Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old February 20th, 2008 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default Proof Leftist School is Wrong: Mass Media Corporations Put Politics Over Profits


[I would welcome some BTL on this - who can identify the logical flaws in Miller's countercase? Miller, if you don't know, is the top media critic in the nation, by jewish ways of measuring things.]


The Jewish Media: The Lie That Won't Die

By Mark Crispin Miller

When Marlon Brando declared on Larry King Live (4/5/96) that "Hollywood is owned by Jews," he only said what quite a few Americans believe. Since they don't know who owns the media, millions think that it's "the Jews."

It is an old canard. Having been codified in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (forged by Czarist cops in 1905), the lie was sold here by Henry Ford through the 1920s. ("The Twelfth Protocol," proclaimed his Dearborn Independent, "contains the entire plan of Control of the Press, reaching from the present time into the future when the Jewish World Government shall be established.")

In the 1930s, the lie was propagated much more broadly by a loose network of native fascists guided or inspired by Berlin. The best-known of those tools was Father Joseph Coughlin, whose Sunday broadcasts had an audience in the tens of millions, and whose weekly Social Justice had perhaps a third as many readers. Others fiercely seconded his thesis that the media were run by so-called "aliens"--a myth that, on the fringes, lasted through the war. "The motion picture industry," far-right demagogue Gerald L.K. Smith railed in 1945, "is being exploited by Russian Jewish Communists determined to inject their materialistic propaganda into the fresh young minds of our children."

Starting in the late 1930s, there was a notable attempt to set Americans straight. The radio cleric's charge that U.S. media were in the hands of "orientals" (one of his codewords) sparked a salutary counter-propaganda drive by academics, clergy and journalists. The Institute for Propaganda Analysis, based at Columbia University, publicly refuted the canard, as did Dorothy Thompson, whose syndicated column "On the Record" made clear to a massive public that the media were not "Jewish": not the press, not publishing, not even Hollywood, which was dominated not by those crude "moguls" but by New York's major banks, most run by WASPs.

Gentiles in High Places

Today, the myth may be as widespread as ever--and no one is refuting it. Every type of far-right propaganda luridly revives the spectre of the "Jewish media." In a pamphlet and Web-site entitled "Who Owns America?" the prolific neo-Nazi William Pierce, author of The Turner Diaries, tells us that the news and "entertainment media" are "Jew-controlled," which is why they push miscegenation, homosexuality and other race-polluting practices.

Meanwhile, the same spectre haunts the propaganda churned out by the Nation of Islam and other Afro-fascists--all of whom Pierce's readership would like to string up from the streetlamps. Every time Khalid Abdul Muhammad vents in public, he and his audience exult together in the fiction that the whole shebang is "Jew-controlled."

All such diatribe plays up your Eisners and your Sulzbergers--and plays down many other names: Jack Welch and Michael H. Jordan, CEOs, respectively, of G.E. (NBC) and Westinghouse (CBS); Rupert Murdoch (who owns 20th Century-Fox); John Malone, CEO of TCI, the nation's largest cable company; maverick globalist Ted Turner; and many more. Also tuned out are such goyische giants as Hearst Communications, Times Mirror, the Chicago Tribune's empire, Reader's Digest Inc.--and the Shintoist directorship of Sony (which owns Columbia Studios and Tri-Star Pictures).

The far-right media "critique" also ignores the role of major shareholders: buccaneers like Warren Buffett (Disney's largest investor); cyberlord Bill Gates (who owns a big piece of Dreamworks and MSNBC); Gordon Crawford, who manages the media holdings for the secretive Capital Group (which owns a chunk of every major player).

But more important, the far-right attack ignores the crucial point about today's media: Increasingly, their owners are publicly traded multinational corporations, chiefly answerable to banks, insurance companies and other institutional investors--and to advertisers, who are almost always the key source of revenue. Thus guided, corporate capitalism runs the show with no concern for any race or faith or for anything but profits.

Nixonian Jew-Baiting

While crackpot screeds have clearly riled up some explosive folk out on the margins, most of those who think "the Jews" control the media have probably been thus persuaded not by any neo-fascist agitation, but by the systematic rabble-rousing of some big-time pols and their supporters in the press.

