4 days of Tim Russert... Should the MSM be nationalized?

[Joanne98]

Iowa just had it's own Katrina. FEMA didn't show up until yesterday. They needed use of the PUBLIC AIRWAYS! But NO!

20 years ago we had 50 media companies. Now we have 6. Everybody knows this is a problem. The anti-trust laws should have been used in the 90's to prevent an uncompetitive, living in a bubble, in a castle on the top of a mountain, out-of-touch, could care less about the people, media.

I would say break them up like we did AT&T until regional sectors so the people would have some hope of coverage, but I think it's too late for that.

Iowa, if you're pissed, which you should be, start the movement there. Take back the airways by FORCE! NATIONALIZE the bastards!

[mwb970]

1. Surely they will back off on the Russert coverage today.

Unless Tim is resurrected and taken up bodily into heaven today (it has been three days now), I don't see how there can be much else to cover.

It's a three-word story: Tim Russert died. Three days of solid coverage of these three words is enough. Please!

[malaise]

2. Don't hold your breath

GEM$NBC intends to continue this orgy of death for ratings for quite some time.

[mwb970]

9. Ratings? What ratings?

Are you suggesting that there are masses of people tuning in breathlessly day after day to hours and hours of MTP reruns to get a final glimpse of the beloved Tim Russert? Not bloody likely!

I just don't see this as a ratings bonanza in the way the non-stop Anna Nicole Smith coverage was. That went on for over a week, with celebrity-addled viewers apparently watching the whole thing!

I think MSNBC is mourning a departed colleague in public, on the air, when they should be doing it privately and returning to their job of covering the news. That's my two cents' worth.

[BrklynLib at work]

8. The wake is Tuesday...being televised. Guess they are not backing off.

[Greeby]

3. State control of the media?

Wouldn't that just be cutting out the middleman when it comes to propaganda?

[Joanne98]

6. Not if you break it up into state or regional blocks. At least citizens can

petition their government. You can't petition a multi-national company at ALL. It's a myth that commerial media is "free". Public television is way more democratic. Besides THEY ARE OUR AIRWAYS!

[havocmom]

22. Yeah, just put cheney directly in charge

That would be fucking swell, wouldn't it?

What are people thinking? Nationalize media???!!? How about LIBERATE the media and get rid of corporate control of huge blocks of it?

[Radical Activist]

26. No kidding. But decentralizations of a privately owned media

sounds like a big improvement. Or make them all be non-profit corporations.

[Teaser]

4. This has not bothered me.

It's small potatoes. If this aggravates you seriously, it's hard to see how you survived the run-up to the Iraq war without killing yourself.

[mwb970]

11. Non sequitur much?

The run-up to the Iraq War was big news and deserved extensive coverage. The death of a journalist is a relatively minor event that does not require a news network to pre-empt all other news for four straight days. It's been 24/7 Russert on MSNBC, with no breaks, day after day after endless day.

Do you really, truly not see the difference here? I'm delighted that you are not bothered. How very nice for you! But it drives me frickin' crazy. And I'm not the only one.

[Teaser]

16. Sic, Sequitur Multissimus

It follows immediately on the heels of your point. You are getting upset at bad coverage over a small period of time. The pre-Iraq was coverage was much worse coverage over a much longer period of time.

It really wasn't that hard to figure out.

[mwb970]

20. You're right, it is easy to understand.

It would be even easier if we were talking about the same thing, though! I'm talking about overdramatizing at length a relatively minor news event, and you are talking about misleading the public at length about a major news event. These are two completely different and unrelated things, other than the words "at length".

I agree with you about the Iraq coverage. Do you agree with me about the Russert coverage?

[Teaser]

23. Sure. It's too much. But it'll be over soon

and it's effects minimal.

There was no criticism of you in the initial post. Just surprise that you didn't have a heartache prior to this.

[Joanne98]

5. Morning Joe is all Tim Russert. It's hopeless! Even if they quit sometime today.

I think that ignoring Iowa's Katrina is unforgivable. I'm sorry. The MSM is broken. I know nationalizing them is radical. But it's soooo far gone. I'm mean really. Somethings got to be done. This is a crime.

[annabanana]

13. Joe has been "mentioned" as a replacement for Timmeh

(Lord help us)

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-et-nbcsider14-2008jun14,0,3289447.story
Speculation on possible successors centers on three on-air personalities already under contract to NBC: David Gregory, the former White House correspondent recently given his own MSNBC show, "Race for the White House"; Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC's long-running "Hardball"; and Joe Scarborough, the former congressman and host of "Morning Joe" on MSNBC, according to talent representatives who declined to speak on the record for fear of jeopardizing relationships with network management.

