Should We Boycott The Media's Advertisers Until They Cover The Fraud?

[Zhade]

Would it be an effective tactic to go after the news media's sponsors, and force them to cover the growing stories of fraud, intimidation, and voting machine irregularities? Boycott the companies that advertise on the news until they do some serious reporting on all this?

Should we organize a proactive, hard-nosed push to make the media do its damn job? What do you say, DU?

EDIT: If Yes, please, share your thoughts and ideas! DU impacted Sincalir, I think we can do this!

[Zhade]

1. Kick - I want to hear ideas of you think this could work!

I want to starve the media into doing its job. Anyone with me?

[LTRS]

2. Can we wait for some proof of fraud first?

[jmatthan]

4. I think not!!

The subject is that they cover the possible fraud - if not the work being done is conveniently pushed to the back.

They must be forced to cover the subject - so the boycott should go into place to ensure that the subject is talked about everyday with a daily update from the investigators!!

Jacob Matthan

[sherilocks]

3. The only way to starve them

is to stop buying any cable or dish packages that include CNN, Faux, and MSNBC. Every time you pay your cable or dish bill, that's money in the pockets of the 24 hour cable news outlets who so openly support the current regime.

[deacon]

5. Starve The Beast

We need bumper stickers with this slogan.

[LadyinRed]

6. Sports Team owners & their contributions

If this has been discussed, I apologize. I've seen boycotts mentioned regarding foods and products. This thread speaks of the media.

Has anyone posted the amount of money fed into the Republican Party by the Sports Team owners? Just a thought.......

Pro team owners play political game
By Michael Hiestand, USA TODAY
10/27/04
Pro sports team owners can also be big-time players — in politics.

New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner has contributed to candidates of both parties.
AP file

NFL, NBA, NHL, Major League Baseball and NASCAR Nextel Cup team owners, commissioners and spouses contributed at least $14.6 million to national political candidates, parties and other political advocacy groups in the two years leading into Tuesday's election.

That might not seem like much, given total spending is expected to reach about $4 billion.

But less than 1% of Americans make political donations of more than $200, says Larry Noble, executive director of the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics research group.

The sports world, he says, has some "heavy hitters." They're topped by Alex Spanos, owner of the NFL's San Diego Chargers. Spanos, with just three other owners — the NBA Orlando Magic's Rich DeVos, the NFL Houston Texans' Robert McNair and MLB Cincinnati Reds' Carl Lindner — produced about 71% of all money from owners and commissioners.

Who was included: 153 individuals who are the majority owner or presiding officer (in the case of corporate-owned teams) of teams in NASCAR's Nextel Cup Series, the National Football League, National Basketball Association, National Hockey League and Major League Baseball.
Commissioners from the four leagues and NASCAR owners also were included. Seven owners of Canadian teams are not eligible to make donations because they are not U.S. citizens.

Contributions by spouses were included in the totals attributed to the owners or commissioners.

Types of donations: Those made to presidential, House or Senate candidates, state or national political parties, national political action committees (PAC) or so-called 527 organizations (non-profit groups not affiliated with political parties, named for the portion of the IRS tax code regulating them).

Donations to local or state candidates or organizations (other than state parties) were not included.

Donations of less than $200 are not required to be reported to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and might not be reflected in this analysis.

Federal laws limit how much an individual can give during an election cycle to any candidate, party or PAC. The limits:

$2,000 per election (primary and general are separate) to a candidate;

$25,000 per year to a national party;

$10,000 per year to a state or local party;

$5,000 to a PAC.

All are also subject to aggregate maximums. There is no limit on giving to 527 organizations.

Time frame: Donations included were made in the current election cycle, from January 2003 through the most recent reports to the FEC or IRS.

Because of varying deadlines, the most recent reports could have been filed between the end of June and mid- October. Again, some donations made in recent months might not be reflected in this analysis.

Sources: FEC and IRS filings that were made available via searchable databases by the following non-profit, non-partisan organizations: PoliticalMoneyLine, the Center for Public Integrity and the Center for Responsive Politics.

Contributing: MaryJo Sylwester, Rachel Shuster, Scott Boeck, Mike Brehm, Erik Brady, Jim Drinkard and Barbara Hansen

Each is on the Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans and made virtually all their donations to Republican causes or candidates. They might not be motivated by anything related to sports, suggests the CRP's Noble: "These four are longtime donors. And most sports donors have lots more interests than their sports teams. That usually motivates their giving."
Con't...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-10-26-campaign-contributions_x.htm

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-campaign-nfl.htm

MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-campaign-mlb.htm

NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOC.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-campaign-nba.htm

NATINAL HOCKEY LEAGUE
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-campaign-nhl.htm

NASCAR
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-campaign-nascar.htm



Nov. 1, 2004, 1:09AM

Sports figures mum as election looms

Many social scientists suggest it's because players are by and large too young, too insulated from real-world worries by unreal salaries and too self-absorbed to care about the consequences of American civics. In their defense, though, athletes are taught from an early age that team sports require a strong unity of purpose, with less internal dissonance the better.

