Why the Left Has No Answer to the Right-Wing Lie Machine

[Are_grits_groceries]

An Uneven Contest:
What if there were a great debate concerning the nature and future of American society, and only one side showed up?

That approximately describes the condition of the U. S. media today.

The right wing is operating a super-charged carnival of hype, hysteria and hoopla, while the left struggles along with a pipsqueek sideshow: a few magazines like The Nation, Mother Jones and The American Prospect, with minuscule circulation among the already converted, some tolerated columnists like Paul Krugman, Bob Herbert, and Frank Rich, and of course there’s Shultz, Olbermann and Maddow on MSNBC.

Meanwhile, one by one, the lights are going out: in January, Air America Radio fell silent, and last month David Broncoccio’s outstanding investigative program, NOW, closed shop. Last Friday, Bill Moyers’ Journal on PBS broadcast its final program. Shultz-Olbermann-Maddow remain on MSNBC at the sufferance of the owners and managers of NBC and MicroSoft, while Comcast is attempting a takeover of NBC. If successful, how long will this lone outpost of progressive cable-TV commentary remain?
<snip>
The regressive bias of the corporate media is starkly revealed by the coverage, and the non-coverage, of the public demonstrations of last month. When a couple of thousand tea-party or gun-rights enthusiasts show up on the Mall in Washington, or across the Potomac in Virginia, the mainstream media is there to cover them en masse. But when up to ten thousand protesters gather on Wall Street, or fifty thousand jam downtown Los Angeles to protest the Arizona “show your papers” law, these events might just as well have taken place on the far side of the moon.

If the MSM takes any notice of progressive talk radio or cable TV, it is usually to portray a false equivalence with the bloviators on the right, as an implied excuse for the latter’s rhetorical excesses and outright lies. Amazingly, that false equivalence was repeated last week by the President himself, at his University of Michigan commencement address.

There is no equivalence. When Olbermann or Maddow make a trivial errors of pronunciation, attribution, or date of an event, etc. they make on-air corrections as soon as these slip-ups are brought to their attention. But when O’Reilly, Beck, Hannity, et al, tell flat-out demonstrable lies, they do so without fear of consequence and therefore without public correction. And their fearlessness is justified, for no one in the mainstream media is likely to hold them to account. To be sure, Ed Shultz calls them out in his “Psycho Talk,” and Keith Olbermann in his “Worst Persons,” and Rachel Maddow does not hesitate to call a liar a liar, but when they do the regressive talksters and the MSM take little notice, which only further demonstrates the insignificance of progressive media commentary.
<snip>
The scope and power of regressive propaganda now at work is enormous and profoundly discouraging to those who would oppose it. But, in the final analysis, the progressives have a formidable and invincible ally: reality. Facts, as John Adams observed, “are stubborn things.” And the scientists will continue to discover and validate stubborn facts, regardless of what the right would prefer them to disclose regarding evolution, global climate, or whatever. In addition, the majority of Americans are facing each day the brutal reality of regressive economic policies as they lose their jobs, their homes, adequate health care, and the prospect of sending their children to college and on to rewarding careers. No amount of high-volume propaganda and media dominance can obscure these hard facts.

Even so, this much remains compellingly clear: unless and until the progressive left develops an effective media voice, there can be no restoration of American democracy, no return to political sanity, and no establishment of economic justice.

The oligarchy that owns and runs our government and controls our mass media has learned Goebbels's lesson well: A lie unanswered is a lie believed – more so if the lie is repeated, over and over again.

More about the problem, the lies and possible remedies:
http://www.truthout.org/why-left-has-no-answer-right-wing-lie-machine59220

We need to find an answer and fast. At least we need to try to start something else that has a chance.

[zeemike]

1. Agreed.

now I am off to read the remedies in the article.

[CrisisPapers]

55. An Urgent and Angry Message to "No_Grits_Groceries"

IS IT ASKING TOO MUCH THAT YOU IDENTIFY THE AUTHOR?

Ernest Partridge
(The Author)

See: www.crisispapers.org/essays10p/nolocontendere.htm .
Also posted on Democratic Underground.

To Zeemike: I am posting this as a reply to you in order to get this message on top of the pile.
Hope you don't mind.

