, the viewer, as an "interview". Hell, pay me $65,000/day (like Katie Couric); I can do that! Segments on GMA, TODAY & The Early Show used to last about 7.5 minutes and sometimes the entire half hour if warranted but now you are lucky to get 4 minutes. They rush the guest in all these interviews by never letting them deviate from the questions they ask and they rush the interview.
All the networks play "Race Card Journalism". The only reason why Fareed Zakaria is on ABC's "This Week w/George Stephanopolous" is because of 9-11. If it were not for that event, there would be no person with a Middle-East background as a regular on the Sunday Political Shows. When the Iraq War is over, they'll will have no further use for him. What happened a few weeks back when steroids were in the news? They all trotted out African-American athletes and commentators to be guests on these shows and the conversations pretty muched focused on Barry Bonds and Marion Jones even though other non-African-Americans were also caught up in that scandal. These shows only wanted to talk about these 2 people. Plus, if you've noticed, it's rare that you EVER see any Hispanic or African-American on the Sunday Shows or Weekday Morning Shows discussing Iraq, Global Warming, Economic or other issues that affect ALL CITIZENS IN AMERICA. These issues are just limited to only 1 nationality! You wouldn't think that from watching the networks. No, the networks only invite them on when issues involving Hispanics or African-Americans occur.
Have you seen the latest "GET" interview in media jouralism? You know, the interview with a person that reportedly EVERY talkinghead wants to interview and EVERY American wants to hear from (or at least that's what the media tells us)? In the newsbiz they call that a "GET". Amber Fry, the mistress of Scott Peterson was on a Special Dateline NBC. Wow; they had to make it "special"! She was treated with kidgloves though still exploited by NBC for her "sexual association" with Scott. Nobody bothered to ask her; "Amber, why did you have sex with a man on the first night you met him" or "Why, is it that after you found out he was married did you continue your relationship with him" or "Why, would a person you call a good friend set you up on a date with a married man"? No, don't embarrass your "get", just ask softball questions and make her tear up for the cameras a la Barbara Walters!
Frankly, I could care less who owns what as long as the reporting and the reporters are objective and don't allow themselves to e told what to report by the network brass or by the political administration in power (ie Bush Administration telling the networks/cable outlets if they want to be "embedded" with the military, they cannot show the bodies/coffins of dead soldiers). Essentially, the DOD controls what we see coming out of Iraq. Now if that ain't propoganda, I don't know what is. On the otherhand, how many dead/mamed/naked/bloody bodies of Iraqis have you seen on tv since March 2003? PLENTY! If it was not for the soldier who leaked pics of Abu Ghraib, who know how long it would have taken before we found out about that. And what happened when we did find out: Media showed the pics of the naked Iraqis (they love to do that) and didn't ask any hard questions of Donny Rumsfeld or Bush or Condie or Colin as to why this was allowed to happened. The Congressional Hearings on this were a joke. The Congress met in a private room to view the DVDs and pics. They come out and criticize the "low on the totem pole" soldiers involved but the "higher ups" (The Prez, The VP, Rumsfeld, Rice & Powell)don't get court martialed. We went to war on a lie (Saddam had WMD). Now that they have decided he had none (even though right before the 2004 Election, Bush said they were still looking for them), they still are trying to justify why invasion was necessary. And as usual, the media is going along with the sham!
Consolidate all they want but be objective in your reporting.
|Author:||Catherine [ Sun Jan 23, 2005 4:57 pm ]|
Frankly, I could care less who owns what as long as the reporting and the reporters are objective and don't allow themselves to e told what to report by the network brass or by the political administration in power (ie Bush Administration telling the networks/cable outlets if they want to be "embedded" with the military, they cannot show the bodies/coffins of dead soldiers).
You just summed up the great improbability of anything unbiased coming from the news media sources, Matt.
The brass will only get more controlling as the Bush administration becomes more and more controlling. One feeds on the other. And it was never more clear to me than when I read this information, which I posted at:
|Author:||MattLiarLauer [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:59 am ]|
Regarding your reply Catherine, I did read you post by way of the link below:
As Jesse Jackson said during the 2000 campaign; "Stay out the Bushes"! It's scary, REAL scary!
All I can say is none of the networks of cable news channels have any backbone anymore. I am really growing tired of the Sunday Political Shows and news whatsoever on tv. Don't get me wrong, I don't only watch them, I get maybe 70% of my news off the internet from "alternative" sites like this one that I just happened to stumble upon by accident. I could not believe there was actually a place like this where people could see threw the bull politicians and media put out.
When I hear about a news organization winning an Edward R Murrow Award, I think Ed must be turning over in his grave at how lapdog the media is. Where is the hardhitting investigation into NASA for the Shuttle disaster? Why is it that no heads rolled for that? Why does the Government still want to give NASA money? Have the problems been "fixed"? What was George W Bush doing when he was supposed to report for duty during that "missing time" when he was in the Guard? Why does this Administration continue to submit for nomination to Cabinet Posts liars and people who have failed to perform in other positions of authority (Condie & Kerac)? Why does the media not hold anybody's feet in this administration to the fire for Abu Ghraib, no WMD and the overthrow of Saddam? Why? Why? Why? One thing we do agree on is that the traditional USA media are a joke.
