Obama, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News: A Look at Media in 2009
Ask just about any public interest advocate concerned about the dismal state of media and journalism, and they will tell you that Obama's media policy platform is excellent: the beginning of what could be the most public interest friendly administration in presidential history. Part of this optimism stems from Obama's understanding that Internet and technology are the cornerstone of a 21st century economy and society. Another part comes from the competence and integrity of the media and telecom advisors working on his transition team. And another comes from his direct experience.
Obama-the-candidate commented several times that voters' false views of him -- that he's a Muslim, a socialist and unpatriotic -- were fed and spread by Fox News and their cohorts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham in the far-right media. Obama understands that they are the special sauce in Karl Rove's toxic recipe to discredit progressive policies and politicians, and divide Americans with wedge issues.
And Obama understands that pushing back against guys like Limbaugh - who this week blamed the president-elect for the financial crisis, calling it "Obama's recession" - requires a bold policy agenda that uses the Internet to pry media distribution monopolies away from the largest media companies. Though often underreported, Obama spoke frequently about his commitment to blocking further media consolidation, fostering more independent and diverse media, ensuring universal high-speed Internet access, and "taking a back seat to no one" in passing "Net Neutrality" laws to prevent Internet providers like Comcast and AT&T from creating fast and slow lanes on the Internet. (click here for a look at Obama's important media reform pledges during his campaign).
The Washington Post ombudsman and others claim that the media was too kind to Obama and hard on John McCain. This superficial analysis is both wrong and misleading. Wrong because you had a candidate that was forcefully embracing the policies of George W. Bush while the nation spiraled into one of its darkest moments in its history. The idea that the press should not exert sharp criticism of such a candidate reflects the kind of tepid pandering that has become the hallmark of mainstream corporate media.
And misleading because the real problem is not the media favoring one candidate over another, but rather its utter failure to practice critical journalism. Turn on your television or radio, and it's 24/7 horserace political coverage, partisan shouting matches, and salacious crap. There is no effort to tell voters the difference between the candidates' rhetoric and reality, how their proclamations match their voting records, and what their policy proposals would actually do. While there were a few notable moments when news outlets actually did this during the campaign, they were few and far between.
Olbermann and Maddow's increased popularity is moving the range of debate on cable from center-right to left-right, but radio is still overwhelmingly right-wing, and the changes at MSNBC fall far short of a comprehensive, long-term solution to thecrisis of journalism. Newsroom layoffs mount across television, radio and newspapers, and omission has become the greatest threat. There is virtually no in-depth coverage and analysis on television of Iraq and Afghanistan, poverty, the environment and the other critical issues facing working Americans. And despite the explosion of the Internet, 45% of American homes still have no high speed Internet, while some 65% of Americans still cite TV as their primary news source.
Charges of liberal bias continue to strike such fear in the hearts of corporate news editors and producers, that they continue obsessive contortions to present both sides of every debate -- not from a factual perspective, but from a partisan one. Even if one side of an argument is clearly true, today's Wolf Blitzer, Charlie Gibson or Brian Williams - and even NPR and PBS - dare not say it (such as the economic bailout being a corrupt boondoggle for banking fatcats) and suffer the wrath of the right wing noise machine, and pressure from their corporate bosses. In today's media environment, the truth becomes irrelevant.
Take a walk through rural Ohio as I did this Election Day, and working-class voters are watching Fox, reading empty newspapers running on a bare-bones staff, and listening to radio's right-wing hate-fest. In today's media environment, we must face the fact that if not for the financial crisis and a disastrous GOP vice-presidential pick, this election might well have been McCain's.
So the incoming president is excellent on media policy, and his election allows media reform advocates to move from defense to offense. However, as Obama inherits a severe economic crisis, two wars, and myriad other problems, it will be too easy for media issues to get pushed down the to-do list. And the well-financed lobbyists from the phone, cable and broadcasting companies who supported Obama's candidacy are expecting a return on their investment. As well they should: if you look back at the history of Democratic presidents and media policy, there have been many disappointments, and cause for us to be as cautious as we are optimistic.
Here's a quick list of the top policy reforms to watch in 2009 for anyone who shares my disgust with news coverage, sky-high cable and phone bills, and the other maladies brought by a media system dominated by the likes of Comcast, Disney, AT&T, General Electric, Verizon, News Corporation and Time Warner:
• Getting super-fast, open/neutral, affordable Internet to every home and business in America, urban and rural, rich and poor - Internet that will allow every website to be a television or radio network... a complete game changer.