EP

[dotymed]

63. Correct.

The reason this never happened before was the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. We desperately need to reinstate it. Fuck raygun.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Don't forget how folks like Frank Rich, Bob Herbert and MoDo gave us GWBush. We eat our own. nt

[ShortnFiery]

7. They are upper tier commentators with, sometimes, a left leaning perspective ...

not gods of the left, in and of themselves. They are not necessarily on "our side" = the working Americans, in that they are millionaires and can no longer relate to us unwashed masses. They are part of the big club ... and the vast majority of us ... are not.

[Berry Cool]

27. No, they're not gods, but I do think they can still relate to us and are on our side.

That much, I believe.

[spanone]

3. the media is the enemy of liberals...enemy

[mmonk]

4. Boy that hits the nail on the head.

Good reading.

[ShortnFiery]

5. No, Left vs. Right is a false divide used by the Political Elites to take more of Americans' ...

Civil Liberties and hard earned tax dollars.

Our (liberals and progressive democrats) TRUE ENEMIES are not the amorphous collections of *right-wingers* but the elite political power brokers who can be found on both sides of the aisle.

I FULLY CONCUR with Mr. Eric Von Freemason's comments to Mr. Partridge's ruse of an article.

"There is no left and right, there are only different strategies for taking more of our rights and more of our money. Politicians and pundits go on TV and rant about how great their side is and how rotten the other side is, but when the cameras are turned off they all high-five each other on a job well done. The goal of the left and the goal of the right is the same goal... take more of our money and more of our freedom. Would a real conservative support Medicare Part D? Would a real liberal support giving billions of taxpayer dollars to big business? C'mon... there's no hope, there's no change, there's just a nation full of suckers."

[RKP5637]

8. +1000 +++ !!!, n/t

[amborin]

28. +1000 we reify those labels/distinctions

"left" versus "right"

"Dem" versus "Repub"

we think of them as naturally occurring distinctions, when they're just crude, man-made labels

they're meaningless right now; both parties represent the ruling elite, and the battles between and among the masses work to keep elites in power; it's all a side show

[Are_grits_groceries]

34. Disagree with part of that.

The power brokers are enemies of the people in a lot of ways no matter what ideology they espouse. However, I will never find common cause with a lot of the Right because of the fanatical religious tinge to them. Gawd is their master, and their vision of him can be a very destructive one.

They no more care about other people that don't agree with them than the money power brokers do. If they had their way, the government of corporations MIGHT be overthrown and replaced with a very rigid theocracy.

I'll remain apart from them and fight the power brokers from this side thank you very much. You'd have to watch your back every minute trying to fight with them.

[Andronex]

52. +1000...

There is no left in America, only republicans and democrats who work together to enslave the American public, we are suckers if we believe otherwise.

[Kablooie]

6. Ya vol, mine hair.

[bluethruandthru]

9. We need to take a page from the repubs and do what they do.

We need to all have the same talking points and buzzwords. We must start saying "the conservative media" the same way they did with "the liberal media". We need to counter their "tax and spend liberals" and "big government liberals" with our own phases. We've done it a bit with "The party of NO". But that's just a drop in the bucket.

The DNC needs to hire it's own version of Karl Rove...and then they have to make sure that every Dem lawmaker/spokesperson/pundit/cartoonist/editor/talk show host has daily talking points..and follows them.

That's the only way we'll even make a dent in what's happened over the last 30 years.

[Occulus]

26. I've always liked "borrow and spend conservatives" as an answer to "tax and spend"

because it lets us ask the people, "what would you rather do- spend money you have, or money you have to borrow?" Most people get that one right away.

Funny thing. I have never heard it used in the media. Obvious phrase, unused.

[HughBeaumont]

10. K & R for later.

This has been a truism for a long, long time now. The GOP and the Corptocracy have exclusive propaganda arms in Faux and CNBC, respectively. CNN is joining in on the "Repubs can do no wrong" fun, and ABC does what they can to bolster the "Strong Republicans" lie.

[KharmaTrain]

11. The Golden Rule...

Ye who had the gold "deregulated" the media and gained control of the means of distribution. It began under Raygun and reached its zenith during the Clinton '96 dereg days that spawned Faux Noise as well as the massive proliferation of hate talk on radio. It created the "Mighty Wurlitzer" that pumped out all the anti-Clinton rhetoric then kissed boooshies ass and now calls this President a "socialist". The major conduits of commuications were dominated by predominately conservative corporations that wield political power through their domination of the airwaves, cables and "public discourse".