The mass distrust of the alleged Hebraic cabal behind the media was first politically exploited at the highest levels by Richard Nixon, who sincerely hated that imaginary clique. He often raved to H.R. Haldeman about those "satanic Jews" atop the networks and the New York Times. Nixon's button-man in the campaign was his felonious understudy, Spiro Agnew, whose paranoid attack on the news media--"a tiny and closed fraternity of privileged men, elected by no one"--was tacitly anti-Semitic. His animus became much more explicit after Agnew's forcible retirement: "All you have to do is look around and see who owns the networks, who owns the Washington Post, the New York Times," he declared in 1976. "As you look around in the big news business, you see a heavy concentration of Jewish people."

Agnew's assault on Big Media was both conceived and crafted by the young Pat Buchanan. Since then, Buchanan has ebulliently parlayed his media celebrity into a full-time political jihad against the media (among other targets), and has done so with a tang of anti-Semitism so pronounced that even William Buckley finally had to clear his throat.

Arnold Good, Murphy Bad

However, many a rightist less flamboyant than Buchanan has deployed the Coughlinesque innuendo. In his contretemps with Murphy Brown, Dan Quayle suggestively attacked the "cultural elite" who "mock us in newsrooms, sitcom studios and faculty lounges across America." Christlike, he declared: "I wear their scorn as a badge of honor!" The identity of these folks was left deliberately vague: "I know exactly who the cultural elite, the media elite and the Hollywood elite are," Quayle noted darkly. (Presumably he did not mean his his own family, which controls a billion-dollar media empire that includes the Arizona Republic and the Indianapolis Star.)

More recently, Bob Dole, pretending to take on Hollywood entire, swung his wrath pointedly and only at Time-Warner (CEO: Gerald Levin). At the same time, Dole praised as family-friendly the film True Lies, starring noted Aryan and cinematic serial killer Arnold Schwarzenegger. It is surely no coincidence that True Lies was released by 20th Century Fox--the studio owned by Rupert Murdoch, dark financial angel of the New York Post, The Weekly Standard and other founts of G.O.P. propaganda.

Meanwhile, off the stump, the trope of the "the liberal media" has been copiously reconfirmed for years by countless rightist hacks and true believers. While "liberals" need not always stand for "Jews," the rhetorical strategy is the same in both cases: to distract attention from the real elite that actually controls the media by scapegoating the usual minority as conspiratorial outsiders.

Thus the time has come for another counter-propaganda drive--and not just to fight the rise of anti-Semitism, but to reaffirm democracy itself, which is again at risk.

Mark Crispin Miller teaches media studies at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1365
 
Old July 9th, 2009 #2
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

[media work hand in glove with corporations, just as they do with central government]

Not Just WaPo: Atlantic's Corporate-Sponsored "Salons" Tout "Private Conversations" With Top Journos, Lawmakers
By Zachary Roth - July 6, 2009, 1:13PM

Last week, Politico reported that the Washington Post had planned to put on an exclusive off-the-record "salon" at the home of its publisher, where corporate lobbyists would pay as much as $250,000 to gain access to Post reporters and editors, as well as Obama administration officials and members of Congress. The news provoked an outcry in DC journalism circles -- the Post's own ombudsman called it "pretty close to a public relations disaster" -- and the the event was quickly canceled.

But the notion that the Post's gambit represents some sort of new and uniquely outrageous collapsing of the wall between the editorial and business sides of a news publication is badly off the mark. In fact, it would be closer to the truth to say that the paper got caught pushing the envelope on a money-making and influence-building strategy that other outlets had been quietly deploying for years.

Check out this undated flier, obtained by TPMmuckraker. Sent out by Atlantic Media, which publishes The Atlantic, the flier advertises the magazine's "Salon Dinners," which it describes as "private conversations among thought leaders."

These aren't one-off events, by a long shot. The Atlantic has held approximately 100 of them since 2003, according to Zachary Hooper, a spokesman for the magazine.

And they're by and large initiated by the corporation that pays for them, according to Hooper. "The corporate sponsor" -- with whom the magazine generally has a longstanding business relationship -- "comes to us and says, 'We're interested in having a discussion on a certain topic.'" The magazine's business staff, said Hooper, takes things from there.

The events, as described in the flier, appear strikingly similar to the dinner planned by the Post -- right down to the use of the word "salon" to create an aura of intellectual inquiry. Just as the Post reportedly sought to have health-care lobbyists pay for an event on health-care reform, the Atlantic flier makes clear that the "salons" are paid for by corporations and focused on a public-policy issue in which the corporate sponsor has a major stake. It offers the following "sampling of salon dinner sponsors and topics":

• AstraZeneca on "Healthcare Access and Education"
• Microsoft on "Global Trade,"
• GE on "Energy Sustainability and the Future of Nuclear Power"
• Allstate on "The Future of the American City"
• Citi on "The Challenge of Global Markets"

Hooper declined to say how much these corporations put up to sponsor the events.

