The Online Information Resource for Iowa's Progressive Community

For IA Sec of
Agriculture

Francis Thicke

Search

Login

Username:
Password:
Remember me 
 

Daily Archive

July 2005
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

Categories

Powered by BlogHarbor
Powered by BlogHarbor
View Article  Big Media Interlocks with Corporate America
Big Media Interlocks with Corporate America

From Media Channel - by Peter Phillips

Mainstream media is the term often used to describe the collective group of big TV, radio and newspapers in the United States. Mainstream implies that the news being produced is for the benefit and enlightenment of the mainstream population-the majority of people living in the US. Mainstream media include a number of communication mediums that carry almost all the news and information on world affairs that most Americans receive. The word media is plural, implying a diversity of news sources.

However, mainstream media no longer produce news for the mainstream population-nor should we consider the media as plural. Instead it is more accurate to speak of big media in the US today as the corporate media and to use the term in the singular tense-as it refers to the singular monolithic top-down power structure of self-interested news giants.

A research team at Sonoma State University has recently finished conducting a network analysis of the boards of directors of the ten big media organizations in the US. The team determined that only 118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten big media giants. This is a small enough group to fit in a moderate size university classroom. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. In fact, eight out of ten big media giants share common memberships on boards of directors with each other. NBC and the Washington Post both have board members who sit on Coca Cola and J. P. Morgan, while the Tribune Company, The New York Times and Gannett all have members who share a seat on Pepsi. It is kind of like one big happy family of interlocks and shared interests. The following are but a few of the corporate board interlocks for the big ten media giants in the US:

New York Times: Caryle Group, Eli Lilly, Ford, Johnson and Johnson, Hallmark, Lehman Brothers, Staples, Pepsi

Washington Post: Lockheed Martin, Coca-Cola, Dun & Bradstreet, Gillette, G.E. Investments, J.P. Morgan, Moody’s

Knight-Ridder: Adobe Systems, Echelon, H&R Block, Kimberly-Clark, Starwood Hotels

The Tribune (Chicago & LA Times): 3M, Allstate, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Kraft, McDonalds, Pepsi, Quaker Oats, Shering Plough, Wells Fargo

News Corp (Fox): British Airways, Rothschild Investments

GE (NBC): Anheuser-Busch, Avon, Bechtel, Chevron/Texaco, Coca-Cola, Dell, GM, Home Depot, Kellogg, J.P. Morgan, Microsoft, Motorola, Procter & Gamble

Disney (ABC): Boeing, Northwest Airlines, Clorox, Estee Lauder, FedEx, Gillette, Halliburton, Kmart, McKesson, Staples, Yahoo

Viacom (CBS): American Express, Consolidated Edison, Oracle, Lafarge North America

Gannett: AP, Lockheed-Martin, Continental Airlines, Goldman Sachs, Prudential, Target, Pepsi

AOL-Time Warner (CNN): Citigroup, Estee Lauder, Colgate-Palmolive, Hilton

Can we trust the news editors at the Washington Post to be fair and objective regarding news stories about Lockheed-Martin defense contract over-runs? Or can we assuredly believe that ABC will conduct critical investigative reporting on Halliburton’s sole- source contracts in Iraq? If we believe the corporate media give us the full un-censored truth about key issues inside the special interests of American capitalism, then we might feel that they are meeting the democratic needs of mainstream America. However if we believe — as increasingly more Americans do- that corporate media serves its own self-interests instead of those of the people, than we can no longer call it mainstream or refer to it as plural. Instead we need to say that corporate media is corporate America, and that we the mainstream people need to be looking at alternative independent sources for our news and information.


— Peter Phillips is a professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and director of Project Censored, a media research organization. Sonoma State University students Bridget Thornton and Brit Walters conducted the research on the media interlocks.

(Source)

View Article  CAFTA: Where Do We Stand?
CAFTA:  Where Do We Stand?


Following up from yesterday's post - there have been many items written about CAFTA, and why "The Democrats" seem to be taking different positions with regard to free trade.

The Washington Post writes CAFTA Reflects Democrats' Shift From Trade Bills:


A long, slow erosion of Democratic support for trade legislation in the House is turning into a rout, as Democrats who have never voted against trade deals vow to turn their backs on CAFTA. The sea change -- driven by redistricting, mounting partisanship and real questions about the results of a decade's worth of trade liberalization -- is creating a major headache for Bush and Republican leaders as they scramble to salvage their embattled trade agreement. A trade deal that passed the Senate last Thursday, 54 to 45, with 10 Democratic votes, could very well fail in the House this month.