This domination is not total nor as dominant as it once was. The Internet has proved to be a great medium for the millions "turned off" by the right wing inundation of the other "news" and it has had a posivite effect in bringing Democrats together that played a big factor in the '06 and '08 elections and I still believe is yet to be felt in this cycle. This rise along with the economic collapse of "old media" has shifted the dynamic, but there still is an imbalance.

With websites like MediaMatters and groups like MoveOn, the "left" DOES have rapid response to the right wing lies...and those looking for the truth will quickly find it. The problem is those who live by "conventional wisdom" of the corporate media world who peddle a "fair and balanced" game that assumes the population is more divided than it is.

[Scuba]

12. This might help...

In response to your comment "Even so, this much remains compellingly clear: unless and until the progressive left develops an effective media voice, there can be no restoration of American democracy, no return to political sanity, and no establishment of economic justice."



An effective voice to speak the truth and get the message through. And a message that Americans can personalize. Three keys they can remember.

1. America has been highjacked by special interests, corporations having "free speech" rights, etc.

2. We can take America back, by applying the Constitution, without bloodshed or great human suffering.

3. Our candidates will take an Oath that a) we'll take no money from special interests and b) we'll pass term limit and anti-corruption legislation to hold future elected officials accountable.

[depakid]

13. More of the fruits of media deregulation and consolidation

[Bitwit1234]

14. It is the Democrats fault for not passing laws to correct this

When a lie is told as the truth something should be done. Rules should be made and if not followed, fines and licenses pulled. That's the only way. A real tough FCC boss should be in place. One who will make sure that rules are followed. Not the wishy washy type we have now.

[FiveGoodMen]

33. "When a lie is told as the truth something should be done"

Any time I've said that -- here at DU! -- I've gotten run over by those who believe that lying is fair game...

Protected speech...

Pretty much the American way.

If we don't stand up against lying, nothing else we do will help.

But when all the pukes lie and almost all the Dems defend it ... well, there's really no plan B.

[WinkyDink]

60. Oh, yes, the lying Republicans are without responsibility to TELL the truth.

[OHdem10]

15. The Media follows the people. The Democrats have one over-arching

problem. We do not have a philosophy in which every
Democrat believes and therefore are willing to take to the
streets to defend. Most importantly, you have a Liberal
Wing and a Conservative Wing within the party itself. Remember,
the HCIR Bill.

Fairly or unfairly, the Media see this as a weakness. They
know they cannot get one answer. IMO, the fact that we
have a RepublicanLite Wing, reinforces for the Media the
GOP is the stronger party.

My point is if we had a United Party with one strong set
of beilieves, (not a list of issues), there would not
be a problem. For years the Democrats kept the Republicans
pushed back and governed. The Democratic Party believed
in something and saw their responsibility to look out for
"little guy". Now our party just like Republicans look out
for Business. You can be a real Democrat and support Business
when appropriate. Now when the Crunch is On many Dems will
throw the little guy under the bus in order to support
Wall Street and Corporations.

Yes, the Media is not helpful but nothing will ever change
as long as we simply blame the Media and excucse our party.
The Media looks for strong leaders who are decisive and
willing to lead. Most of our Dems on the Hill are more
concerned with simply maintaining their own seat.

[EFerrari]

31. The for-profit "news" media doesn't follow the people, at all.

They follow their bottom line.

And that's why we have to support the independent media.

[FailureToCommunicate]

16. Even after reading the "remedies" in the article, the prospects seem bleak. Hope DU stays afloat for

our sanity if not for holding back the tide of right wing biased media...

(Skinner, et all, are you eating right and getting regular exercise?)

[ThomThom]

17. true, so true

an educated voter will make the right and good decision
We need to get the money out of elections and find a way to get the facts to the people

[rudy23]

18. Also, because reason crumbles in the face of their sheer will to serve themselves

That's why winning the debate never means winning the war.

I think our side's got this all wrong. Like it's a debate contest where being "right" matters more than having the will to put your agenda into action.

[Strelnikov_]

19. Commercial Progressive/Liberal Radio Is Not Viable

Excellent article.

Following is a regurgitation of a post I made years ago. I think 80%+ of the problem is the misinformation spread by radio. Why 80%, because this shows up in voting booth. Think about the garage, the delivery truck, the farmer etc. where the 'blue collar' workers toil. With the radio blaring.

Many 'Liberals' seem to think that the 'new media' is the answer. Sorry, don't agree. How many people today have time to seek out (pull) this 'new media'.

We need push, which is what radio provides. Cheap (for the consumer) and pervasive.