And just as with the Post, the Atlantic dinners are strictly off-the-record, and not open to the public. The flier describes them as:

Private, custom, off-the-record conversations of 20-30 key influential individuals, moderated by an Atlantic editor, designed to bring a thoughtful group together for unbounded conversation on key issues of the day.

And -- again like the Post's planned dinner -- the draw for corporations is access not just to the hosting publication's reporters and editors, but to other big-name journalists, not to mention members of Congress and other Washington heavy-weights. Among the "sampling of attendees" listed on the flier are Chris Matthews, George Stephanopoulos, David Brooks, Fred Hiatt, Maureen Dowd, Andrea Mitchell, James Carville, John Kerry, John Sununu, Gary Hart, Norm Coleman, Chris Dodd, Mitt Romney, and Rahm Emanuel (listed as a congressman, a position he held from January 2003 until the start of 2009).

Since last week, at least two separate posts on the Atlantic's website have drawn attention to the Post's misadventure. Both note in passing that the Atlantic itself organizes corporate-sponsored events, without elaborating.

There do appear to be differences between the Atlantic's events and what the Post had in mind. Hooper, the Atlantic spokesman, stressed that the magazine makes an effort to put together a guest list that will allow journalists and politicians in attendance to hear a range of viewpoints. For instance, said Hooper, the Astra Zeneca-sponsored dinner on health care included representatives from the National Business Coalition on Health, and Leapfrog, both of which are advocacy groups that support efforts to lower health-care costs, as well as from the National Alliance on Hispanic Health, and the American Lung Association. And the GE-sponsored event on nuclear power involved the Natural Resources Defense Council and the non-partisan research group Resources for the Future, among others.

"At the end of the day, it's something that helps our journalism," said Hooper. "It gives [our journalists] more perspectives for their journalism." He added that the money from the dinners "helps underwrite the broader journalism we do."

The salons aren't the only high-fallutin' corporate-sponsored events put together by The Atlantic. Last week, the magazine hosted its yearly "Aspen Ideas Festival," which brings together a similar roster of media, political and business elites, and is paid for in part by corporations. But those confabs are on the record and open to the media. Nor does there appear to be quite as close a link as with the salons between the discussion topics and the interests of the corporate sponsors.

It's not just the Atlantic, of course. As the Post helpfully pointed out in its effort to do damage control on the scandal, the Wall Street Journal earlier this year "brought together global finance leaders -- including Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd -- for a two-day conference sponsored by Nasdaq and hosted by Robert Thomson, the Journal's top editor, and other editors and reporters." But that too was on-the-record, and was web-cast by the Journal.

The Post added:

The Journal also holds conferences with its All Things Digital unit. A session in May, described as offering "unmatched access to the technology industry's elite," was sponsored by Hewlett-Packard and Qualcomm, among others, and featured the CEOs of Microsoft, Yahoo, NBC Universal, AT&T and Twitter, as well as Weymouth.

And of course The New Yorker holds an annual corporate-sponsored festival, featuring its editors and writers, as well as other big-name cultural figures. The one planned for this fall is paid for American Airlines, Delta, Westin Hotels and Banana Republic, reports the Post.

What to make of all this? Clearly, there are degrees of egregiousness here. A corporate-sponsored event that's off the record and closed to the media and the public seems more objectionable than one that's open and on the record. Equally, an event that's focused on a public-policy issue that's of particular interest to the event's corporate sponsor seems more objectionable than, say, having a clothing company or an airline put up money for a festival that treats everything from the global economy to indie rock, as in the case of The New Yorker. An event whose advertising seeks to lure corporate lobbyists by promising the ability to directly influence elected officials or journalists seems, perhaps, more objectionable than one where the potential for influence-peddling is at least less explicit. It's also worth noting that when a daily newspaper risks compromising its coverage of a key policy issue, it probably does more damage than when a monthly ideas magazine appears to do the same.

So it's fair to say that the Post's plans, as described, seem to rank highest on the egregiousness scale than any arrangement that's yet surfaced -- with the Atlantic's own long string of corporate-sponsored "salons" perhaps coming in second. But the key point is that, even before this latest occasion for outrage, there was hardly the kind of clear and distinct line between the news and business sections of many major media outlets that the reaction to last week's news would suggest.

