BuffettNews.com

Article by Lauren Horwitch in "BackStage" :

"What if six male billionaires decided what 300 million people watched on TV, saw in movie theatres, heard on the radio, and read in every major newspaper? What if those six men, including the country's biggest defense contractor, chose which projects got green-lighted and which actors were cast?

Some would call it an Orwellian nightmare, but artists and thousands of other U.S. citizens call it reality. More precisely, it's called media consolidation: the popular practice of international corporations monopolizing media outlets such as TV stations, movie studios, and newspapers. As it stands, six companies own 90 percent of the media holdings in the United States: Viacom, which owns Paramount, CBS, MTV Networks, and DreamWorks; Disney, whose subsidiaries include ABC, Miramax, Pixar, Touchstone, Walt Disney Studios, and Walt Disney Theatrical; Time Warner, parent company of Warner Bros., HBO, half of the CW (co-owned with CBS Corp.), CNN, and AOL; General Electric, which owns NBC Universal; Bertelsmann, whose holdings include Sony and BMG Music Publishing; and News Corp., owner of 20th Century Fox, Fox Broadcasting, MyNetworkTV, FX Networks, and MySpace. The men at the helm of those corporations are, respectively, Sumner Redstone, Robert Iger, Richard Parsons, Jeffrey R. Immelt, Carl Bertelsmann, and Rupert Murdoch.

The entire article can be found at http://www.backstage.com/bso/search/art ... 1003285440

Ceol na Mara wrote:Article by Lauren Horwitch in "BackStage" :

"What if six male billionaires decided what 300 million people watched on TV, saw in movie theatres, heard on the radio, and read in every major newspaper? What if those six men, including the country's biggest defense contractor, chose which projects got green-lighted and which actors were cast?

Some would call it an Orwellian nightmare, but artists and thousands of other U.S. citizens call it reality. More precisely, it's called media consolidation: the popular practice of international corporations monopolizing media outlets such as TV stations, movie studios, and newspapers. As it stands, six companies own 90 percent of the media holdings in the United States: Viacom, which owns Paramount, CBS, MTV Networks, and DreamWorks; Disney, whose subsidiaries include ABC, Miramax, Pixar, Touchstone, Walt Disney Studios, and Walt Disney Theatrical; Time Warner, parent company of Warner Bros., HBO, half of the CW (co-owned with CBS Corp.), CNN, and AOL; General Electric, which owns NBC Universal; Bertelsmann, whose holdings include Sony and BMG Music Publishing; and News Corp., owner of 20th Century Fox, Fox Broadcasting, MyNetworkTV, FX Networks, and MySpace. The men at the helm of those corporations are, respectively, Sumner Redstone, Robert Iger, Richard Parsons, Jeffrey R. Immelt, Carl Bertelsmann, and Rupert Murdoch.

The entire article can be found at http://www.backstage.com/bso/search/art ... 1003285440

Thank you Sen. Conrad Burns for sponsoring the Communications Act that made all this possible... may you spend your last days (after losing the election on the 7th for your role in the Abramoff fiasco) being forcibly sodomized to the sound of Britney Spears and Insynch for making consolidation a reality...

Before cable TV, there were three networks (3 owners). From the glass is half full perspective, there are twice as many owners today.

Skibo wrote:Before cable TV, there were three networks (3 owners). From the glass is half full perspective, there are twice as many owners today.

but there were a lot more locally-owned radio stations...

RinglingRingling wrote:

Skibo wrote:Before cable TV, there were three networks (3 owners). From the glass is half full perspective, there are twice as many owners today.

but there were a lot more locally-owned radio stations...

It's the radio and newspaper monopolies that scare me more than television. And Rupert Murdoch scares me, too.

chippewa wrote:

RinglingRingling wrote:

Skibo wrote:Before cable TV, there were three networks (3 owners). From the glass is half full perspective, there are twice as many owners today.

but there were a lot more locally-owned radio stations...

It's the radio and newspaper monopolies that scare me more than television. And Rupert Murdoch scares me, too.

I am thinking that given old Rupert's conservative leanings and support for folks who hate immigrants.. perhaps ownership of a media conglomerate by an Aussie interested more in infotainment than actual news should be illegal...

Why so mean towards Rupert Murdoch? He has found a formula that gets ratings and is profitable. There are plenty of other choices. Nobody is forced to watch any of his networks or news. If you like your news with a liberal slant then the Communist News Network(CNN) is for you. Ted Turner is much scarier than Rupert Murdoch. I guarentee you if Murdoch believed reporting news with a liberal bias was more profitable, he would have raided CBS, CNN, ABC, NPR and NBC for the best reporters/news benders available.

Skibo wrote:Why so mean towards Rupert Murdoch? He has found a formula that gets ratings and is profitable. There are plenty of other choices. Nobody is forced to watch any of his networks or news. If you like your news with a liberal slant then the Communist News Network(CNN) is for you. Ted Turner is much scarier than Rupert Murdoch. I guarentee you if Murdoch believed reporting news with a liberal bias was more profitable, he would have raided CBS, CNN, ABC, NPR and NBC for the best reporters/news benders available.

blahblahblah... thanks for the use of the pejoratives. You lost your argument as soon as you used the words "Communist", "liberal" and "liberal bias". Thanks for playing.