++++++++++++

Commercial Progressive/Liberal Radio Is Not Viable

Why people expect power to support those talking truth to power is beyond me.

There is a ready market of over 40% of the populace in even the reddest of areas that are not currently served by political talk radio. What every business model requires, a ready-made market.

Problem is, the money boys (advertisers, station owners) are from the other side of the political divide, and most apparently would prefer to lose money. Even worse, they are now apparently buying up AAR affiliates with good numbers in order to push them off the air. No station, no problem.

So much for the free market.

Instead of trying to ‘fight the last war’, that is, model progressive talk radio after Reich-Wing radio, a different (and not really innovative), approach is needed.

This approach is . . . . use the NPR model.

In larger, left leaning cities, commercial Progressive radio will be viable due to the critical mass of advertisers. In smaller, or redder, markets, where most of the advertisers are prejudiced, funding would come from the ‘Corporation For Progressive Radio’ to offset losses.

As Liberals/Progressives, we would need to donate $100/200 a year to the corporation (I used to donate this much to NPR). If 1/6 of Kerry voters donated $100/yr., $1 B a year could be raised.

My belief is that until those in the Red areas (Phoenix, Missoula, Atlanta, etc. etc.) are provided access to an alternative to Reich-Wing propaganda radio, Progressive politicians will make limited inroads. Some discount the effect of Reich-Wing propaganda radio on the political shift, and dumbing down, of the electorate, particularly the ‘working class’. I do not. Radio is low cost (for the consumer), convenient, and pervasive among the ‘working class’.

One other change is that the on-air ‘personalities’ would need to accept that they are part of a movement, and park their ego, and need for $1 M/yr paychecks, at the door.

My experience with all cities, and particularly ‘Red’ cities (St. Louis, Kansas City, Denver, Des Moines, Albuquerque), is that the older/university neighborhoods are ‘Blue’, surrounded by ‘Red’ suburbs which are the enclaves of the middle and ‘working’ classes. That is, the part of the electorate that has been consistently voting against their best interest. Therefore, the primary strategy would be to ‘serve’ these areas. The ‘Blue’ would provide a critical mass of funds, with the CPR providing funds to keep the enterprise ‘just in the black’.

A secondary strategy would be a salient into smaller markets with larger universities (Columbia, MO, Springfield,. MO, Iowa City/Cedar Rapids, IA, Fort Collins, CO) and therefore a younger demographic. The dynamic in these smaller cities would be similar to the larger cities, with the relatively large progressive base proving the revenue to operate nearly self-sufficient.

A third, and probably most important, strategy, will be air-drops into (typically ‘Red’) smaller cities that are rural regional centers (Quincy, IL, Topeka, KS, Waterloo, IA, Quad Cities, IA). These operations would probably require the most funds from the CPR.

Parallel to all of the above, ownership of stations should be the priority, or the sorry situation in Missoula and Phoenix will simply continue. With an adequately funded CPR, when a station comes up for sale, they would be ready. On-line funding drives could even be effected to raise funds to outbid the Christo/Corporatist oligarchy.

+++++

[JDPriestly]

56. In LA, we have Pacifica Radio. It's non-profit and not entirely

left-wing, but more left. It is public radio. We also have KTLK which broadcasts Thom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes and Stephanie Miller. I don't know who is on in the evening, but the late afternoon radio is not political (and of no interest to me). Thom Hartmann is my absolute favorite. But they are all pretty good.

Pacifica is already sort of the model you suggest. I think that there is a problem buying radio stations. Takes a lot of money.

[Echo In Light]

20. Segments of the Dem's profe$$ional class vehemently disavowed/trivialized the Right too often/long

... and so while the right was blatantly active on many levels, there was often little or no substantive resistance (and certainly no national platform for it) to the rightward shift...how could there be when the directive was to denounce any such shift while marginalizing and attacking those who accurately demonstrated otherwise

[kentuck]

21. There is a corporate media bias.

and it ain't liberal.

[leveymg]

22. I'm afraid, we'll all just have to pass the hat and buy Comcast.

That's how the Saudis and Exxon/Mobil Oil and General Electric do it. They bought it, they pretty much put out the message they want over the media they own.

Any chance that Obama and Congress will actually slip their leash, put some teeth into the FCC and reassert the "public airwaves" and Fairness doctrines? Don't hold your breath. While I understand the problem, and sympathize with the author, there is no easy answer, fast or slow.