• Reversing consolidation of media ownership through tougher broadcast license requirements and incentives for more independent, diverse and local radio, television and print outlets.
• Dramatically increasing funding for public media: for PBS and NPR, as well as community radio and television, and other noncommercial outlets. This includes policies that better protect public media from undue political pressures.
Now that the champagne has been put away, it's time to realize that while disastrous members of Bush & Co. are heading towards the exits, the disastrous members of mainstream media remain firmly in place. Ignore the problem at your - and the nation's - peril.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I have the option of tuning in Stephanie Miller, Big Eddie, and Thom Hartmann on tiny WCPT am 820 in Chicago.
The big 50,000 watt WLS is dominated by right wing talkers. If given a chance I believe Ed Schultz would have great ratings on WLS but we will never know because of corporate control.
i don't think you understand people listen and like what these guys have to say. see air america, that was torture.
Huh? Can you please restate in coherent sentences what it is that you're trying to say?
My recent blog addressed a closely related issue, the fear that conservative radio pundits have of the possible return of the Fairness Doctrine:
http://thi
Cool web site design, think4urself - the antithesis of Ruslim's "1980s Las Vegas brothel" design.
RE: Radio is still right-wing.
Yes, but who still pays much attention to radio? Answer? Old people, and middle agers in their cars who forgot to bring their favorite CDs. The demographic that overwhelmingly voted for Obama (read: young) has Ipods, Iphone, and yes, CDs, and view right-wing hate radio as an archaic relic of a generation out of touch and running out of time.
Your answer left out an important group: working class country people. I work in a shop down South, where Rush is commonly called "the news."
Internet will kill Fox.
Hope so.
I agree up to a point. Rush ,Hannity and company have much help thou. Right wing preachers toe the line almost verbatim. Sometimes the Sermons and Preacher Web Sites all but give out the entire Republican Party Line. it makes it hard here in Texas as well as the Southeast. You would think Rush and Company were a new 12 Apostles.
Internet will definitely kill fox news. Anyone who's been fed fox news B.S. cannot survive blogging. You can't fight truths with lies from someone else, expecially in the age of you-tube, email, and high-speed internet.
Rupe rt Murd och's Austarlia's trying hard though to not let this happen:
They use red herrings like "the children, the children" to push forth their agendas.
http://www
(Cut and paste entire link)
The right wing's talk radio disinformation juggernaut might be the worst in world history and represents a total pirating of every major talk radio signal in the country, where they are allowed to lie 24/7 without response. The Annenberg study over 12 years found that 20-50 listeners had been duped with utter "false certainty" on almost every issue, swinging five of the past seven elections. They literally took over and wrecked the federal government.
Even bringing up the "Fairness Doctrine" is such a red herring that it would revive them to full blown power overnight. A smarter approach is to appoint only FCC commissioners who pledge to require balanced programming in return for license renewals. This takes it out of the public sphere and into the boardroom. If and when it does flare into an issue, Obama can deftly handle the issue by asking who thinks it is fair to allow the publcly owned airwaves to be used by any side to demonize the other. Congress could also finally hold hearings revealing to the clueless majority what ruined their politics, with testimony at long last from Annenberg's Kathleen Jameson whose work has only been reported outside the U.S., as the primary cause of our country's ruin.
Very smart post. I realize that I must concentrate on this issue. Thanks.
Hi Josh - This is 100% right and thanks for posting it. The main stream media will continue to treat right-wing pronouncements like the recent insane Palin comments on Obama as somehow credible, while at the same time trying to contribute to marginalizing Obama the way Jimmy Carter was.
Thanks to you as well, ld. Gotta focus in on this issue.
Other than a very few conservative shows, and Fox news, Obama has nothing to worry about. The press will fawn over this man like they have been doing for months now.
I disagree. It is one thing to be conservative and talk about things. But it is entirely another to flat out lie and incite people to hate as has been the case. Limbaugh and Hannity and numerous others flat out lie and make stuff up just to be saying hateful things about the left. Some on the left do so as well. There needs to be some kind of integrity check happening here that just isn't happening.
Consumers should be able to tune to a radio station and rely on what they hear to be a reasonable facsimile of the truth. Perhaps a truth in commentary law is needed - not necessarily a full blown fairness act. I wouldn't want to put commentators out of business unless they were purposely spreading hate and lies. In this way, Limbaugh would have to change his tune but still have his show. Hannity would have to tone down and a couple lefties would too because there are some that go overboard as well.