RinglingRingling wrote: blahblahblah... thanks for the use of the pejoratives. You lost your argument as soon as you used the words "Communist", "liberal" and "liberal bias". Thanks for playing.

If you believe that any network is unbiased then you are very short sighted. I find it funny that you respond so eloquently to my "labels" yet calling Murdoch and other conservatives "immigrant haters" is ok. I think if you open your eyes (and mind) you will find that most conservatives hate illegal immigration and accept any legal immigrant with open arms.

Seems that both our posts have some bias, as does the news.

Skibo wrote:

RinglingRingling wrote: blahblahblah... thanks for the use of the pejoratives. You lost your argument as soon as you used the words "Communist", "liberal" and "liberal bias". Thanks for playing.

If you believe that any network is unbiased then you are very short sighted. I find it funny that you respond so eloquently to my "labels" yet calling Murdoch and other conservatives "immigrant haters" is ok. I think if you open your eyes (and mind) you will find that most conservatives hate illegal immigration and accept any legal immigrant with open arms.

Seems that both our posts have some bias, as does the news.

I find it funny that a) you missed the , denoting humour; b) I am willing to bet Rupert's expressed support for conservative candidates who were going overboard on the illegal immigrant issue; c) Murdoch's approach, as well as his own description of his views is "conservative", so hardly the pejorative you tossed out with the "Communist" statement; and your beating the drum on a supposed liberal bias in the news is just part of that "big lie" approach that isn't supported by fact. (Tho I would believe that by comparison to those using buzzterms like "liberal bias in the media", a moderate or someone slightly right-of-center would be liberal to flamingly-so.)

RinglingRingling wrote:
Thank you Sen. Conrad Burns for sponsoring the Communications Act that made all this possible... may you spend your last days (after losing the election on the 7th for your role in the Abramoff fiasco) being forcibly sodomized to the sound of Britney Spears and Insynch for making consolidation a reality...

HARRRR!!

(I think I just hurt myself! )

Poor Connie!

Thanks RR!!!!

Skibo wrote:Before cable TV, there were three networks (3 owners). From the glass is half full perspective, there are twice as many owners today.

Perspective is something few of us are allowed to have. Education on the subject however is something you must find, it is not given out lightly.

Now those 6 media people (2x as many as you said) own not only TV, but movies, billboards, 98% of all print adds, 98% of all radio, 98% of all music VENUES, and the list really dose go on.

"Oh who cares?" I'm sure you'll hear. Well, you better, cause those who control all media, control everything we do, see, hear, like & hate.

Wake up

Drumkat wrote: Now those 6 media people (2x as many as you said) own not only TV, but movies, billboards, 98% of all print adds, 98% of all radio, 98% of all music VENUES, and the list really dose go on.

"Oh who cares?" I'm sure you'll hear. Well, you better, cause those who control all media, control everything we do, see, hear, like & hate.

Wake up

Myths busted

Data at the end pg 9 on is from 2004 but I don't think it has changed much.

Skibo wrote:Before cable TV, there were three networks (3 owners). From the glass is half full perspective, there are twice as many owners today.

You're SO right on. (And TV went off the air for the night at 11:00 PM).
I wonder if some of these same people are P.O.ed at auto makers for putting the mom & pop horse-and-buggy shops out of business.
Jeez, Louise.

I can't wait to shake Conrad Burns' hand.
(Yours either, Sibko).

Skibo wrote:

Drumkat wrote: Now those 6 media people (2x as many as you said) own not only TV, but movies, billboards, 98% of all print adds, 98% of all radio, 98% of all music VENUES, and the list really dose go on.

"Oh who cares?" I'm sure you'll hear. Well, you better, cause those who control all media, control everything we do, see, hear, like & hate.

Wake up

Myths busted

Data at the end pg 9 on is from 2004 but I don't think it has changed much.

Well knowing anything at all about how Clear Channel has "evolved" over the last 2-3 years shoots this down hard. They are not just in Radio, they are moving to get everything. One source = bad. Just like if you only watched FOX, how dumb they could make you

I personally never listen to the radio so it only effects what I read, where I'm allowed to perform, and what I'm forced to select on the TV.

Media to the masses SUCKS anyway I look at it.

Conrad Burns Classic.
http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articl ... 1burns.txt

What I love is these high powered people could give a RIP about you and you just love to blindly follow.

With the explosion of the internet and blogging, I think we have more independent sources of "information" than ever...

While a large corporation (or a number of them in cahoots) may be able to control TV/Radio/Newspapers, they won't be able to control what we see/hear/read on the internet....

Skibo wrote:http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-at040928.pdf Myths busted

Data at the end pg 9 on is from 2004 but I don't think it has changed much.

The testimony was from a representative of the Cato Organization, a libertarian think-tank.
Do you think the fact that Rupert Murdoch was on their Board of Directors influenced them in any way?

Ceol na Mara wrote:

Skibo wrote:http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-at040928.pdf Myths busted

Data at the end pg 9 on is from 2004 but I don't think it has changed much.

The testimony was from a representative of the Cato Organization, a libertarian think-tank.
Do you think the fact that Rupert Murdoch was on their Board of Directors influenced them in any way?

other than saying, "you know, my funding helps pay your salaries" every other week during the progress meetings?

nah.. not at all.