Until we become billionaires, just continue watching Rachel and Keith, and doing our own netroots media thing. And, fight like hell to keep New Neutrality!

[G_j]

23. K&R

[starroute]

24. Some of this imbalance is at the think-tank/policy institute level

The most basic truth may be that the media is lazy. The right has been working since the 70's to develop think-tanks and public policy institutes which offer well-honed positions and spokespeople for the media to draw on. The left doesn't have anything equivalent.

It's true that when covering demonstrations, the media shy off from anything reminiscent of the 60's. But doesn't necessarily apply at the level of expertise. If they left could develop a set of credible mainstream experts to explain the issues of the day from a progressive but not overtly partisan position, I think it could go a long ways to redressing the balance.

Something similar is also true of legislation. The right has had ALEC for a long time, which essentially provides pre-written bills to conservative state legislators on any current issue. I don't know of anything equivalent on the left, which means that the right is able to get its own solutions into position while the left is still trying to figure out what it wants.

The left is 40 years behind on this, and I don't expect it to replicate what the right did in the 70's. For one thing, the deep-pocket funders aren't there, and for another the Internet has made the basic conditions very different. There's never going to be a left-wing Heritage Foundation. But the information flow has to be controlled at its root -- and right now, the left is always stuck playing catch-up.

[JDPriestly]

57. Yes. We on the left don't have think-tanks subsidized by very

wealthy people of the left.

But, in fact, we have more intellectual power. DU, Firedog Lake, Daily Kos and similar sites are kind of our think tanks.

Huffington Post covers the news, but is unfortunately limiting comments from what I can tell. By limiting comments, it loses a lot of really good reader input.

It's not that we necessarily read more than the right-wingers. I don't really know about that. But we read more challenging stuff -- more history.

I am always amused when someone like Sarah Palin supports her arguments with a selected quote from one of the Founding Fathers. The quote is almost always taken out of the context of the Founding Father's entire written works. She has no idea about what the Founding Fathers wanted, really said, did. And she is typical of right-wingers.

We have the best sites on the internet. When you look at our news sites, our depth analysis sites (which I did not mention), then we are really amassing a lot of information and making it available to the interested public.

Now, we need to get our own friends and neighbors to read all these sites. That's where personal contact, discussion and e-mails are useful. Liberals are more likely to read and right intelligently.

We should not imitate the right-wingers. We should use the tools that are unique to us -- our superior educations to start with.

[MilesColtrane]

25. Anti-trust laws would solve a host of problems, with banks, with the media...

health care....

The list is long.

[Stuart G]

29. K and R

[newtothegame]

30. We've had a product: Air America. It didn't sell. The question is WHY?

On a side note, I would say a lot of what we use to counter the right these days is dismissed as pure rhetoric as a result of decades of using worlds like sexist, racist, and Nazi as tools of political convenience. Our dilution of these once-powerful words through "gotcha" politics (see: Trent Lott and Strom Thurmond's birthday party) has rendered these words moot to most Americans at this point, and they will be virtually meaningless in a generation.

[MilesColtrane]

32. Right wing talk/news is engaging because it's fear based.

...goes straight to the reptilian part of the brain.

If you are going to ask most people to think, you've got to entertain them a little bit.

The Jon Stewart model is working well.

[kentuck]

36. Because...

liberals tend to defend government and government programs and conservatives tend to be anti-government. The anti-government viewpoint is better radio and television. It's easier to criticize taxes. It's easier to criticize pro-choice viewpoints. It's easier to criticize welfare recipients. It's easier to criticize big government.

[William Z. Foster]

45. a strong left wing program would work

A pale imitation of right wing radio, a mirror image polite and gentrified, merely taking the opposite side of the partisan bickering and crossfire talking points idiocy - all of which has been defined by right wing think tanks - is at best boring, at worst counter-productive.

If we are going to play a game of "our upscale gentrified beautiful people and their lifestyles versus yours" the right wing will always win that game. We get style,points, and that is about it. We get to "be right" and the right wingers actually win.

Peter Werbe's program out of Detroit - hard hitting, strongly pro-working class and Labor, and no cutesy attempts at being entertaining - is an example of what could be done and how successful it could be. The problem is that there are a lot of people right here who would start some sort of McCarthyism, a witch hunt and frenzy about "far left fringe radicals" who are "hurting our team" if someone posted the things here that Werbe routinely talks about. And his "far left radical" talk gets great acceptance from the general public. So much for "we are a center right nation."