Athletes - Entertainers
But the two high-profile, flushed-with-income groups who dominate contemporary culture in the United States veer in sharply opposite directions when it comes to how they involve themselves in politics and the political process. If entertainers by and large lean toward overtly liberal activism, athletes tend to be quietly, if passionately, conservative.

Still, other than noted Bush-basher Martina Navratilova, how many have stridently expressed their opinions? To be sure, there are few Bruce Springsteens in the mix, crisscrossing the country and giving free concerts for Kerry.

Remember Charles Barkley explaining to his mother how a black kid from the hardscrabble rural South could grow up and become a Republican? "Momma," he said, "I have to be a Republican. I'm rich now."

The San Diego Chargers' Alex Spanos ($5.2 million), the Orlando Magic's Rick DeVos ($2.2 million), McNair and the Cincinnati Reds' Carl Lindner ($1.3 million) accounted for 71 percent of the total $14.6 million in political contributions from owners. Most, if not all of it, benefited Republicans.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/politics/2877437

BB

[itzamirakul]

9. "Starve the Beast" Campaign

If you have not yet read the "Starve the Beast" thread on this board, I hope you will take the time to do so. I don't know how to set up a link to it yet, but someone else will, I am sure.

Media complicity in pushing the right wing agenda for the past four years is appalling and I simply refuse to support the stations, their mealy-mouthed, overly-well-paid-easily-bought-off, manicured talking heads or their advertisers. I no longer have cable which is one reason that I have lots more time to read and post on worthwhile boards such as DU and to seek out new information all over the web. I listen to Air America Radio while I am posting, and find that I enjoy myself even more than I did while I was a slave to the tv.

For the holidays, please consider this. Do not buy from ANY of the major advertisers. Do your shopping at small, family-owned businesses, second-hand shops, flea markets or try making gifts.Be creative in your gift-giving. Most people have "too much stuff" already.

If you have kids, get them into the spirit of things by explaining our reasons for changing our shopping habits. Kids, especially, love "making" gifts. We can survive without the products the corporations foist on us as "have-to-haves", but can they survive without us? Perhaps they will consider giving us more national representation on their news broadcasts for our viewpoints if they feel a financial pinch. That is the goal of "Starve the Beast."

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

7. i asked the media

why nothing on the voting (fraud) irregularities

nothing yet:shrug:

[Dogmudgeon]

8. Why try to starve the beast?

It has plenty of people willing to feed it.

Why not try to kill it instead?

--bkl

[Lorien]

10. Other than a boycott, how do you propose

that we do that? I've cancelled my cable and will not buy anything I don't need, I'm careful about what I do buy, I'll soon be out of the stock market-so, what next?

[Dogmudgeon]

11. Run for local office

- Get active in your local Democratic and/or Progressive party
- Copy and distribute "subversive" literature about the Bush cabal
- Buy some stock in a company you hate, then exercise your shareholders' rights to gripe about their policies
- Cultivate a relationship with your local representative, even if s/he is a Republican

There are hundreds of things you can do. There are plenty of websites that can give you ideas, tips, and even offer training, if you can get to where they are (usually LA, SF, NYC, or Boston).

The reason I am against mass boycotts is because they are passive. You end up with an ineffective technique and you've deprived yourself in the process. There is literally no such thing as a business that isn't part of the "problem", but nearly all businesses will respond to well-planned, targeted campaigns.

The boycotts that work are the ones that are targeted, the way Cesar Chavez carefully targeted the lettuce and grape markets to bring pressure on the entire farm-worker exploitation industry. Maybe a boycott of Bose Wave Radios would work today (Bose is a Bush supporter). And certainly a boycott of Amway products.

But the "boycott everything" approach is doomed to failure. Put your energy into something that will make a difference.

Incidentally, I don't mean this message as a rebuke or a gripe. We're all frustrated to tears right now. It will take a little time before we can formulate effective action. But we should be committed to making the best use of the limited resources we have. The stakes are extraordinarily high, so we have to be extraordinarily clever.

--bkl

[Zhade]

12. Kick for more discussion

:dem:

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. So in other words, boycott everybody?

:shrug:

[Zhade]

14. Does every news source fail to investigate?

Knight-Ridder, for example, often does good work. Then there's AlterNet.

I'm talking the Big Guys who have real influence, like the nets and the CNN-MSNBC-FOX Axis of Propaganda. And even there, I wouldn't boycott every show - Olbermann, for example, does a better job than most.