Fasten your seatbelts. We're going to experience some turbulence.

[NYC_SKP]

This discussion thread is pinned.

TPTB have successfully implemented their vision/strategy. Two parties, one outcome.

I fear that we're given the illusion of choice, but really it's two flavors of the same shit soda, to quote another member in another thread.

I'm going to resist this, I'm going to speak truth to power and support genuine progressives like Sanders, Warren, and anyone else not part of this rigged game.

The "base", considering funding, support, and control of messaging, are shown below in two infographics:

The money and the media:








Who's with me?

[Enthusiast]

1. Sadly kicking and recommending for accuracy and truth in reporting.

I'm with you.

[L0oniX]

2. K & R The Democratic soul is being sold to the highest 1% bidders.

[bvar22]

28. This chart shows the same thing:

[Cosmic Kitten]

51. Ahhhhgh, the irony, it burns! Make it stop!!!!

the young man who managed the coffee shop said he couldn’t help overhearing what we were saying. He wanted to tell us why he opposes minimum wage hikes: he started working at the coffee shop several years ago at a very low wage, worked hard, gained skills, and is now earning more than twice his starting salary.

He said that a high minimum wage might have kept him off the first wrung of the ladder.

It's that kinda stoopid that hurt all of us.

[brush]

74. Yeah, that's sad

If the young man started at minimum wage several years back his pay was probably in the $7.25-$7.50 an hour range. He says through hard work and learned skills he now makes twice that, which is about $15.00 an hour, which is what minimum wage workers are fighting for.

He fails to see that if he had started at $15.00 and hour and worked hard and gained skills over several years his pay now might be in the $20-25 an hour range.

Or maybe he's one of those that don't want others to equal what he's making now, which means he fails to see again that as a manager, his pay would have to rise over those $15 an hour minimum wagers he manages.

The keep-em-stupid by downgrading public education plan of the repugs is working.

[dixiegrrrrl]

53. Yeah but,,in all fairness....they ARe the only people that have the money.

[NYC_SKP]

63. Irony Alert: Hillary Talks about CEO Compensation!

I don't have to tell you that in some "conversation with America" somewhere, Hillary Clinton lamented the fact that CEOs make as much as 300 times what their workers make. I think it's more, much more.

Anyway, HRC earns even more than that when she gives an address, often to a very wealthy audience.

The Hillary Pay Ratio
A new index to chart the gap between political words and deeds.
April 14, 2015 7:30 p.m. ET

Just in time for Wednesday’s nationwide walk-out by fast-food workers to demand a higher minimum wage, Hillary Clinton emailed supporters this week to complain about pay differentials in American business. According to Reuters, Mrs. Clinton griped that “the average CEO makes about 300 times what the average worker makes.”

Many of these CEOs can only wish they were rewarded for their time as handsomely as Mrs. Clinton is. The expected 2016 Democratic presidential nominee has been paid as much as $300,000 per speech.

Supporters of Wednesday’s worker rallies are hoping that Mrs. Clinton will endorse their demand for a $15 minimum wage. That’s more than double the current federal minimum of $7.25. And for the sake of argument let’s assume that $15 per hour is what event staff were paid at the venues where Mrs. Clinton spoke. We’ll also assume about 90 minutes of her time for a speech plus a question-and-answer period. Mrs. Clinton’s fee in this scenario would be more than 13,000 times the earnings of the typical worker.

Mrs. Clinton said in her Sunday campaign video that the “deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top,” and she would know based on her taste for amenities and expenses along with her speaking fees. “She insists on staying in the ‘presidential suite’ of luxury hotels that she chooses anywhere in the world, including Las Vegas,” the Las Vegas Review-Journal wrote last August. “She usually requires those who pay her six-figure fees for speeches to also provide a private jet for transportation—only a $39 million, 16-passenger Gulfstream G450 or larger will do.”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-hillary-pay-ratio-1429054250

Just shoot me now.