Late Update: Atlantic Media publisher David Bradley responds. Our take is here.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmem...red_salons.php
 
Old February 13th, 2017 #3
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/es...ns-left-020817

ESPN embraces leftism loses 10k viewers a day...maybe there's a connection. Naw..

http://whitesidesportsblog.blogspot....disengage.html

Last edited by Alex Linder; February 16th, 2017 at 07:13 AM.
 
Old February 16th, 2017 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

PewDiePie #1 Video Maker on You Tube, dropped by Disney becuz whines about "anti-semitism". PDP HAS 53,000,000+ subscribers. But politics > profits in (((media))).

 
Old February 17th, 2017 #5
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

Trailer for 'racist' Netflix series Dear White People 'gets a million dislikes in just ONE day' - and sparks customer revolt

Controversial new programme has garnered a huge backlash
Numerous subscribers have cancelled their Netflix service in response
Users slammed the forthcoming show as 'not reverse racism, just racism'
One of it's writers, Jack Moore, posted on Twitter: 'F***white people'
It's claimed the company deleted 100,000 negative comments from YouTube

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...s-ONE-day.html
 
Old February 17th, 2017 #6
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

Trailer for 'racist' Netflix series Dear White People 'gets a million dislikes in just ONE day' - and sparks customer revolt

Controversial new programme has garnered a huge backlash
Numerous subscribers have cancelled their Netflix service in response
Users slammed the forthcoming show as 'not reverse racism, just racism'
One of it's writers, Jack Moore, posted on Twitter: 'F***white people'
It's claimed the company deleted 100,000 negative comments from YouTube

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...s-ONE-day.html
 
Old May 5th, 2017 #7
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

perfect example: bill nye the 'science' guy come sex degeneracy advocate = his stupid jew-featuring (bloom) video is universally hated, yet still put out by a giant profit-seeking corp. again, a one-shot refutation of leftist school of fake media criticism

http://www.returnofkings.com/120642/...c-for-children
 
Old May 15th, 2017 #8
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

Fans of the Tim Allen-starring sitcom Last Man Standing have threatened a boycott of ABC after the network cancelled the conservative-friendly series last week despite strong ratings and critical acclaim.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywo...-cancellation/
 
Old July 18th, 2017 #10
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,921
Crowe
Default

When you're a member of the same tribe that controls the money, and the banks, you can afford the luxury of blowing some potential profits to push a political agenda.

And it's not just mass media corporations, but a lot of the commercials (((they))) put on TV to advertise for a number of corporations are pushing cultural Marxism.

Examples:


There is lots, lots more of this. Commercials like what's shown are actually the norm.

I've seen a lot more oil driller commercials here lately, as in White man + sheboon.

Also, this:


TL;DR for the above video is: White kids are bad, stupid, and irresponsible, but nigger youth and parents are intelligent and responsible. Even though the facts prove that the opposite is true. Although Subaru is a Japanese company, I'm willing to bet that they probably hired jewish marketing consultants who recommended the above commercial be aired. Jews love using commercials to attack stereotypes that are logical, and based on reality by showcasing what's atypical of the norm, while trying to sell it off as the norm.
__________________
Low-IQ bible scholars are legion, the big book o' bullshit is catnip to the underbrained. --ALEX LINDER

Last edited by Crowe; July 18th, 2017 at 03:47 PM.
 
Old September 27th, 2017 #11
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 42,443
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

http://tvline.com/2017/09/27/last-ma...w-cmt-revival/

In a new interview, Tim Allen is speaking out against ABC’s decision to cancel Last Man Standing after six seasons, and the failed deal to revive the family comedy on cable network CMT.

“It’s hard,” Allen says during a sit-down on Norm Macdonald Live. “I have no idea why [ABC] did what they did.” But that doesn’t stop him from suggesting that the decision came down to his conservative politics.

“I always wanted Last Man Standing to be like [All in the Family],” he says. “Archie Bunker pushed boundaries, but Carroll O’Connor was not that guy at all. [Mike Baxter was] a version of that guy. But there’s nothing more dangerous, especially in this climate, than a funny, likable conservative.”

Averaging 6.4 million weekly viewers with a 1.1 demo rating, Last Man Standing was ABC’s second-most watched comedy (behind Modern Family) but No. 8 in the demo. “[They] hadn’t won a Friday night in 15 years,” he says. “They put us out to pasture on Friday and we won Friday. Big night for us. Big night for them.”
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 PM.
Page generated in 0.12553 seconds.