Fir left wing radio to work, it has to BE left wing - strongly pro-Labor and anti-ruling class - it can't be some sort of nicey nice Republican-lite mirror image of Hannity and Limbaugh.

We can never win if we are not making our case, and we can never make our case so long as we are restrained by those among us who will attack anyone expressing anything that is actually remotely left wing.

on edit -

Peter Werbe
http://www.peterwerbe.com/

You can listen to him live on the Internet Sunday nights:

Nightcall, Detroit's award-winning, phone-in talk show, hosted by Peter Werbe, is in its 39th year. Nightcall airs Sundays on WRIF-FM 101.1 from 11:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., Eastern Time, or listen online.

www.wrif.com.

Nightcall and Peter's interviews are podcasted.

http://www.wrif.com/podcasts/Episodes.aspx?PID=1499

Archives of the show here, at the White Rose Society website:

http://www.whiterosesociety.org/Werbe.html

Nightcall Facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/nightcall

[KonaKane]

48. Radio's just not our thing.

Liberals just don't have their ear glued to AM radio like the rightwing does. Demographic study after study has shown that, and even though I supported AA when it started out, I knew in my gut that it wouldn't be long before it tanked because of that reality.

The right is more hooked up to a media IV than the left is. I remember reading a report on viewing habits of the liberal vs. conservative some time ago, and it basically said that the average rightist has a tendency to get 90% of its news from a singular source (like FOX news or Rush Limbaugh) and spends a whole lot more of their day plugged into that source, than does the liberal who gets their news from several sources. Just by sheer math, that means advertisers are more successful with rightwing programs because they have a bigger and more dedicated captive audience.

I worked in radio for almost two decades, and as a committed and fervent liberal I am pissed off as any one of us that we couldn't get on top of the radio game. But the fact is, we are too intelligent and too discerning to get our info from single sources and that means we will never be able to drive a major artery of media for our causes.

[William Z. Foster]

35. the media is an important factor, yes

But it is as much an effect as it is a cause.

The right wing is free to unambiguously and aggressively represent the ruling class, the agenda of the wealthy few.

We are not free to ambiguously and aggressively represent the working class.

That is the main reason we are handicapped. Even if "we" had half of all media access, the pro-working class among us control us and our organizations, relentlessly police everything we say and do, and we will never be free to put up a strong and united front against the right wing.

[FiveGoodMen]

38. "the pro-working class among us control us"

Isn't that who "us" is?

[William Z. Foster]

39. that post didn't work, did it?

Confused myself. It is a real mess the more I look at it.

Let's try again -


The right wing is free to unambiguously and aggressively represent the ruling class, the agenda of the wealthy few.

We are not free to unambiguously and aggressively represent the working class.

That is the main reason we are handicapped. Even if we had half of all media access, the pro-ruling class folks among us, who control us and our organizations, who relentlessly police everything we say and do, will prevent us from putting up a strong and united front against the right wing.

[FiveGoodMen]

40. That makes much more sense.

[William Z. Foster]

42. thanks

Thanks for catching that. I was heading out to dinner when I posted it, and then the editing time had expired. It was quite a mess.

[me b zola]

37. K&R

[Historic NY]

41. Letting the lies go unanswered does nothing but cause festering ideas out in the fringe world...

like the stupid Beck red phone crap..I got an e-mail about. The WH hasn't refuted his claims. Would be nice to get that number.

[lonestarnot]

43. If we can't buy a network, then every motherfucker here needs to learn the art of freeway blogging.

People always have to go someplace and we can do it so cheaply and massively if there were only a way to have people understand this fucking concept. Cheap as solar power. OK :shrug: they don't get that either. :(

[Common Sense Party]

58. I don't understand the concept and you're not helping.

What is "freeway blogging"? Is it graffiti?

Are you actually suggesting that we change public opinion via graffiti?

[lonestarnot]

66. You new to DU? and No not graffiti. I believe that is destructive.

www.freewayblogger.com

[Common Sense Party]

67. I've been hear one year less than you, and this is the first I've heard

of it.

So, it's like bumper stickers. You can only get a brief blurb across. Personally, I think facts change minds more than slogans and sound bites.

But I'm glad to hear it's not graffiti.

[lonestarnot]

68. Nothing but facts on a blog madam.

[Arkana]

44. We don't have an answer

because it's not our way to lie and the truth isn't as sexy.