[Darb]

78. That's just simplistic bullshit optics.

If you think that those monied individuals don't give to anyone they think might win the oval office then you might need to search for another brain cell to rub against your other one. Money drives elections, PERIOD.

It's reality, go fucking attack a Republican.

What color is your favorite pony?

[bvar22]

91. I am a Democrat.

I have never given a Republican a single penny or a single vote.
I don't campaign for Republicans.
I don't volunteer to help Republicans in their campaigns.
I don't promote the Republican Message (the poor can just fuck themselves).
Why would the Republicans listen to me?
I have no voice in their Party.
I don't get mad a dog when they behave like dogs; I don't get angry at Republicans for acting like Republicans. THAT is what they DO.

I HAVE spent many thousands of dollars and many thousands of hours helping Democrats get elected for the last 45 years. I expect Democrats to act like Democrats and represent FOR the Working Class.
I get very angry when Democrats behave like Republicans and cozy up to the Ownership Class.

I have EARNED my right to Speak Out in MY Party,
and I will use that RIGHT.

[mylye2222]

3. With You As Well.

KnR.

[Cosmic Kitten]

4. Wait, what? There's no Liberal media?!?

We do need to listen closely.

When the elite speak of "we"
or "us" or the "base" it would
be naive to think "we"
are "in the club".

after all: "We all got into this
mess together, and we’re all
going to have to work together
to get out of it."

[2banon]

5. a real tough slog.. I'm with ya for the long haul.

Last edited Wed Apr 15, 2015, 01:18 PM - Edit history (1)

[Cosmic Kitten]

7. "Long haul" is dead on.

The party needs a century long plan.
We know the right-wing has one.

[cui bono]

66. Problem is the party is now centrist and they don't like liberals or progressives.

Well they want our votes but they don't like us asking for stuff.

So who's plan is it going to be? How is it going to be implemented? The party is where it wants to be I'm afraid.

[Cosmic Kitten]

72. "The Party" is an interesting concept

Squeeze "the party" like
a tube of toothpaste?

[Gidney N Cloyd]

6. The financial consolidation worries me a lot more than the media consolidation.

If we went from 6 media giants to say, 18, I'd bet there'd be little impact overall on what we're fed in terms of news and entertainment.

[Cosmic Kitten]

9. Why? Where does the "feed" come from?

If we had 18 media outlets
why would they have an interest
in maintaining the status quo?

[Gidney N Cloyd]

24. But what actually is the status quo? It's about making money and they'd all still be chasing the...

same advertising dollars, and those advertising dollars chase the consumers. There's niche and divergent programming out there now and if there was more of a market for it, the big companies would be chasing those dollars, too. With the exception of a few players which clearly have socio-political Agendas (Newsmax/Fox), most media companies are just seeking profits.
If we want to make a difference we have to change the consumers, get them to think critically and call bullshit when they see or hear it.
All that said, yeah I'd still be more comfortable with a lot of smaller media companies and I'd especially prefer that we return to the old limits on ownership within a single market. But on a macro level I just have doubts as to what change more and smaller companies would bring.

[Cosmic Kitten]

31. Some good points!

Chasing advertising dollars
is a business model.
As you point out, there exists
a few outlets with socio-political
agendas... NPR?
There should be more.

As to changing "consumers",
lets start right there!
We are NOT "consumers"
We are citizens, the public,
people, voters, etc.
You are not your khakis...
We are the all-singing
all-dancing crap of the world ;~)

Traditional broadcast is dead.
Move on to the new media platforms.
Viewer created content is the future!

[bvar22]

90. Not too many years ago, we had several hundred,

and the "News Divisions" of the Major Networks operated independently from the parent company.
"NEWS" was a Public Service....not a money-making slot for the programers.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

92. Not several hundred giants, but it was possible once to thrive as an independent or small group.

In fact the law pretty much encouraged it. I'm a little rusty now-- got my undergrad in broadcasting back in '80-- but I believe the limit back then was a company could own 1 TV, 1 AM, and 1 FM station in a single market.

