tintinisahottie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 9,298
- Reaction score
- 271
tldr; as always, bias in news is ok as long as the bias aligns with mine. Both sides
President Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The act, signed into law on February 8, 1996, was "essentially bought and paid for by corporate media lobbies," as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) described it, and radically "opened the floodgates on mergers."
The negative impact of the law cannot be overstated. The law, which was the first major reform of telecommunications policy since 1934, according to media scholar Robert McChesney, "is widely considered to be one of the three or four most important federal laws of this generation." The act dramatically reduced important Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations on cross ownership, and allowed giant corporations to buy up thousands of media outlets across the country, increasing their monopoly on the flow of information in the United States and around the world.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34789-democracy-in-peril-twenty-years-of-media-consolidation-under-the-telecommunications-actTwenty years later the devastating impact of the legislation is undeniable: About 90 percent of the country's major media companies are owned by six corporations. Bill Clinton's legacy in empowering the consolidation of corporate media is right up there with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and welfare reform, as being among the most tragic and destructive policies of his administration.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is not merely a regrettable part of history. It serves as a stern warning about what is at stake in the future. In a media world that is going through a massive transformation, media companies have dramatically increased efforts to wield influence in Washington, with a massive lobbying presence and a steady dose of campaign donations to politicians in both parties - with the goal of allowing more consolidation, and privatizing and commodifying the internet.
This issue has not been central in the 2016 presidential election. But it is deeply concerning that, of all the presidential candidates running in 2016, the Big Media lobby has chosen to back Hillary Clinton. Media industry giants have donated way more to her than any other candidate in the race, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics. In light of this, we must be mindful of the media reform challenges we face in the present, as we try to prevent the type of damage to our democracy that was caused by the passing of this unfortunate law.
Trump just hired a Breitbart executive to run the rest of his campaign. Some kind of unbiased lack of partisanship by Breitbart. Probably want to cease posting any articles from there on the election.
CNN’s 723,000 average viewers placed it at No. 16 among all cable networks.
http://www.thewrap.com/ratings-cnn-loses-to-msnbc-fox-news/CNN’s drop is significant, as the network was the No. 1 cable channel in Monday-Sunday primetime and Monday-Friday prime, in terms of both total viewers and the key 25-54 news demo as recently as the week of July 25 during the Democratic Convention.
CNN also won the primetime demo during July sweeps but last week marked its second-lowest rated week of the year among adults 25-54 with 193,000 average viewers. Coming out of the GOP and Democratic conventions, MSNBC has topped CNN in total prime viewers all 11 weeknights of August.
As Amanpour says, CNN has now decided to tell the truth. That's the reason people have stopped watching.
If Soros were a rock-ribbed conservative who supported Republican candidates and causes, you can bet that a swarm of reporters would right now be lustily tearing into these documents determined to expose any and every shred of evidence of influence peddling and misdeeds.
But because Soros is a hard-core leftist, he apparently gets a pass. Shameful
Here is the way it works. "All the news that's fit to print," the Ministry of Truth, and the usual suspects tell the left-liberals what to think and when to think it. And the left-liberals, who are so open to the world and change, like it. If they don't cover a development, then it must not be true, and other sources who do cover it are unreliable and not authoritative. Got it.
http://www.investors.com/politics/e...ia-blackout-of-hacked-george-soros-documents/
Huffington Post in free fall, Breitbart experiencing tremendous growth.