[JoDog]

7. This is really upsetting me.

I can understand 15 min. of the 1/2 newscast and extended cable eulogies on the day he died. But this is on the verge of intellectual and emotional masturbation. There is a lot of news going on, and NBC is doing itself and its viewers an incredible disservice by not covering it.

The sad thing is, I think that Tim Russert would have been the first to object to all this.

[Vinca]

10. The only thing that really bothers me is the years they've ignored

the deaths caused by George's war of choice. Oh, sure, once in a while they'll do a piece on a particularly heart-wrenching tale or tell us about a soldier who threw himself on an explosive to save his buddies, but that's the exception. The majority of dead soldiers are ignored and the innocent Iraqis - including many, many women and children - do not exist in the U.S. media. If they devoted half as much time as they've given to Russert to show pictures of dead and maimed Iraqi kids, this war would be over today. I don't begrudge the MSM their mourning, but I wish they would do their jobs.

[rucky]

12. They are "nationalized" in a covert Pentagon sort of way.

Don't know how we can take back the airwaves, expect by more choices and more competition.

[Joanne98]

14. I'll be interested to hear what the media reform movement has to say about this

I hope they have been working on ways to break up the companies and return the airwaves to the American people. The MSM would probably go to the WTO for protection. But as I remember the WTO can't interfere in issues of national security. when a whole state is underwater, I would think is a security issue. At the very least an emergency. I'm looking at the laws this week. I'm beyond sick of this.

[melm00se]

15. is this the answer to

everything: nationalization?

Oil companies
Airlines
Media outlets

what's next?

[annabanana]

17. I don't know.. Lets try a couple and see... Health Care first. . . n/t

[melm00se]

24. I am not a big fan of nationalization

especially something like the press. Just imagine an administration like this with far more than influence but direct control over the media.

[Clear Blue Sky]

18. State control of media = propaganda. Bad idea.

Now at least there are choices. Don't like what you hear, watch another channel.

[DS1]

19. 12 threads on him on the first page of GD. But anyway, what are they saying?

I'm glad I can't even watch this stuff, it would only piss me off.

[KharmaTrain]

21. Nationalized? No. Re-Regulated? Yes!

It's always amazing how people here claim to be in favor of a "free press" or "free speech" except when they find it not to their liking. Then it's "bring back the fairness doctrine" and "censor their asses". You'd think some would learn the lessons here about working the corporate media, not being taken in by it.

The Russert coverage is definitely over-the-top...and a big reason I'll be avoiding M$NBC for the next few days until they get this out of their system. While Russert was visible and surely had his share of fans, he was just an employee...a voice and face on the tube...nothing more, nothing less. He didn't do anything in his life that will endure other than with his family and friends...more for his personality than for the actual work he did.

This was a tragic, sudden loss, but not one that millions of others haven't or don't face. We've all had a family or co-worker pass on, but life goes on...and so does the business. This shows more the insular and arrogance of the corporate media...obsessing on their own celebrity and loss while paying little attention to the world outside...except to "analyize" and pontificate about.

The answer isn't "Nationalizing", but the long overdue revision of "Telcom '96"...the bill that enabled the corporate media to monopolize what you see and hear and make it all but impossible for alternative voices to rise to the front. Sadly, in Iowa there are a lot of radio stations that aren't doing much or any flood coverage since deregulation made them "relay" stations for the larger corporate interest...eliminating news departments and local coverage that are vital in times like this.

[Supersedeas]

25. serveral cable stations -- only operating message: distraction before news

[onenote]

27. we had 50 media companies? really? Got a link?

I grew up in an era where there were four choices for television: an ABC affiliate, an NBC affiliate, a CBS affiliate, and an indpendent station that did no local or national news. We also had a PBS affiliate. And I grew up in one of the 50 largest TV markets in the country. We had three daily newspapers, one of which was basically a joke. And we had a bunch of AM radio stations (FM was basically unknown until I was in high school), most of which offered minimal, canned news reports.

Today, I have the same broadcast stations, except that the independent is now a Fox affiliate that offers considerable news and local programming. There are two additional indpendent stations (neither does much in the way of news coverage). I have over 100 additional cable choices including several 24 hour news channels, channels that allow me to watch coverage of Congressional debates and hearings, channels that provide documentary programming that does not, and has not, existed on broadcast television for decades, premium channels that give me access to programming that would never be allowed on broadcast television.

Is there two much concentration in certain aspects of the media today, particularly radio? Yes. Was the situation really that much better in the past? No.