[bvar22]

93. We didn't neeed several hundred giants...

...when the News Divisions were separate from the Network.

I can remember Sundays, reading several different major news papers, and they weren't just
copies of each other.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

94. That technical separation was definitely a good thing but I'd be careful to not over-romanticize it.

There was still network management pressure and just among the news people themselves there was a certain amount of groupthink and clubbiness. Add to that an almost total lack of female and minority influence and even when you've got separate news entities you were getting roughly the same take.

[KoKo]

8. Fantastic..

Thanks to you for posting it here where we can use it for reference without having to dig it up from search through DU Archives and to 'Frugal Dad" for pulling it all together with the sourcing included.

This shows so clearly why the American People are so uninformed about issues and how we have been propagandized to the point where few independent media sources or start ups can ever be heard by the majority of Americans.

[Cosmic Kitten]

10. How do we help encourage an appetite for diverse "news"?

How do we make it
cool to be well informed
and embarrassing to
parrot talking points?

[zeemike]

16. I know what I would like to do.

And it is probably impractical and unworkable but I still would like it.

I would like to start a cut the cable tv campaign...get people to stop watching them...starve the beast...because most people have the TV on from morning to night with the constant drone of propaganda in the background even if they don't actually watch it.
It has cast a spell on us and is everywhere and all the time
It would be like going cold turkey on heroin.

[Cosmic Kitten]

21. AWESOME! I cut the cable myself...

cold turkey is tough

It's funny how when we change
our habits we notice how the once
ubiquitous leaves a vacuum.

Online can fill the void.
And it lets me choose exactly
what I'm interested in viewing
as opposed to corporate "programming".

[zeemike]

26. i have been off the drug for over 5 years now.

And I am clean...not jonesing at all anymore.
And you are so right about on line for information and entertainment...being able to chose what you want to see is empowering.
I have learned more online at you-tube in a day than I did on cable in a year.

[Cosmic Kitten]

33. +1 Woo Hoo... right there too!

You Tube rocks.

[AtheistCrusader]

84. It's hard, even book publishers and awards can be jacked up for political purposes these days.

Hugo awards allegedly compromised:
http://www.geek.com/news/winter-isnt-coming-hugo-awards-own-gamergate-is-delaying-a-song-of-ice-and-fire-1620356/

In the end, you have to choose your own content. There are means of accessing video content outside cable company preferences, fortunately. Any single source might have an agenda though.

[arcane1]

29. I would be right behind you! I cut mine in 2004 and never looked back.

Unfortunately, we'd have a hard time with the masses as a whole. I don't think people would know what to do without "content" to stare at.

[KoKo]

18. Some of us have tried here on DU..

Last edited Wed Apr 15, 2015, 12:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Supporting Progressive websites, posting videos from Thom Hartmann and "Free Speech TV," donating to "Common Dreams," "Nation of Change," "Alternet," "Truth Dig," "Truth Out" and others. Al Gore tried with "Current TV" and other groups tried with "Radio America" with Ed Shultz and other voices who then moved on to MSNBC....but the funding was never there or people weren't interested enough for an alternative to Limbaugh and Fox.

BUT they need lots of MONEY....and the money has dried up since our Dem was elected to two terms.. so some sites have had to go to Adds for revenue and others have had to be on shoe string budgets constantly begging for money to keep afloat.

MONEY RULES...as we can see with our Candidates since "Citizens United" and people have to Search for Alternative Media whereas most average Working Americans only have time to turn on the TV or listen to the Radio in Commutes and Convenience is what Alternative Media can't offer because they can't get the airtime because they don't have a way to break into the Corporate Controlled Mainstream Media as "NYC_SKYP's" post has show.

The worst thought is that we Progressive Dems just don't have a message that sells with ordinary people. I don't believe that. But, I do believe there are those in Power who want us to think that.

Anyway...that's what I've concluded.

[Cosmic Kitten]

35. Good points. Two issues come to mind.

Those "progressive" sites
you mentioned are/were uninspired.

