Celebrity Candidates Pay for "News" and "Debate" Exposure?
Posted on Sunday, January 13, 2008 at 9:27 AM in US Media Whores
Celebrity Candidates Pay for "News" and "Debate" Exposure?
By Treva L. Van Fossen
Sun. January 13, 2008
I've been trying my utmost to reach executives with NBC/MSNBC, according to jobs affiliated with program directing, producing, new, MSNBC investigates, etc. The best I got was a guy that claimed that he was only a technician.
So, I'm hitting my blogs and some choice forums to openly speculate what I think is happening with the exclusive treatment the corporate media is giving to specific candidates, who happen to have earned additional money beyond the teaser-donations offered by lobbyists that seek special favors in Washington D.C.
Here is what has been going through my mind:
I have detected an obvious lack of presidential primary campaign commercials on television this election season. This had me wondering if there is either a new law banning the practice, or if executives over corporate media, especially with national exposure, have been accepting campaign funds from candidates and party organizations (Like the DNC, DLC, RNC, and GOP) in exchange for what is passed off as political news coverage and debates. If certain pay-TV and network insiders are accepting campaign funds in exchange for providing advertisements on behalf of candidates, then what we see are commercial bits disguised as news reports and informercials disguised as debates.
Let's assume that my suspicions are accurate, or at least, close to the truth. Hypothetically, it might mean that some sources paid off the corporate media in exchange for amount of time and positive attention paid to each candidate, giving CEO (Clinton, Edwards and Obama) additional time for additional money. Maybe, Biden and Richardson could only afford to pay so much in exchange for the limelight with a set timer on it. (Cover-My-Arse Reminder: I am only speculating hypothetically, not out-right accusing, unless something stronger than circumstantial evidence can back up these probabilities.)
So, maybe the media threw out some freebies to a few candidates in each party to give the impression that its entertainers (which play the part of professional journalists) are trying to give fair time, even though one debate (On CNN) turned out to be the intended Hillary and Barak Show, with Edwards, Biden and Richardson in supportive roles to "weigh in" (as Wolfe Blitzer repeatedly said) on anything which kept the focus on Hillary and Barak.
This takes me back to that little video I watched of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards having that little conversation after a debate. It's the one where Hillary says to John that she wants certain candidates out of the debate. It is the one where she stated that she would have the party leaders do something about that, the one where she says, "Our guys should talk."
They might have received more back up after Dennis Kucinich answered the questions Wolfe Blitze asked all Democratic Party candidates in the CNN debate last November, would you support the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is. You may recall Dennis' answer, which began with, "Only if..."
Once Dennis expressed his reservations and terms, I'm certain they did not go over well at all with the brass at the DNC and the DLC. I can see those plutocrats contacting each other to say, "You know, it was bad enough that we didn't help to keep the little trouble maker out of the debates, because, God only knows, what will come out of his mouth next to piss off our corporate backers and cost us money on Wall Street. We'd better do as Hillary and John suggested and pay off our media friends to figure out a way to keep him off TV."
I would really like to have a look at where campaign funds for the celebrity candidates in both parties went. This includes any donations and personal member investments into the coffers of the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Leadership Council, The Republican National Committee and the Grand Old Party (GOP). Maybe, it's time to demand an investigation into this matter.
If you are, or were a supporter and volunteer for a candidate that was snubbed, like my candidate (Dennis Kucinich) has been by corporate media "news" on TV and in print, especially if your candidate was not permitted to appear in a televised "debate", feel free to openly speculate in such a way where you can legally cover your ass, as I have. If you would like to join me in chorus to demand an independent and impartial investigation, or class action law suits, then we might get results.
Feel free to pass this message on to any candidate that has been ignored by the "news" media, or any supporter that has invested dearly in that candidate's campaign. If the FCC isn't interested in doing its job, then we need to find other means to end biased media exposure of celebrity candidates with the money and the willingness to engage in anti-democratic back-door deals.
By Treva L. Van Fossen
Sun. January 13, 2008
I've been trying my utmost to reach executives with NBC/MSNBC, according to jobs affiliated with program directing, producing, new, MSNBC investigates, etc. The best I got was a guy that claimed that he was only a technician.
So, I'm hitting my blogs and some choice forums to openly speculate what I think is happening with the exclusive treatment the corporate media is giving to specific candidates, who happen to have earned additional money beyond the teaser-donations offered by lobbyists that seek special favors in Washington D.C.
Here is what has been going through my mind:
I have detected an obvious lack of presidential primary campaign commercials on television this election season. This had me wondering if there is either a new law banning the practice, or if executives over corporate media, especially with national exposure, have been accepting campaign funds from candidates and party organizations (Like the DNC, DLC, RNC, and GOP) in exchange for what is passed off as political news coverage and debates. If certain pay-TV and network insiders are accepting campaign funds in exchange for providing advertisements on behalf of candidates, then what we see are commercial bits disguised as news reports and informercials disguised as debates.
Let's assume that my suspicions are accurate, or at least, close to the truth. Hypothetically, it might mean that some sources paid off the corporate media in exchange for amount of time and positive attention paid to each candidate, giving CEO (Clinton, Edwards and Obama) additional time for additional money. Maybe, Biden and Richardson could only afford to pay so much in exchange for the limelight with a set timer on it. (Cover-My-Arse Reminder: I am only speculating hypothetically, not out-right accusing, unless something stronger than circumstantial evidence can back up these probabilities.)
So, maybe the media threw out some freebies to a few candidates in each party to give the impression that its entertainers (which play the part of professional journalists) are trying to give fair time, even though one debate (On CNN) turned out to be the intended Hillary and Barak Show, with Edwards, Biden and Richardson in supportive roles to "weigh in" (as Wolfe Blitzer repeatedly said) on anything which kept the focus on Hillary and Barak.
This takes me back to that little video I watched of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards having that little conversation after a debate. It's the one where Hillary says to John that she wants certain candidates out of the debate. It is the one where she stated that she would have the party leaders do something about that, the one where she says, "Our guys should talk."
They might have received more back up after Dennis Kucinich answered the questions Wolfe Blitze asked all Democratic Party candidates in the CNN debate last November, would you support the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is. You may recall Dennis' answer, which began with, "Only if..."
Once Dennis expressed his reservations and terms, I'm certain they did not go over well at all with the brass at the DNC and the DLC. I can see those plutocrats contacting each other to say, "You know, it was bad enough that we didn't help to keep the little trouble maker out of the debates, because, God only knows, what will come out of his mouth next to piss off our corporate backers and cost us money on Wall Street. We'd better do as Hillary and John suggested and pay off our media friends to figure out a way to keep him off TV."
I would really like to have a look at where campaign funds for the celebrity candidates in both parties went. This includes any donations and personal member investments into the coffers of the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Leadership Council, The Republican National Committee and the Grand Old Party (GOP). Maybe, it's time to demand an investigation into this matter.
If you are, or were a supporter and volunteer for a candidate that was snubbed, like my candidate (Dennis Kucinich) has been by corporate media "news" on TV and in print, especially if your candidate was not permitted to appear in a televised "debate", feel free to openly speculate in such a way where you can legally cover your ass, as I have. If you would like to join me in chorus to demand an independent and impartial investigation, or class action law suits, then we might get results.
Feel free to pass this message on to any candidate that has been ignored by the "news" media, or any supporter that has invested dearly in that candidate's campaign. If the FCC isn't interested in doing its job, then we need to find other means to end biased media exposure of celebrity candidates with the money and the willingness to engage in anti-democratic back-door deals.
8 comments :: post a comment ::
link