No News is Good News

by Kevin Kardos, SUNY Cortland, December 10, 2004

Printer-friendly version

Much to my amazement, I have become political.  This past presidential election, and the months of campaigning that led up to it, sparked a newfound interest in politics and the electoral process. I have deliberately avoided thinking about these subjects for most of my life. I am not proud of my apathetic stance towards politics, but I have always felt powerless in regard to how I could have an impact on my own government and felt inconsequential in regard to how it functions. However, this election rousted me from my lethargy. I found myself wanting to know more about the men running for the presidency and the issues that were going to serve as battlegrounds for their campaigns. Unfortunately, I hit a major roadblock. Where would I get my information? What sources would I trust?

Nowhere else is it more true that there are two sides to every coin than in politics, but both sides always seem to be claiming that they have won the toss.  Like many Americans, I rely on mainstream media to keep me informed.  Don’t rush to conclusions.  I maintain a healthy skepticism toward what I am being shown on any news broadcast.  Also, I do need a source to keep me informed and aware on what is happening in the world beyond my front yard.  Unfortunately, it wasn’t until I started researching this article that I realized not only that my trust has been misplaced, but what I perceived as “semi-truthful” reporting was in fact a conspiracy to keep me misinformed, confused, and unaware. I was prompted to find out just who controls what I see and hear every day on my television.  Just how “free” is the freedom of the press that is deemed so important as to be stated in the First Amendment of the Constitution?  Who are the puppet masters that manipulate the strings on how and what is reported to the public?  The answers are both frightening and disheartening.

Using my remote control as a guide, let’s take a look at who controls what.  Starting with channel three we have our first major network, NBC.  Owned by General Electric, NBC has television holdings that include 13 stations or 28% of US households, CNBC business television, and MSNBC 24-hour cable and Internet news service (co-owned by NBC and Microsoft).  This is the same Microsoft that donated 2.4 million dollars to elect George Bush in 2000.  General Electric added another 1.1 million to the Bush campaign.  GE also produces turbines for nuclear reactors and power plants, produces military hardware, and nuclear power equipment.  Changing the channel to five, we find our friends at CBS, which is owned by Viacom.  Viacom CEO Summer Redstone endorsed Bush six weeks before the election, “From a Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal.  Because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on.”  Channel eight is where we find the notoriously right-minded Fox affiliate, which is owned by News Corporation, which in turn is owned by Rupert Murdoch.  The same right-wing Rupert Murdoch who sits on the Board of Directors at Philip Morris (USA) that donated 2.9 million to George Bush in 2000.  Channel number nine is home to ABC, which is owned by everyone’s favorite mouse, Mickey.  Disney radio stations are responsible for serving up hour after hour of folks like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Laura Ingraham, Matt Drudge, and other right-wing fanatics.

Make no mistake, news is money and money is power.  Commercial media is not serving the interests of the public.  It does not want to bite that hand that feeds it.  Instead, the public is misled, while critical journalism is on the way out the door.  In a study done by the University of Maryland’s PIPA, the Program on International Policy Attitudes, polls revealed that most of those who got their news from the commercial TV networks held at least one of three fundamental “misperceptions” about the war in Iraq:

1. that Iraq had been directly linked to 9/11
2. that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq
3. that world opinion supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

This situation is unacceptable.  How can the public make rational decisions on whom to elect as Commander In Chief when it is being lied to?  I hope to see some change in how the media operates, but I will not be holding my breath over the next four years.  I still feel powerless and inconsequential, but somehow I acquired the belief that it is my responsibility to care anyway.

Sources:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/04/47530.php

http://www.nowfoundation.org/issues/communications/tv/mediacontrol.html

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1122-31.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1109-31.htm

DESIGNER: Greg Montano, New Media Design, SUNY Cortland, USA

your thoughts?