They are plagued with the "bubble"
effect, echoing the same talking points.
And the hosts do little to elevate the discussion.

I want so much to like some of those folks
but they absolutely fail to inspire.
Sadly, Thom does more to elevate
the insane right-wing than promote the left.
I can't take his show BECAUSE of his guests.
I like Thom, his guests and topics ruin it.

The networks you mentioned were train wrecks.
As a consequence, they made the left look
worse rather than promote the cause.

The second issue is MESSAGING.

Progressive Dems just don't have
a message that sells with ordinary people.

Um, yeah, that is a BIG PROBLEM.

There are to many splinter causes
vying for primacy. Those wedge issues
are what dilutes the message.

There needs to be a singular focus.
The party establishment is talking
about Populism for a reason.

[calimary]

39. MESSAGING. MESSAGING. That is so important!!!! Critically important!!! And so far

our side has been pretty sucky at it. And we do let it get too watered down, and toothless, and complicated, and convoluted.

We need more quick-hit, easy-to-digest, and yes, dumbed-down messaging that BOOM! NAILS it in one bite. Unfortunately, we have to deal with what's there - a "listening audience" that has been severely dumbed-down and so poorly educated on critical thinking that they are pre-conditioned to just swallow whatever's being spoon-fed to them. Repeatedly spoon-fed to them. Simple messages, REPEATED ad nauseam. It's a form of brainwashing, really. Very deliberate and calculated. And even though we are the good guys here, WE HAVE TO THINK MORE STRATEGICALLY, and we HAVE TO BE SCHEMING AND CALCULATING, too. And yeah, sometimes it's unclean. It'd be nice to be fair and open and all that other good stuff. Well, that's not how the game is played.

And we want to WIN, don't we?

[Cosmic Kitten]

46. Office Supplies, we need office supplies ;~)

Dry erase boards,
maps, charts, that kinda stuffs

[NYC_SKP]

55. It's great to be on the right side of this with the best people, KoKo!

Like you!

[NYC_SKP]

97. Kicking to keep at top of my posts. nt

[Phlem]

11. Huge K&R!

Thanks NYC_SKP!

You know I'm there.

[a kennedy]

12. Makes me ill.....

and it's like we DON'T have a choice at all, they own EVERYTHING. Little guy indeed.

[zeemike]

13. I'm with ya.

Those graphics are interesting and troubling...or at least they should be.
But they don't seem to trouble some people, and all I can figure out is that those people somehow benefit from it.

Nope we cannot wait for Hillary to finish her turn, we must start now.

[heaven05]

14. saved and bookmarked

for use in the upcoming election madness soon to engulf this nation. K&R

[AtheistCrusader]

77. Careful with it.

First item I randomly fact checked wasn't true. Post 76.

[AlbertCat]

15. The bank merger chart....

I've been looking for that since I saw something similar like, last year.

It's time to break up the banks.... maybe?


And isn't most of this (especially media ownership) illegal... but they keep getting special waivers from the FCC?

Just apply the rules....please.... not special cases!!!

[F4lconF16]

17. You might want to start checking out the socialist group here.

Our two-party system is beyond broken. The entire history of our country has pitted an elite against the desperately poor, an employing class against a labor class. The party system has simply been two parts of that elite maintaining stability of an oppressive economic system. The Democratic Party has been not just complicit in it, but a main proponent of it. Stalwart liberal heroes such as FDR were part of an economic and political elite that consistently stabilize a constantly collapsing system. He very carefully worked for stability and only gave the working class just enough to keep them from revolting. He pulled a lot of the energy out of the socialist movement, and was key in keeping Bourgeois Society viable.

The danger of capitalism is that with enough sustained growth, it will produce such enormous wealth that it can afford to "buy off" the radical movements; e.g. establish enough stability by producing a middle class that will resist systemic change and support the elite. This is why I think people like Clinton are so dangerous: they have incredible potential to prevent the collapse of a system that by all rights is unsustainable. If there's any consolation, it's that every time there is a crash, there is the chance of radical action, and capitalism inherently guarantees those crashes. Climate change will also force the system to reform or collapse in the next five decades, as our growth will begin to (is already) consuming its base, and there will be a large opportunity when it does.

