EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
- Victory in Seattle as Teachers Win Battle in Standardized Test Boycott
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Enemies of Campaign Ad Transparency
Broadcasters Push Back on FCC Plan to Post Names of Political Ad Buyers Online
Sometimes in a dumbfounded moment the only response to the news is to rub your eyes in disbelief. Both of mine are quite irritated today at the audacity of corporate broadcasters as reported in a story online at The Washington Post. The headline sums it up: “Broadcasters Fight Plan to Post Names of Political Ad Buyers on Web.”
This still is from an ad in Florida from Winning Our Future, a super PAC supporting former House speaker Newt Gingrich, that attacks former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.
That’s right: The mega-media giants CBS and News Corp. (Rupert Murdoch’s minions), enriched beyond the imagination of Midas by money pouring into their local stations from political advertising in an election year, are stamping their feet like spoiled children and shouting: “No! We will not!”
They are defying the Federal Communication Commission’s request that they post on the Web the names of billionaires and front organizations — many of them super PACs — paying for those ads. That’s all: Give citizens access online to find out who’s buying our elections. Advocates of transparency in politics say that this is most efficient way voters can know “the true interests” behind all that money pouring into elections. Reasonable, no? Good for democracy, yes? And why shouldn’t CBS and NewsCorp oblige such a modest request, given the tremendous wealth they accumulated from their privileged use of airwaves that belong to all of us?
They should, but won’t, because they don’t have to as long as we let them get away with it. What to do? First, read the story. Second, sign up for email updates from the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, Free Press and the Media Access Project, some of the public interest groups fighting for the FCC proposal. Then be in touch with Flackcheck.org to follow up on our conversation with Kathleen Hall Jamieson of the Annenberg Public Policy Center who is asking citizens to challenge the negative and deceptive political ads running on commercial stations where you live.
Let stations know that the poison they’re pouring into our political bloodstream has to stop, and so does their obstinate refusal to keep us from knowing who’s paying for it.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


14 Comments so far
Show AllOnce you realize that Amerikan Elections (tm) are bought and paid for, does it make any difference who the buyer is?
Maybe. Maybe not. I still want to know, though, and, as Mr Moyers points out, they are our airwaves these guys are getting filthy rich off of. Just as if someone polluted my local creek, I'd want to know whodunnit.
You are supposed to watch the puppets, not the people pulling the strings.
Hey, did you hear about Romney's latest gaffe?
If it doesn't make any difference which buyer's candidate wins
the voting -- and so which buyer (with his purpose) really wins --
then why bother even to have an election? Instead, just put the
office up for auction. If a rich man's money is his political speech,
and he can have as much speech as he has money, would it be
any more perverse to let a rich man's money be his votes, and
he can have as much votes as he has money? After all, a rich
man spends his money on politics (presumably) with the purpose
of getting his candidate elected: That is, really, he buys votes via
the intermediation of attack ads and rabble-rousing on TV. He can
buy votes in that round-about way legally, but we all know that what
he really wants is a bought-out officeholder. It makes a difference
whether or not we know who the buyer is. The difference is whether
we have PROOF that an officeholder has sold his office, rather than
just drawing a conclusion of selling out from some jurisprudentially
contestable evidence.
Isn't that what it has come to already. And we use to laugh at the USSR for believing their people actually believed their propaganda! Well we're being spoon fed just what the dollar mongers want us to know, Open up and swallow!
BOYCOTT THE CORPORATE MEDIA AND ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO DO THE SAME!
And they called it democracy.
I think most people just want to be left alone, to be free to live, die, and buy as much stuff as their credit cards will hold.
They keep saying the economy is in recovery, hmmm, I personally don't see a lot of evidence of it..
I wonder and I suppose a lot of other people do too, if Washington even knows we are here, except when they are counting tax receipts.
When do you suppose was last time any of them even pumped their own gas?
There are two America's, Washington DC and every where else in the country.
It must be nice to be so cuddled, so self important, so pampered.
99% of us will never know.
Cuz well, we are just satisfied to be able to get up in morning, have cup of coffee, head off to work, and pay for their life styles.
I personally would like to know where they get the money from. What is the big deal? We are asked where we get our money from in taxes. They want it broken down, and catagorized, so we should expect the same.I want to know if some one recieved funds from a business or industry they condemned; like Mitt Romney did a few months ago, going on the attack against porn, but accepted campaign funds from the same company he just condemned. I want to see the hypocrisy.
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
You are supposed to watch the puppets, not the people pulling the strings.
I wonder and I suppose a lot of other people do too, if Washington even knows we are here
just put the office up for auction
* * *
hear ye, hear ye! come one come all!
global spice trade productions, (™) now holds casting tryouts.
wanted: articulate clowns and barristers to stand unabashed in the limelight to speak stale slogans and platitudes with such sound and fury the lines we give you with a practiced air of fresh spontaneity .
costumed in red or blue, you shall play the most noble roles.
wanted: actors for the greek chorus, (aka media), expert teleprompt readers to keep the audience focused on the farce/drama center stage while deflecting attention from any back stage production problems.
wanted: a cast of 350 million groundlings to stand just below the apron to hiss or hoot on cue for you champions either red or blue.
the biggest show on earth! and we have a part for YOU!
