Let's get real about what drives the MSM

[MindMatter]

Of course they have a slant driven by their corporate owners. But other than Faux, that isn't the biggest driving factor.

The real engine is ADVERTISING

When I was going over my advertising budget with a local TV station for my business earlier this year, the salesperson was adamant that I should plan my campaigns to be light in November and leading up to the primary. And also during the Olympics, as this network carries the games. Political season is huge for the TV networks. It is like taking candy from a baby. Ask anybody working in the industry. It is huge.

And how do they go about maximizing their revenue? Simple, they manufacture controversy. They find non-events like Rev. Wright and pump them into public debate. They take a race that has over for two months and report on it as if the everything depends on tomorrow's primaries.

That is all motivated, not to inform, but to generate controversy. And in the process, they hope to spook the leading candidate into
spending advertising money that isn't necessary, and to entice the railing candidate that if she would just dig deep and spend another million, she could change the outcome.

The media companies are not in the news business. They are in the advertising business. And they are in the controversy business. But not the news business.

[blm]

1. You're mistaken about CNN - House of Saud didn't buy a controlling share because

they wanted to make money off of advertising.

House of Saud uses CNN as their PR Dept and to protect their US interests - and that includes Bushes and Clintons, the only two families who have earned their trust to cover for their needs.

[MindMatter]

12. CNN is a little different

in that they don't have local affiliates.

The business model for the networks (NBC, ABC, CBA, and Faux) is mainly driven by the advertising sold by the local affiliates. That is what enables the local affiliates to pay their allocation for the programming. These "news" shows are no different than Survivor or American Idol. They all follow the same basic formula of fabricating controversies and tension that just aren't there otherwise.

[slackmaster]

2. That's about the size of it

Anyone who expects them to act otherwise is naive.

[chill_wind]

6. I'm not naive. I'm angry. I was angry in 2000. I was angry in 2004.

Long before that, really. And every single day in between. And this primary season, I am really, really angry.

[slackmaster]

8. Keep that up and it will damage your health

There are many things that you have no possible control over. Don't stress yourself needlessly.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

17. LET'S HEAR IT FOR RONALD RAYGUN

HE DID INESTIMINABLE DAMAGE TO OUR NATION.



RAGE IS A BETTER WORD

[HowHasItComeToThis]

3. ANYTHING FOR PROPAGANDA

[uponit7771]

4. Obama needs to capatalize on their greed then, use it against them

[MindMatter]

13. How?

Sounds like a good idea. Do you have any examples of tactics that might do this?

[rucky]

5. Follow the money...and it's more obvious the other way around (Edwards).

Candidates with no money for ads get ignored. Back when there were 8 candidates, their face time was directly proportional to their fundraising.

[MindMatter]

14. But that's the point.

Clinton is broke, but she's getting loads of support from the networks to keep the illusion of a tight contest alive.

Of course, they don't have to do this with all 8 candidates, but as the field narrows, it is strongly in the networks' interest to keep feeding the flames. Maybe they will lose money when Clinton's campaign reneges on their advertising bills, but Obama has $50M to spend.

[Life Long Dem]

7. Yeah, I was thinking if it was a ratings thing...

when they came out with Clinton's secret weapon - the nuclear option. It tightens the race back up and doesn't allow Obama to cruise on home.

Nuclear option.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-camp-considering_n_100051.html

[Armstead]

9. That's a big part of it -- It's also ratings driven

[MindMatter]

15. Yes, of course.

The ratings are always important, especially to minimize the make-goods on the national purchases.

Either way, they make more money when they stir up the shit. If they could find a way to get Hillary to take off her shirt, they'd do it.

[zulchzulu]

10. After the Mississippi primary, there was 42 days to fill before the Pennsylvania primary

42 days is a LOT of time to just cover the Presidential election...so guess what they did to have LOTS of advertising revenue come in:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/zulchzulu/194

[AndyTiedye]

11. They are the Propaganda Arm of their Parent Companies

GE makes far more off the war than they could ever hope to make off of NBC. It is NOT about ratings for them.
GE's former CEO Jack Welch even said he bought NBC so he could control the ouptput of their "news" organization.

If it was just about controversy they would not be giving the Repiglicans a pass on everything.
They only like controversy when it hurts the Democrats!

[MindMatter]

16. By playing it this way,

they stand to win from every angle.

[Uncle Joe]

18. I believe this is what's killing our democratic republic.

They should be in the news business, the problem is their clients are corporations, the American People are only customers or consumers. There is a significant distinction as to fiducial responsibility owed to a client over a customer or consumer with the customers or consumers coming out on the low end of the scale. I believe this is why you will almost always hear the corporate media refer to the American People as consumers instead of citizens.

The only way a dysfunctional "free press" can maintain that power structure status quo is to dumb down the American People until the nation falls in to chaos and the Constitution is scrapped.

But don't worry about the corporate media, they'll do just fine selling advertising to the booming privatized military, prison and security industries, until we get our ass kicked by some other empire. Then they'll sell advertising to them.