All we can do is tell the truth, doggedly, day in and day out, to as many people as we can.

[William Z. Foster]

51. we don't have a message

I really think that the problem is not so much getting the message out there, but rather the lack of a coherent consistent message.

We try to go in two directions at once - "work within the system" and challenge the system. You can't do both. Which is it? If we were consistently challenging the system, the message would resonate and spread by word of mouth and there are not enough of us to keep up with the speaking engagements that would pour in. They wouldn't make money - you can't simultaneously trying to be a winner by playing the game and trying to end the destructive murderous game - and they wouldn't get MSM airplay. So what? Word of mouth is powerful, and if you are telling the truth you don't need to buy up all of the media and pound your simple minded message into people's heads 24 hours a day. You have enormous advantage that the right wing does not have. We are actually on the side of the working people. At least I hope we all are, although reading many of the posts here makes me wonder about that.

We don't have a clear message. We have a grab bag of complicated "positions" on hundreds of "issues," all carefully worked out to be mirror image responses to right wing lunacy - in other words we are accepting their selection of issues, their framing of the debate, we are on their playing field obeying their rules - and all elaborately crafted to be "practical" and "realistic" and not be too radical or rock the boat.

[Douglas Carpenter]

46. the right-wing media all more or less consider themselves part of the same team as

the right-wing movement, the Republicans in Congress and when the team holds the White House - as the President. They see backing their team and supporting their team's leader to be a basic principle - just as it goes without saying that at least being an apologist for any slip-ups or imprudent words by any respected members of the team even if they might quietly hold some personal reservations.

A right-wing journalist sees loyalty to their Party and their Party's leader as a principle far greater than any idealistic notions about balanced journalism.

Sure they may occasionally let out some disapproval over specific and isolated issues - but the way the old American Communist Party might have occasionally acknowledged that the Soviet Union was sometimes wrong. In other words, any public criticism is uttered in the spirit of solidarity; ever mindful that their cause and their points of unity are greater than any petty disagreements and differences. Their journalist who are these days ubiquitous in every mainstream media outlet, share the same sense of solidarity with their movement and their leaders as their grassroots activist who knock on doors and hand out leaflets.

I suppose their simply is no unified progressive or liberal movement with the sense of cohesion that dominates the modern American right-wing political movement and certainly not one that has a remotely comparable presence in the mainstream American media.

[WinkyDink]

61. Rich sides with rich. It's pretty simple.

[whereaminow]

47. If you wanna win people over,

you can't just drone-on like Ben Stein... You've got to have a little more showmanship... Fact or fiction, it's the truth. Facts may be stubborn, but ideology is downright unalterable. Beats stubborn any day of the week.

[ErikJ]

49. BUMPERSTICKERS

The media is CORPORATE so they are going to support their corporate sponsors just like the politicians do and vice versa. We live in a Plutocracy now dont forget.

One small part to help get the truth out is bumperstickers. Northern Sun has lots of good ones. http://www.northernsun.com/n/s/bumper-stickers.html

I just bought #7171 and # 7172

[Kitty Herder]

50. K&R

[Enthusiast]

53. Yes.

And this is what has me so disturbed. It's the media. The media is the problem.

[Enthusiast]

54. K&R, nice article nt

[WinkyDink]

59. And when were the media and citizenry MOST involved in speaking truth to power? When we Boomers

were young.

When we Boomers took to the streets, to the campuses, to the voting-booths and voter-registration offices.

Mock and knock my generation if you will, but where are the young truth-seekers NOW?

[chillspike]

62. I say this is a good thing

If Fox News wants to be The National Enquirer, let them be The National Enquirer.

Let their lies get as bad as they like.

More truth for us.

[DailyGrind51]

64. Greg Burns, on Chicago's WTTW news program "Chicago Tonight" made the same observation!

Burns is a sports writer for the "Chicago Tribune" and he was asking why the Obama administration is not continuously reminding people about how this mess was created by the Bush administration.

[olegramps]

65. The First Step toward a Dictatorship is control o f the News Media.

The Conservative Fascists in alliance with their useful Evangelical idiots are far advanced in their determination to control the mass media. The invasion of Iraq revealed that journalism in this country had reached an all time low. The neo-cons could publish their PNAC blueprint for the preemptive invasion of Iraq without one major news outlet informing the public of their stated intentions. In stead of exposing them as war mongers they cheered their blitzkrieg Shock and Awe murder of innocent civilians.