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."

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.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
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."

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.
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."

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.