I guess we will have to sit back and wait for the next reporter to venture into and take on "Bushworld" at the risk of losing their jobs.
|Author:||dori [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:31 am ]|
Thank heaven for the internet! Without actual news from other countries, we would never know what is going on in America.
We are not ignorant by choice, we are raised to not question. Notice how your neighbors are perfectly comfortable accepting what media hands out?
We are the troublemakers. We want actual facts. That is what makes the people in power not want anyone to hear us.
And that is why we have to keep trying to get some communication out!
Never give up!!!
|Author:||Eva [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:11 am ]|
I had a co-worker say to me the other day "What do you know, you get all of your information from the internet". The truth is that I would know a fraction of what I know if it weren't for the internet.
The morning news shows are a joke. They are not news shows , they are entertainment. I'll admit, I watch them to get my weather of the day, or to get a movie review. They will have a few minutes in each half hour in which they give the news of the day. Some of news that they give one or two minutes of time to are the major news stories that deserve to be talked about in more depth. I will then go on the internet and find the story and see what I am not being told. Most of the time though, I will find stories on the internet that are not discussed on TV at all.
You have many people though in this country who only get their news from either MSNBC, CNN or Fox. Those people probably think that the only thing that happened over these past few days was that Johnny Carson died.
|Author:||dori [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:20 am ]|
How right you are Eva.
If one more person tells me, "I know it is right because it was on Fox News" I am going to...well, whatever one does when they are totally fed up.
All those people who still believe we are in Iraq because Iraq was part of 9/11--Fox News viewers. Don't try to argue with them, they will have your head. Gently try to talk sense but as it says in the bible--if they do not wish to hear, gently shake the dust from your feet and move on to people who are receptive--who have the capability of understanding.
Does wonders for the digestive system.
|Author:||Catherine [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:15 am ]|
|Post subject:||What Ted Said|
Turner Compares Fox's Popularity to Hitler
By Jim Finkle -- Broadcasting & Cable, 1/25/2005 2:14:00 PM
Ted Turner called Fox a propaganda tool of the Bush administration and indirectly compared Fox News Channel's popularity to Adolf Hitler's popular election to run Germany before World War II.
Turner made those fiery comments in his first address at the National Association for Television Programming Executives' conference since he was ousted from Time Warner Inc. five years ago.
The 66-year-old billionaire, who leveraged a television station in Atlanta into a media empire, made the comment before a standing-room-only crowd at NATPE's opening session Tuesday.
His no-nonsense, sometimes humorous, approach during the one-hour Q&A generated frequent loud applause and laughter.
Fox wasn't laughing, however. "Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network, and now his mind," said a Fox News spokesperson. "We wish him well."
Turner's comment came just days after another Nazi reference to Fox.
Gilmore Girls Executive Producer Amy Sherman-Palladino had some choice words for Fox's American Idol at a WB panel at the critics tour in L.A. Saturday. (Both shows air Tuesday at 8 p.m.) American Idol is like the Nazis marching through Poland," she said. "You just got to let them go. Get out of the way. We're kind of France going, 'You know, just don't burn down Paris, that's all we're asking.'" Asked by one of her shows' co-stars, Lauren Graham, if that was really the analogy she wanted to go with, Sherman-Palladino said that's how she saw it.
Among the other Turner highlights from Tuesday:
On Fox News: While Fox may be the largest news network [and has overtaken Turner's CNN], it's not the best, Turner said. He followed up by pointing out that Adolph Hitler got the most votes when he was elected to run Germany prior to WWII. He said the network is the propaganda tool for the Bush Administration. "There's nothing wrong with that. It's certainly legal. But it does pose problems for our democracy. Particularly when the news is dumbed down," leaving voters without critical information on politics and world events and overloaded with fluff," he said.
On TV news in general: "We need to be very well informed. We need to know what's going on in the world. "a little less Hollywood news and a little more hard news would probably be good for our society."
On media consolidation:"The consolidation has made it almost impossible for an independent. It's virtually impossible to start a cable network." Broadcasters and programmers "don't want more independent voices out there. They own everything. That's why I went into the restaurant business. Either that or I'd work for a salary for one of the big jerks.
The war in Iraq: "We've spent 200 billion destroying Iraq. Now we've got to spend 200 billion to rebuild it, if they'll let us -- and all to find a nut in a fox hole -- one guy," Turner said. "He posed no threat to any of his neighbors, particularly with us there with overwhelming military superiority." --"it is obscene and stupid"
Why selling his company to Time Warner turned out to be a huge mistake: At the time he agreed to sell his company, "it was from a business standpoint the right thing to do." He owned 9 percent of the merged company, which "which got me some real serious respect." But after the company acquired AOL, Turner's stake in the new company was diluted to 3 percent. "Then I got the pink slip"
Why it wasn't that huge a mistake: "I have a responsibility not to be too critical of my old company. It is a good company and I had a lot of experiences there. A lot of time things that are painful at the time they occurred turn out to be for the best."
Ted Turner for President? "I'm too old and too burned out to take on that responsibility. I thought about it when I was younger. I don't know if I could have gotten elected or not. It would have been a lot of fun to do when I had higher energy levels."
What he'll put on his tombstone: "I have nothing more to say."
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group