Don't allow yourself to become one of the people who keeps the system stable on the backs of the poor and working class. Vote for the Democratic Party if you must--I will not advocate otherwise on this site--but recognize that our two party system will prevent any true reform from happening. Any change needs to come from radical action on a local level. Our candidates in the Democratic Party must be committed to the people. Those we choose to elect need to be elected in order to further our movement towards an eventual systemic change. Get out and work in your communities, change people's ideas. Establish networks of support and interdependency. We can hold out against the monoliths of capitalism and political power in this country if we try.

[brush]

75. Do you favor a parlimentary system and the demo-socialist systems of Europe?

Last edited Thu Apr 16, 2015, 11:17 AM - Edit history (1)

Germany has particularly strong unions.

[F4lconF16]

80. No, I do not.

They are still strongly capitalistic systems. Germany right now is committing the same economic imperialism that the US does. Even the scandinavian countries have their issues. I favor a fully socialistic society, though a democratic socialist state is certainly an improvement over the heavily nationalistic, imperialistic, and corporate state that we have now.

On edit: it is hard to fully describe what a socialistic society would be like, because it depends so heavily on societal conditions of the time. It is almost impossible to predict what the world will look like in 50 years. For now, here is a good article on some aspects of it: http://socialistorganizer.org/what-socialism-would-look-like/

[brush]

82. Thanks for the link.

I have saved it and will read it later but have to go out now.

I also meant to ask you what you think about Montdragon cooperative system in the Basque region of Spain?

[F4lconF16]

83. Um...

*heads off to go do research*

...I will get back to you on that if you'd like, but to be honest, I'd ask that question in the Socialist-Progressive group (found here). I'm still fairly new to socialism, and my understanding of the theory and history is still evolving. There are people there with far more experience than I who would be able to better answer your questions.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

19. GE completed the sale of NBC two years ago.

From last September: This is why the Republicans, despite always being wrong, still get the lion's share of airtime

Scroll down to post #44: Not this again?

Every time this is posted - and this is not the first time - I point out that GE does not own NBC anymore.

NBCUniversal

NBCUniversal, Inc. – formerly known as NBCUniversal Media, LLC on January 29, 2011, and NBC Universal, Inc. previously from November 29, 2004 to January 28, 2011, and colloquially referred to as NBCU or NBCUni – is an American media and entertainment company engaged in the production and marketing of entertainment, news, and information products and services to a global customer base. The company owns and operates American television networks, numerous cable channels, and a group of local stations in the United States, as well as motion picture companies, several television production companies, and branded theme parks. It is the world's largest mass media.

NBC Universal was formed in August 2004 by the merger of General Electric's NBC with Vivendi's Vivendi Universal Entertainment. GE and US cable TV operator Comcast announced a buyout agreement for the company on December 3, 2009. Following regulatory approvals, the transaction completed on January 28, 2011. Comcast subsequently owned 51% of NBCUniversal while GE owned 49%. Comcast intended to buy out the rest of GE's stake over the following seven years, but nothing happened until February 12, 2013, when Comcast announced its intention to complete the purchase all at once and assume 100% ownership of the company by the end of March. The deal was finalized on March 19, 2013.

A newer graphic should be available.

ETA: MelissainKC beat me to it. See post #38.

Here's post #38: Ge does not own comcast

Comcast owns NBC and all of the companies listed under GE.

Here's post #52: But is it an improvement? Does Comcast's ownership make NBC less biased?

If it does I haven't noticed it yet.

[arcane1]

30. So now Comcast owns NBC?? I can't say that's much of an improvement :(

[KoKo]

38. The chart needs to be revised but it doesn't change the fact that a small number

Last edited Wed Apr 15, 2015, 04:51 PM - Edit history (1)

of conglomerates own our Media. Comcast replaces GE in the chart...but, the control is still there just passing hands to make one Corporation even larger.

