-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Schechter / The Stable Of Cable As A Poster Child / Jun 08
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 20:37:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: ZNet Commentaries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sustainers PLEASE note:

--> You can change your email address or cc data or temporarily turn off 
mail delivery via:
https://www.zmag.org/sustainers/members

--> If you pass this comment along to others -- periodically but not 
repeatedly -- please explain that Commentaries are a premium sent to 
Sustainer Donors of Z/ZNet and that to learn more folks can consult ZNet 
at http://www.zmag.org

--> Sustainer Forums Login:
https://www.zmag.org/sustainers/forums

Today's commentary:
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2007-05/26schechter.cfm

==================================

ZNet Commentary
The Stable Of Cable As A Poster Child June 08, 2007
By Danny Schechter

"We are in an industry that benefits from a very deregulatory regime," 
boasts National Cable and Telecommunications Association president Kyle 
McSlarrow. "We think our customers benefit from that. We think we're the 
poster child for leaving most decisions to the marketplace."

Ah yes, leave it to the market place. Where have we heard that before? 
Answer: at every business meeting in America and echoed almost every day 
in our media. The market is our icon and fetish built on the assumption 
that it acts freely, guided by an "invisible hand" in Adam Smith's 
phrase, and always clear of external pressures except the occasional-and 
I would say systematic-acts of corruption.

No one talks about what this word market really means or what its impact 
is. In theory, we have a market system that reflects the democratic 
impulses of buyers and sellers.

In practice, there is nothing free about it. It is dominated and 
monopolized by a handful of companies who choke off real competition and 
exclude players who challenge their dominance. How is it that Al 
Jazeera's English channel can get on cable all over the world-even in 
Israel-but be denied access on America cable, even though the company is 
one of the world's leading brands?

A "deregulated regime" guarantees market failure and all the problems 
that go along with it.

I am sure Mr. McSlarrow is not thinking here of the other poster 
children that the FCC worries about in its recent report on the 
pervasive violence on cable outlets or how babies have their health put 
at risk by overexposure to TV as overworked parents used their boob 
tubes as a babysitter.

I am sure he's no longer thinking of the spewing racism on the cable 
spectrum now that IMUS has been surgically removed from the airwaves 
after a flap that purged his presence but left so many other demagogues 
unaffected.

And what about Bill O'Reilly of Faux Nooze Channel? What is he a poster 
child for? I haven't heard the cable association weigh in on his role as 
a poster child.

Read this new study by researchers at Indiana University. They found 
that: "Bill O'Reilly calls a person or a group a derogatory name on 
average once every 6.8 seconds during the 'Talking Points Memo' portion 
of his cable news show."

According to a more detailed press release provided by the University 
the researchers used a technique developed after World War I and made an 
astounding discovery:

"The same techniques were used during the late 1930s to study another 
prominent voice in a war-era, Father Charles Coughlin. His sermons 
evolved into a darker message of anti-Semitism and fascism, and he 
became a defender of Hitler and Mussolini. In this study, O'Reilly is a 
heavier and less-nuanced user of the propaganda devices than Coughlin."

Here are some of the findings of the study regarding O'Reilly's 
perceived enemies:

"The researchers identified 22 groups of people that O'Reilly referenced 
in his commentaries, and while all 22 were described by O'Reilly as bad 
at some point, the people and groups most frequently labeled bad were 
the political left - Americans as a group and the media (except those 
media considered by O'Reilly to be on the right).

Left-leaning media (21.6 percent) made up the largest portion of bad 
people/groups, and media without a clear political leaning was the 
second largest (12.2 percent). When it came to evil people and groups, 
illegal aliens (26.8 percent) and terrorists (21.4 percent) were the 
largest groups.

O'Reilly never presented the political left, politicians/government 
officials not associated with a political party, left-leaning media, 
illegal aliens, criminals and terrorists as victims. 'Thus, politicians 
and media, particularly of the left-leaning persuasion, are in the 
company of illegal aliens, criminals, terrorists - never vulnerable to 
villainous forces and undeserving of empathy,' the authors concluded."

[UPDATE: Bill O'Reilly has challenged the findings of this study. Read 
about it here and here.]

As Bill O'Reilly's pattern of hateful commentary goes unexamined within 
his own issue, few are asking why the cable industry, which was launched 
with so much hope to offer more diversity, has embodied so much of the 
worst on TV. In response to O'Reilly, CNN gave us not an alternative but 
a clone called Glenn Beck. And don't get me started on the many 
Neanderthals on MSNBC over the years.

We have more choices but often with fewer voices. The deregulatory 
regime has let them get away with it, while helping to advance the 
interests of the real regime in power. In battling against regulation, 
the industry is always saying it will "self-police itself." Duh?

Rather than offering programming that can enlighten or "illuminate" 
issues, in Edward R. Murrow's phrase, what we have is, as Bruce 
Springsteen once put it, 57 channels and nothing on. That is before the 
number of channels climbed. Ok, maybe that's not totally true anymore. 
There are some good shows and CSPAN. HBO may pay the bills with its sex 
shows and B-Movies but it does feature strong documentaries, but most of 
the programming dumbs it down and tarts it up.

Cable execs "understand" the concerns of their viewers and critics but 
please, they implore, Congress and the FCC don't regulate, don't impose 
public interest obligations, don't insist on more diversity or kids fare 
or honest news, don't assure the continuing presence of public access 
programming, and most of all, don't do anything that will stop the 
revenues flowing into huge media combines as Americans pay more and more 
for cable and entertainment and often get less and less.

Writing in Broadcasting & Cable Magazine editor Max Robins laments the 
passing of the wildmen who built the industry and their replacement by 
visionary-free "different breed risk adverse bottomed-up players." I am 
not sure we need more buccaneers like Murdoch who is still with us or 
Ted Turner who isn't.

What we need is more regulation in the public interest and rules to 
insure that the needs of viewers come before the needs of advertisers 
and highly paid cable executives.


  - News Dissector Danny Schechter edits MediaChannel.org. He worked at 
CNN and CNBC. His new film is IN DEBT WE TRUST (indebtwetrust.com) 
Comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
FRIENDS mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sffreaks.org/mailman/listinfo/friends

Reply via email to