The problem with how progressives take on America's media problems is that, they try to get the media to improve itself, or they try to get the government to improve the media, but they don't try to get campaign spending limits implemented so that there are better politicians around to make improvements in the media.

As long as the media is an OLIGOPOLY (i.e., a near monopoly) of bigger and bigger media companies, there will be too little MARKET COMPETITION going on in the media for it to be an adequate media. BUT, THAT OLIGOPOLY WON'T END UNTIL THERE ARE ADEQUATE CAMPAIGN SPENDING LIMITS IN ENOUGH OF THE RACES FOR AMERICA'S POLITICAL OFFICES (i.e., SO AMERICA HAS ENOUGH POLITICIANS WHO ARE QUALIFIED-ENOUGH FOR THEIR OFFICES TO DO A GOOD-ENOUGH JOB OF ENDING THAT OLIGOPOLY.)

Do we really know what makes a person qualified for their office ?

Nevermind that the Seattle Times has for years been trying to put its main competitor (Seattle PI) out of business, or that the owner of the Seattle Times (Frank Blethen) routinely uses the editorial pages to push his own agenda. And nevermind that it was Bill Clinton that signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which massively deregulated the media and paved the way for the rise of giants like Clear Channel (John Kerry helped draft the Act too).

No, the problem is private ownership of the media. Individuals should not be allowed to own or operate public assets. There will always be a motive for them to use it for their own interests at the expense of the public.

While spending limits are a leap in the right direction, the main cause of all this are the so-called "Corporate Rights" enjoyed by Corporations. Until we can deligitimize these "greedy", profit above all else 'robber barons', we won't see any legitimate change in our lifetimes. It might take the 2nd American Revolution to really change things.

Jackgay writes: "Do we really know what makes a person qualified for their office ?"

No, but a good indicator is how much facetime candidates get in the news media. You can pretty much bet that candidates like Kucinich and Ron Paul are well qualified from the point of view of the electorate. They're just not well qualified from the point of view of the corporate media and those whose perspectives they represent.

nickhart is absolutely right. The FCC was set up to regulate publicly owned airwaves by granting or revoking licenses to broadcast stations. Broadcast licenses are only supposed to be renewed if the station meets the "public interest, convenience, or necessity" criteria. The Federal Communications Commission rarely checks if the station is meeting any criteria whatsoever; there seems to be no interest in whether the broadcasters are serving the informational needs of the community in good faith.

Clearly, the FCC has failed its mission and should be abolished. All media outlets - television, radio, newspapers - should be publicly owned and run. To minimize the corrupting influence of ambition, perhaps membership on the various boards could be assigned randomly, like having to perform jury duty. Until we control the media, we will have an immense propaganda machine continually hampering and subverting our efforts to bring more democracy and justice to a society bloated by consumerism and sedated by mindless spectacle.

"Until we can deligitimize these "greedy", profit above all else 'robber barons', we won't see any legitimate change in our lifetimes. It might take the 2nd American Revolution to really change things."

Hopefully not. But I worry one is coming, because martial law, which is clearly on the Bush Administration's table, will ignite it.

A peaceful solution, such as Jefferson's campaign against Adams and the Federalists, would be much preferred. Unfortunately the tyrants are utterly bonkers at this writing.

...because martial law, which is clearly on the Bush Administration's table...

That's what all those check points at the airports are for. Controlling the population. All those for profit prisons too.

If the public airwaves belong to us, why aren't we getting any money from their rental? Why is the money going to politicians instead of to the public?

The Australian Broadcasting Commission is an independant radio and television service all over Australia and gets criticism' from all political parties,which means it is doing a good job.PBS in America is sponsored by some of the biggest corporations which must affect the manner in which they report the news.
The cost to Australians is about 8 cents per day (in taxes) and tends to keep the commercial media and pollies in check.

Just face up to the point that the system has been stolen by the ruling class[corp. and people of priveledge]. the only hope is for the economic system to crash.

of all the issues facing the us today the issue of net neutrality is of the highest magnitude, apart from everything else in this article, whether you liked it or not.

this is the google primer on net neutrality and i ask, deeply and widely, for everyone to read it. please.

http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality.html

Sumner Redstone, Michael Eisner, Rupert Murdoch, Leevy, control 95 per cent of our mainstream media. Their loyalty is not to the country that feeds them, that is the good ol' USof A, but rather to Israel. Thoughtful Americans universaly acknowledge this fact. As result they are able to convince those Americans who can't read between their treacherous lies, especially when reporting or promoting wars, to support misadventures such as the Iraqi war. The only nation that has benefitted from this war is Israel. You see, Iraq posed a potential threat to Israel and therefore their NEOCON supporters amongst us, formulated a plan, under the guise of a NEW WORLD ORDER, to protect it. The bitter fruit, harvested as a result of the published propaganda of these monkey media moguls have been the following: America has become the mmost despised nation on Earth. close to 4000 young American soldiers have lost their loves, over twenty thousand others wounded, over 500 billion American tax payer dollars dollars have been squandered, an entire nation (Iraq) has been destroyed. These treasonous human beings, together with their Neocon confreres such as william kristol, richard perle,elliot abrams,paul wolfowitz and the rest of their monkey friends are succeeding in destroying everything good that America stood for and should be apprehended and tried for treason.

This war belongs to Tim Russert, Charlie Gibson, Matt Lauer, Katy Couric, Chris Mathews, and all the other people of the MSM. They are the only people who can stop this fiasco, but for some reason they refuse. Can you guess why?

WTCDOWN: Just as in the US there are a LOT of us that do not support this war or aggressive tactics in general, this is also true of many Israelis. It's naive to say that only THEY benefit from this situation when the US military-industrial complex and its diabolical CEOS are getting rich off the far of dead bodies, now killed in extreme numbers oh, so efficiently. Isn't that what all the TAX dollars are invested in? As if killing a people makes any nation safe. And that brings me to Israel. No nation is immune to the law of karma. Sadly, Israel's foreign policy is going to bring a lot of painful lessons back on itself. Because the vast majority of world leaders (this being facilitated by media ownership that deftly places its own into positions of influence) support aggressive measures in pursuit of a coveted resource (today it is oil) they don't realize the self-defeating clause that such actions inevitably draw upon. We humans are "short attention span" theater types, and often don't draw the dots together that show how actions taken evoke powerful reactions OVER time.
It was painful to watch the people in India lose their homes this week, ditto those in Hondurus and parts nearby as we who colonize the Western world over-use resources that directly bring these tragic levels of pain to others. When suffering becomes too much, all agencies of nature take over to create a basis for a more balanced world. We are so close to that cusp, our society's values remind me of the band playing on the Titanic as it sunk.

The rules do matter. Suppose each newspaper, radio, or television station was required to be a single outlet. No entity whether person or group could control all the information.

SIOUXROSE, obfuscation of facts and divertion of attention from the nub of a topic are elementary tacts used by pundits to divert attention from painful truths. Yes, our dastardly military industrial complex and their "diabolical CEO'S" are people of the same ilk as our MEDIA MOGULS, with the same fanatical attachments and loyalty to Israel, but have the added incentive of incalculable financial gains.I too know many enlightened Israeli who, like me agree with my stated facts, including my girl friend who happens to be Jewish.Having said this, if you care to reply to my statement, answer the original question; "what other COUNTRY(s), besides Israel have, or has benefitted from the war in Iraq?"