[NYC_SKP]

42. Thanks. I remember when it was the "Big Ten" of media consolidation.

Fuck it, we know which way it's going and it's been with the help and acquiescence of both parties.

[MissDeeds]

20. Excellent post

Thanks for the info NYC_SKP. This is one of the many reasons I support Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

K&R and bookmarked

[JDPriestly]

22. And none other than Bill Clinton signed the media consolidation bill that helped make this

possible.
I wonder what Hillary thinks about the FCC and media consolidation.

Need I ask?

[Cosmic Kitten]

36. You don't need to ask...

but someone should answer

[rhett o rick]

23. I am with you and thanks for posting. The HRC supporters want 8 more years of the continuation

of the consolidation you show. Some are saying it's too soon to draw the line. I say that it's probably too late but we must stay and fight anywayz.

The Populist Movement is growing even though the Corp-Media and Third Way are ignoring or denying it's existence. At some point the various separate pieces will merge.

The Big Money Oligarchs may be able to buy the 2016 election but they can't stop the Populist Movement momentum. They can beat the hell out of protestors but that won't be enough.

[JDPriestly]

25. Does anyone know who owns the Comedy Channel or why Jon Stewart is leaving the Daily Show?

[arcane1]

32. I think Viacom owns Comedy Central, and I'm willing to take Jon at his word

He basically said he couldn't handle watching cable news anymore. I can relate! I can barely watch the cable news clips on the Daily Show!

[George II]

27. Overly simplified - how many votes can "Citicorp" cast?

[NYC_SKP]

34. Citizens United, PACs, Diebold there are oodles of ways to influence votes.

Where have you been?

It's not like every candidate gets the same treatment by media, or same ad funding, or exposure, or anything.

If that was the case, votes would be votes.

[Cosmic Kitten]

37. How much advertising can they buy?

If advertising doesn't work
why spend billions on a campaign?

[villager]

40. And their book publishing "divisions" don't even make the list, notes this (former?) author

I guess instead of books I write "content" now, since more of it is distributed digitally.

But most of the various (big) imprints we know are, in turn, owned by media giants....

[Fritz Walter]

41. We do have options away from this paradigm

One, for the Money
Several years ago, when my too-big-to-fail bank hit me with overdraft fees (because a regular, direct deposit landed mere nanoseconds after a scheduled payment), I closed all accounts there and walked my deposit accounts, credit card, mortgage, home equity line of credit and six figures worth of investments literally down the street to my friendly neighborhood credit union. It took some careful planning and preparation, but within a month the transition was complete. Never. Looked. Back. The CU offers the same or better services at much lower fees and a much better rate of return on investment than the bank ever did. Their certified financial planner works with me at no cost, versus the "Let's Make a Plan" scheme currently promoted; so, Let's Not, and not say that we did. If you are eligible to join a credit union, what are you waiting for? They're safer (via regulations) and more member- ("customer&quot friendly than any of the banks listed above or even the local/regional banks not shown. Their motto pretty much says it all: We Never Forget That It's Your Money. Yes, they have lobbyists, but their focus has been on preventing the banks from pushing legislature through that would take away CUs' tax-exempt status.

Two, for the Show
I am unplugged from most of the media streams listed above. I get my news from the Internet, including Google News. These conglomerates, and especially local daily newspapers HATE hearing that. I get my music on free streams or via downloading/ripping. Movies? Pass! The only thing keeping me on cable is broadband and when a less expensive alternative (with the same relative bandwidth) comes along, I'm cutting that, too.

[Duval]

43. I am! nt

[SleeplessinSoCal]

44. the campaign season is too long by a year.

Amend the "Constitutional Amendment" repealing CU to include a limit on time spent. Plus, time = money, not speech.

p.s. Hillary is already talking repeal.

[Cosmic Kitten]

48. Repeal is not gonna happen

Does anyone think Congress
will cut their apron strings?

