-from the Los Angeles Times: A judge in Nevada has just ordered MSNBC to include Rep. Dennis Kucinich in Tuesday's Democratic Party presidential debate in Las Vegas or he will cancel the forum. Senior Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson vowed to issue an injunction halting the nationally televised debate if MSNBC failed to comply. Kucinich had filed a lawsuit seeking to be included just this morning. The judge ruled it was a matter of fairness and Nevada voters would benefit from hearing from more than just Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama. Kucinich had been invited to participate in the 6 p.m. Pacific debate Tuesday, but that invitation was rescinded last week ... So set up a fourth podium. Andrew Malcolm, correspondent - The Los Angeles Times

I got word from the Kucinich campaign of the very possible likelihood that General Electric and perhaps other corporations will be dumping money into efforts to overturn Judge Thompson's ruling. It's a pity that justice must be purchased, which seriously burdens people that don't have billion dollar wells to stand up to that kind of money.

I ask the genuine patriots of our country to contribute to help us to defend this ruling from the corporations that don't want us to hear what Dennis Kucinich has to say. I realize, the judge's orders won't guarantee that Dennis will be treated any better than he was before.

Most contributors to Dennis Kucinich's fight for fair access to the debates and so-called "campaign news" coverage, as well as, to all primary ballots come from supporters that really can't afford the most basic living expenses. Please, don't let the burden be on low income and lower-middle-class voters to defend our right to fair and free access to current information on who is running for President, what they stand for, and what kind of background they have. It is unfortunate that many voters are under the false impression that only Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and John Edwards are running on the Democratic Ballot. It is unfortunate that many voters assume that Ron Paul dropped out, because they don't see his name and picture in the Republican "reports." It is a shame that most voters don't know who is running as an alternative party candidate, because the corporate media controls information that most people turn to for their election-related news.

Please, help us fight for our democratic rights. The public owns the airwaves, not GE, Walt Disney Co., FOX, General Electric, Viacom, Clear Channel... Please Contribute to our cause.

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.

I suspected that the Des Moines Independent is a Gannet Inc. owned publication, but I wasn't sure about that until after I fired off a letter to the paper's publishing-editor Carolyn Washburn. I know a lot about Gannet Inc. I won't say what I intend to do with this information, as well as, more info I'm compiling. I know why Gannet Inc. executives do not want to provide fair opportunity for any political candidate and his, or her advocates to explain the candidate's record, position on issues and ideas if that candidate is an advocate for the very people corporations like Gannet Inc. and many of its most valued advertisers exploit and hurt.

My letter to Carolyn Washburn is in response to her decision to throw together a mock criteria list with the intention of adding "rules" that were deliberately included to keep, at least, one candidate from participating in that farce of a debate in Iowa.

To: Carolyn Washburn, Publisher/Editor of the Des Moines Register
From: Treva L. Van Fossen

Dear Ms. Washburn,

Please note: this letter will be publicized on the Internet. Perhaps, it will also be printed in bulk and circulated in your publishing area.

Do you have a problem with fair election coverage of all the candidates? Do you feel that you have executive privilege to deny any candidate fair opportunity to explain his record, position on issues,and ideas to voters during an election campaign? Do you believe that you are entitled to trample the right each voter has to fair exposure of every candidate, such as, during debates and through sources (like newspapers) which cover election campaigns and government activities?

Based upon your decision to ban US Congressman Dennis Kucinich (Ohio, Dem.) from the debate which your newspaper is sponsoring, the answer must be, "Yes," to all of the above questions.

I have examined the details of your reported "criteria" for candidates to meet if they wish to participate in the debate which your newspaper is sponsoring. I take issue with several items on your list. I wish to address two of them.

One item was the candidate's poll position.

You and I both know that a candidate's poll position is heavily determined by the amount of exposure that media resources, such as, the Des Moines Register, provide for each candidate. We both know that the candidate receiving the least amount of exposure in newspaper reports and televised reports on an election campaign will not do well in most polls (including fabricated ones offered by biased sources that can manipulate poll results). We both know that many media insiders pretend that they don't report on candidates which do poorly in polls, or in your case, exclude them from media-sponsored debates. We know that this "excuse" is used to explain why these sources refuse to offer information that can improve a candidate's position in public opinion polls.

This is just one sleazy tactic that I learned from "journalism professionals" at the newspaper where I worked for nearly eight years. I worked for one of the most powerful corporate media conglomerates in the world where I learned many of that corporation's dirty tricks, as well as, media strengths and weaknesses.

Another "requirement" in your criteria list: the stipulation of where the candidate's Iowa field director must operate. This is an elitist requirement. It smacks of discrimination of candidates that refuse to accept Big Business and Big Industry bribes (a.k.a., campaign donations) which come in the form of large sums, and scattered small sums from sources representing these industries, no matter how
discreetly.

Are any Big Business and Big Industry "donors" for celebrity candidates (Like Clinton, Obama, Edwards, and Biden) also most valued advertisers with your publication?

This country is supposed to be a democracy, not a plutocracy. Does someone need to explain this to you? Apparently, they do.


Your decision to create a way to knock Congressman Kucinich out of this debate has caused me to become very intrigued about your publication. Now, I am curious to learn whether, or not the Des Moines Register has its own production and circulation departments. I'd like to know how much you pay most production and circulation employees and what type of "benefits" your provide them (if any). I'm very interested in knowing if, or how often OSHA has cited and fined your publication for work-place hazards, especially in the production and circulation departments which I suspect you control, vicariously through lower-level management and supervisors.

I am interested in these things, because I believe that they will help me to determine some of the reasons why you don't want Iowa voters to learn about Dennis Kucinich's official record as it reflects his position on the issues and the ideas he has.

What will I do with this information?

I like to share. I like to teach. I like to encourage people to harness the power which knowledge brings.


Sincerely,

Treva L. Van Fossen.

Anti-democracy Big Media should regard this message as fair warning.