You would also apply this to Cable, Sattelite, TV, and print as well as radio. Just as there are limits and responsibilities associated with free speech, such as yelling fire in a movie theator, there are limits and responsibilities that go along with the free press.
http://bil
Exactly, but pressure on ownership and FCC license renewal vetting is the way to go, not frontal attacks on their legion of 50 million. Why on earth was there no real pressure put on media ownership when the Dems took control of Congress? Surely they know that the right's steamroller is ready to flatten them again as soon as the perfect reactionary storm brews. Instead, ownership showed their contempt by rolling out ratings clunker (#47) Dennis Miller in a hundred radio markets, while ratings winner leftie Ed Schultz (#6) can't get on a major signal. This is a deliberate effort by media ownership to tilt the country to the right, in return for their fat tax cuts and outright multi-owne
I think that people are really seeing these guys for what they really are. They have actually desensitized the american people to all of their hatred. Most people don't even pay attention to them. They have become quite a joke. On election day, I worked at our local Obama headquarters and decided to video people coming into the headquarters just to get their thoughts and ideas about the historical value of the day. In doing my interviews, one of the last questions that I asked each interviewee was What do you think of fox news. There was not one positive statement about them of all of the people interviewed and one person even said that fox saying that they are fair and balanced is blasphemous.
Bless you, 2351, for doing the down and dirty work. But remember that you were speaking to people who were determined to vote for Obama. They had already rejected the nonsense of Fox. I hope you saw and took some solace from them but we have a great deal of work left to do. Again, bravo to you, 2351.
American "news" channels (online and broadcast) lost me when they chose to follow the lives of Britney Spears, Paris Hilton and the like. I fled to PBS, BBC and Al Jazeera. But wanting to have a voice, I ended up also adding Huffington Post to my list.
I think interactive media will be the best thing to happen to media. It's starting to feel weird when I *can't* respond to a news story online.
Faux Noise, Limbaugh, and Hannity will soon be yesterday's news. The spewed their hate and racist rant and only a few uneducated skinheads, kkk's and ingorant backwoods people lister to them. They have been exposed, so they will slowly become extent.
Lagumbo, I was at a Dr's. Office today and Fox News was playing in the waiting room TV. It is in almost every Business I go in here in Texas that has a TV. They think by playing Fox News they will influence people in the right wing direction.
DougNTexas, you are absolutely right! I too am in Texas (Southeast). We have have lived the oppression of Bush for many years longer than the rest of the nation. He appointed Texas as the "Model State" for all that he wanted to do to the nation. The subsequent Governor, Rick Perry, picked up where Bush left off For years I worked with Right Wing Christian Conservative Repubs. Listening to them was the hardest part of the job. They followed the same path... oppress your employees and exploit them to meet all your needs. Make yourself rich at the expense of those under you. Exploit, exploit, exploit.
Business owners promote this mentality and, yes, they do keep the tube on Fox so that we are inundated with their point of view. At anytime of the day local talk radio is jammed with all the windbags. I'd like to take a poll of all the auto accidents occurring in one large Texas county and ask if they are of the left or the right. I'd be willing to bet the majority are left and have been listening to talk radio. It is so vile, one is driven to fits of road rage.
Having reasonable debate is what, I think we all want. Why, why, why do we always have to be so out-of-balance to finally realize that now our only option is to over-correct. Is it because we, the people, have been silenced and oppressed for so long?
Same think here in Georgia and when we drive from Georgia to Texas (my grandmother lives in Texas), Fox News is playing in every motel along the way. Whether we stop for the night in Alabama, Mississippi, or Lousiana, it is always Fox!
About the only we as individuals can do is let advertisers know, especially at local level, that you will not support their products or services if they continue to advertise on Fox, especially AM radio Fox.
"There is virtually no in-depth coverage and analysis on television of Iraq and Afghanistan, poverty, the environment and the other critical issues facing working Americans.
Ummm...let
PS: A little thread drift, but will someone please tell Wolf Blitzer that most of America can read and that we don't need everything repeated out loud when it's right there on our screens.
Fox is no longer news! hasn't been for a long time now! It's a jerry springer show of lie's,half trueths, screaming, intertainment t.v.! They should no longer be able to claim that tittle!
If I could name one thing that destroyed the credability of our media, it is Fox news. They started the racist and bigoted hate towards liberals, half the people living in america..T
What is the alternative to fairness in the use of a government regulated forum. I never hear the critics of a fairness doctrine argue for allowing unfettered access to broadcasting without any government restrictions. How can you have a forum where the government lets one side of the political divide use that forum 90 % of the time and claim that it is not censorship of the other side? Try broadcasting without a government license and see who stops you. Why is that not censorship?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