It's empty rhetoric.
No one will hold her accountable.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

67. That's the spirit!!!

Given the need to rid ourselves of destructive fossil fuels (and all that goes with them), more independence on self sufficiancy, and an energy system built on renewables, will change the power system in terms of dollars and players.

[Cosmic Kitten]

73. Yep. Decentralize as well.

[robertpaulsen]

47. George Carlin had some choice words on this phenomenon.

He did a great interview here:

And, of course, his now classic piece about our owners:

http://americanjudas.blogspot.com/2010/09/problem-with-education-today-george.html

Why is the situation so bad? Carlin's take is that nobody questions things anymore:

[ashling]

49. I have used this media graphic

in my government classes

[mother earth]

50. Oligarchy States of America, and all issues go the same route, straight to the l%.

K & R for an outstanding OP.

While they cry about their concern for poverty & income inequality, they give the ability to corporations to rule over nations, from the highest courts to all those in gov't, this needs to change.

[Dont call me Shirley]

52. I'm in! Awesome charts! Bookmarked and Rec'd!

[blackspade]

54. great OP. K&R!

[blkmusclmachine]

56. It's folly to think that the 1% wouldn't buy out BOTH Parties.

The only real task is keeping up the illusion of separateness.

[NYC_SKP]

58. Exactly, blkmusclmachine. We are being PLAYED. It's pretty obvious.

This year especially, we aren't even allowed a primary.

[harun]

61. They don't even have to spend that much. Especially when you look

at the return they are getting for their investment. All new income is theirs. ALL.

As long as people keep fighting about wedge issues the 1% has no issues at all. Smooth sailing.

[marym625]

57. 100% with you

Absolutely great post. Thank you

[bravenak]

59. +1

You are right as always.

[marym625]

95. I wish that were true!

Thank you for the vote of confidence!

[onehandle]

60. What's wrong with 'Mrs. Robinson?'

I've been listening to it for much longer than 32 years.

A great song.

[Lifelong Protester]

62. So, basically save my piddly $50 donations?

Not making a difference anyway?

[NYC_SKP]

64. Any funds I spend will go to a different candidate, a Progressive candidate.

I always liked the underdog in a race.

[AtheistCrusader]

85. And, if Hillary is the primary nominee? Then what?

[NYC_SKP]

86. Flat busted. I just paid $7,000 in taxes and $9,200 in medical, just this week.

Don't you follow my Facebook feed and DU posts?

Fuck, my aneurism and subsequent two head surgeries last year cost over $1,000,000 and I had another procedure this year on March 31.

That means I'll be out $6,350 OOP/deductible PLUS my premiums for 2015.

I won't have anything left for Hillary Clinton, she'll have to fend for herself or talk to her friends.

[AtheistCrusader]

88. I have no idea who you are in real life.

And I do not desire to.

There are ways to support a candidate that require no out of pocket investment. In fact, they are the most important ways, as money can't buy everything.

[whereisjustice]

65. great post!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

68. I remember how pissed off Security Pacific customers were when BofA took over....

BofA was already universally HATED for their bad customer service and their fees.

Despite all of their promises of improvement BofA simply imposed all of their crap onto a public that knew better. They fired the bulk of the Security Pacific employees and closed branches. And they did it with glee over their victory.

[truckin]

69. Excellent information and I am with you. nt

[drokhole]

70. And look no further than this article...

...wherein Wall Street Banksters and her cozy hedge fund friends get a good chuckle out of her empty populist rhetoric:

Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street backers: We get it

[raouldukelives]

71. K&R With you the only way one can be. By not assisting & funding those against you. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

76. It's too bad these infographics can't make points without lying.

In 1995, The FCC forbade companies to own over 40 stations yet Clear channel owns 1200 stations.
In Minot, ND they own every station.

iHeartRadio is owned by ClearChannel, true. IHeartRadio owns 6 stations in Minot, ND. Also true.
However, that is not the entirety of Minot radio stations. KTUZ and KWGO are owned by "Programmer's Broadcasting" which is not a ClearChannel derivative. KMPR is owned by a university and public group. There are also nonprofit Christian stations not owned by CC.