Tom Harkin has publicly opposed CAFTA on labor and environmental standards:


"But it's not fair competition if other countries allow their manufacturers or farms to disregard internationally recognized labor rights, and child labor protections or if those countries have lax or nonexistent environmental regulations and rules."


But, as with NAFTA, CAFTA is not about labor or the environment (most manufacturing has not been moving south, it's been moving to China) - it's about agricultural subsidies.  Robert Reich commented on APM's Marketplace about this issue.

Reich supports CAFTA as a 'crack in the door' to undermining the subsidies large agribusinesses recieve for sugar and rice production in the United States.  CAFTA would presumably open the door to imported sugar and rice, which would force the goverment to either pay larger and larger subsidies, or start phasing out the program altogether.

To me, that sounds ominously like "starving the beast" - the very type of governance we've seen from the Bush administration.

What we need to do is develop a common-sense approach to agricultural subsidy policy before committing to opening markets that will both overwhelm locally owned operations (like the farmer-owned ethanol co-ops), or place yet another burden on the federal budget to maintain corporate agribusiness interests.

Using free trade agreements as a means to an end is not only dishonest, but will likely put increased pressure on the small producers who are the most vulnerable to sudden economic shifts.

BFIA Writer's Guidelines

We welcome Submissions

Read Them On The Web

How To Post
A Comment On
BLOG FOR IOWA

How Your Kids Can Help Save the World

FreeKibble.com

FreeKibbleKat.com

Help end world hunger

Iowa Sites

AFSCME Iowa

Child & Family Policy Center - Iowa

Environment Iowa

Eyechanner Foundation

Genetic Engineering Action Network

Iowa Bicycle Coalition

Iowa Citizen Action Network - ICAN

Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement

Iowa Civil Liberties Union

Iowa Democratic Party

Iowa Energy Center

Iowa Environmental Council

Iowa Farmers Union

Iowa Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO

Iowa Fiscal Partnership

Iowans for Better Local TV

Iowa for Health Care

Iowa Freecycle

Iowa House Democrats

Iowa Physicians for Social Responsibility

Iowa Policy Project

Iowa Pride Network

Iowa Public Interest Research Group

Iowa Rapid Response Action

Iowa Underground

Iowans for Voting Integrity

The Least, First

Left Coast of Iowa

Midwest Environmental Justice Advocates

One Iowa (GLBT)

Progressive Action for the Common Good

Progressive Coalition of Central Iowa

QCAD (Quad-Citians Affirming Diversity - GLBT)

Renewable Energy Group

SEIU Local 199

Sierra Club - Iowa Chapter

Voter-owned Iowa

Iowa Blogs

Big Grove Garden

Bleeding Heartland

BlogNetNews Iowa

Century of the Common Iowan

The Deprogrammer (Quad Cities)

Diary of a Political Madman

Essential Estrogen

Green Tea Blog

Iowa House Democrats

Iowa Independent

Iowa Liberal

Iowa Rapid Response Blog

Iowa Underground

Iowa Voters for Open and Transparent Elections

Jedi Tony

John Deeth's Blog

Kay Henderson and Radio Iowa

Left Coast of Iowa Blog

Nick Johnson's Blog

Political Fallout

Popular Progressive

The Rural Populist

Smoky Hollow

Southwest Iowa Guy

State 29

Steve King Watch

Fight
Media Bias

Iowa

Iowa Rapid Response Action

First responders to biased, imbalanced or factually inaccurate media coverage


Iowans for Better Local TV

*IBLTV is a group of citizens from the Iowa City/Cedar Rapids area who are concerned about the decline in the quality of local television. Fight local media consolidation, as it leads to an unaccountable medium that enriches itself while disregarding the need to serve the public good.


Air America

*How to Bring Air America Radio to Your Local Community


The Counterpoint

*The rational counter to 'The Point,' 'The Counterpoint' critiques and corrects the daily editorial by Sinclair Broadcasting's corporate vice president, Mark Hyman, that is broadcast on all Sinclair-owned television stations across the country


National

FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

*FAIR is a national media watch group that offers well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship


Media Matters for America

*Media Matters for America is an information center dedicated to monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media