Can we start a class action suit against the Corporate media?

[Fireweed247]

They have been using the public airways to lie to us, to enable killing millions of people. They have been consistently lying to us and burying the important news. Instead of covering war crimes, they cover Britney Spears. If they had been doing their jobs, Bush and Cheney would be in prison right now. This whole mess is their fault.

We need a class action suit to take their assets. They should be held personally accountable and lose their personal fortunes. If we hold one of them accountable, the rest will shape up.

Are there any DU lawyers our there willing to fight for this cause?

[SpiralHawk]

1. There may be just cause, since the corporate media does not serve the people

but only the republicon homelander totalitarian borg...

[stellanoir]

2. We should be able to since they've been warping and distorting and trivializing

everything for a very long time.

[MadMaddie]

3. The Fairness Doctrine needs to be reinstated

if that doesn't work then a class action lawsuit should be pursued.

The FCC has been a total failure.

http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Fairness.html

<snip>
The Fairness Doctrine from 1949 until 1987, when it was discontinued by the Federal Communications Commission, required broadcasters, as a condition of getting their licenses from the FCC, to cover controversial issues in their community, and to do so by offering some balancing views. It did not require equal time for opposing views. It merely prevented a station from day after day presenting a single view without airing opposing views.
<snip>

[antigop]

4. Um. hate to tell you this, but the SCOTUS is pro-business NOW

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042040.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily

The Roberts Court is showing a willingness to referee corporate concerns

With controversial rulings on abortion and campaign finance, the current U.S. Supreme Court has waded into some of the most explosive issues in American politics. Under the leadership of new Chief Justice John G. Roberts, the high court appears to be on the verge of rewriting vast tracts of settled Constitutional law. But there's another important emerging feature of the Roberts Court that has not drawn nearly as much attention: its sympathy to business.

Supreme Court, Inc.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16supreme-t.html

The headquarters of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, located across from Lafayette Park in Washington, is a limestone structure that looks almost as majestic as the Supreme Court. The similarity is no coincidence: both buildings were designed by the same architect, Cass Gilbert. Lately, however, the affinities between the court and the chamber, a lavishly financed business-advocacy organization, seem to be more than just architectural. The Supreme Court term that ended last June was, by all measures, exceptionally good for American business. The chamber’s litigation center filed briefs in 15 cases and its side won in 13 of them — the highest percentage of victories in the center’s 30-year history. The current term, which ends this summer, has also been shaping up nicely for business interests.

You really think a class action suit would prevail? You're joking, right?