I don't understand the point about Mrs. Robinson. It's a massively popular song, worldwide. It's also a major cultural element in American cinema. That was a ridiculous 'point' about how many times it's been played in US markets since 1968.

[NYC_SKP]

79. Times change, at one time all six commercial stations in Minot were ClearChannel stations. NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/31/business/media-on-minot-nd-radio-a-single-corporate-voice.html

And, if you'll look again at the graphic, the "point" of the thing isn't the particular song.

The point is the fact that "radio station ownership consolidation" has led to 80% of stations using the same playlists.

No diversity of content, no diversity of message, more and more like on big radio/TV station, newspaper, etc.

https://www.futureofmusic.org/press/press-releases/commercial-radio-station-ownership-consolidation-shown-harm-artists-and-public-

Doesn't that bother you?

[AtheistCrusader]

81. Your infographic was made in October 2011. Your counter 'source' is from 200*3*.

Those two stations I specified were created and licensed in 2005 and 2006 respectively. Which means, that without activism driven by that infographic, the Minot, ND radio market has diversified under normal market forces since 2003. (More than just two stations, and one offering public access.)

In 2011 when the graphic was made, that claim hadn't been true for over half a decade. That's what we call "a lie".

"The point is the fact that "radio station ownership consolidation" has led to 80% of stations using the same playlists."

That claim might be true. But the data point offered to support it, does nothing of the sort. That song is quite popular in international markets as well, and is an American cultural icon. You might as well cite the 28 YEAR endurance run of Pink Floyd's 'Dark Side Of The Moon' on the top 25 albums chart. This is a user-demand driven system. Mrs. Robinson is popular not because it is somehow an agenda of radio stations to run it. It is popular because multiple generations of consumers love it. Broad appeal due to it being part of American music and Cinema culture. Radio stations that use a similar song selection process will result in similar playlists for like genres.

[NYC_SKP]

87. And your point is exactly what? Does a dated figure or two negate the thrust of the argument?

I think not.

I don't think that the trend of media and corporate consolidation is by any measure moving in a different direction.

If it has in Minot, then I'm please to hear the good news.

[AtheistCrusader]

89. My point is what it was in my first response. The infographic is wrong.

The first item I selected at random to fact check was wrong.

If people drop this in social media, and attempt to use it to back up their preference for a diversified media, opposition is going to blow it full of holes, because it is wrong.

The spirit, or core message might be good or appealing to us, but the facts are wrong. Easily discoverable as wrong.

What happens when you project a good message to a potentially receptive audience, and your facts that you use to support it are glaringly wrong?

It damages the message.

[JonLP24]

96. Thanks for this bookmarked for future reference forever

A lot of people don't realize how damaging this. Turbulence is the right word for it followed by a dive into the Rocky Mountains

[demwing]

98. K&Rd, and Pinned forever /nt

[LoganOneNation]

101. A Cure for the "Infected" Trump's First 28 Days:

It's a Cookbook, stupid. It's 100% psychological warfare. 0% ideology (from Trump and minions)

Watch out for your anger; if Trump pisses you off, he'll soon own you.

Every single thing Trump has done (and will do going forward) is nothing more than an intentional troll-job on bedrock liberal values. Make No Mistake, that is the main intent: to demoralize every single decent liberal on earth. It is Trump's revenge on liberals for completely rejecting him in every way. He's now mashing their faces in his win.

I am a liberal. If I were not hyper aware of this tactic he is using, Trump's ridiculously anti-liberal moves would probably have the same effect on me that a bite from a rage zombie from the 28 Days Later movie would have. Of course, that's the precise goal of most psychological warfare. The chess moves are calibrated to drive the opposition into an "infected", mindless rage, thereby impairing its ability to be an effective opponent.

This knowledge should cure your liberal Trump-rage infection and inoculate you going forward. You can just laugh at it now, I hope.


Main Point. Don't succumb to rage. If he's pissing you off, he's owning you and you're now "infected."