For sale, meme generator, older model but well maintained. Previously used by by Anita Bryant and Pat Robertson. Call 888.321.6675 for pricing, delivery details.
Are we at war with ourselves internally and externally? As fear, a demand for more and a belief in scarcity grows, the Rule of Law and Justice are parting ways and moving in different directions. A powerful government and military that is becoming an iron fist in service to money, power and privilege endangers everyone's future and becomes a threat to the common good. What are we to do? Do we accept responsibility for our roles in co-creating this mess or do we wring our hands in innocence and pray for salvation while, at the same time, sitting on the sidelines enjoying the show?
Are we going to learn from our experiences and change direction or are we going to define ourselves by them and continue on until we destroy ourselves? What will work best for us - to accept responsibility for creating our reality or denying responsibility for creating it? When we accept responsibility for creating our reality, we begin to see things we didn't see before; we begin to see the connection between what we think and what we experience, what we give and what we get. Then it becomes a matter of changing the ideas we use to define ourselves, and the world, until we create who and what we want.
If we choose to believe in separation, scarcity and competition for survival, should we be surprised to find ourselves defining success by how much money, power and privilege we have? Should we be surprised to find ourselves lying through our teeth and selling our souls to the “company store” or the “devil” as the means to achieve our self-serving ends? Should we be surprised to discover that enough is never enough?
If, on the other hand, we choose to believe in oneness, abundance and collaboration for survival, should we be surprised to find ourselves defining success by how much love, truth and joy we have in our lives? Should we be surprised to find ourselves putting love, the approval of our souls and the quality of our relationships ahead of ego, wealth, power, and privilege? Should we be surprised when we see more value in being who we love to be and doing what we love to do over educational conditioning and the Rule of Law? Who would you rather have preparing your food or making your goods, someone who is forced to do so by necessity and authoritarian mandate or someone who loves who they are and what they do, someone who is motivated by love and natural passion, not fear or money-made passion?
Since we co-create our shared reality, whether by default (passive acceptance) or conscious intent, it is important for us to consider changing how we look at the world as well as ourselves. For example, in life and business, how many of us ask, is what I’m doing good? Do my actions improve the quality of life or undermine it? Do they increase humanity’s chances for survival or threaten it? Asking honest questions with open hearts and minds creates new growth in understanding. We must realize we are not our thoughts, they are tools (building blocks) we use to create our reality (read, We Create Our Own Reality: http://realtalkworld.com/we-create-our-own-reality/).
Instead of continuing to create a world of predators and victims by letting thoughts of fear, separation and competition dominate our thinking, why not ask: what will work best for ALL of us? This takes YOU, ME and US (everyone and everything) into consideration. It not only accounts for the fact that we’re both one AND separate, it accepts we’re not only the products of accident or creation; we’re creation itself! Here are some specific questions:
• What will work best for ALL of us in personal terms? (What is the best way for us to fulfill our own unique potential in support of the world AND ourselves?)
• What will work best for ALL of us in terms of business? (What is the best way for us to sustain the health and well-being of the planet and humanity?)
• What will work best for ALL of us in terms of education? (What is the best way for us to learn and grow? What are the most important things for us to know?)
• What will work best for ALL of us in terms of the environment? (What is the best way for us to treat nature and the earth?)
• What will work best for ALL of us in terms of peace? (What is the best way for us to treat ourselves as individuals and nations?)
What is more exciting, or worth doing, than changing ourselves, and the world, for the better?
Are we human beings having a material experience, or spiritual beings creating a human reality?
How we define ourselves, and the world around us, forms our intent, which, in turn, forms our reality.
In other words, we create our reality from what we choose to believe about ourselves, and the world.
If we do not CONSCIOUSLY choose our own beliefs, we UNCONSCIOUSLY absorb them from our surroundings.
If we must live with the consequences of our beliefs, can we afford NOT to question them?
The more we love ourselves, the better we treat ourselves, and the world.
Blessings of love and understanding be to us all
If everyone would get their product info from sources like Consumer Reports and their national and world news from non-partisan sources like PBS or Businessweek, Madison Avenue and PACs would be nullified. I haven't watched a TV commercial for a product or a political candidate in years. Invest in a DVR and blast through all the commercials and you will have more time to read and watch stuff that's worthwhile.
TOTAL HYPOCRISY = corporate broadcasters, businesses that live off of the transparency of facts in our society, and around the world... shielding themselves from having to be transparent about the facts concerning who corrupts/funds them, and attempts to brainwash people in our society, and around the world!!!
TOTAL HYPOCRISY = corporate broadcasters, businesses that live off of the transparency of facts in our society, and around the world... shielding themselves from having to be transparent about the facts concerning who corrupts/funds them, and attempts to brainwash people in our society, and around the world!!!