[MGP-Forum Announce] Is it better to build, not buy, metro news organizat...

[Markkarlin at aol.com]

In a message dated 10/29/2006 8:03:00 PM Central Standard Time,  
dlh at donnahalper.com writes:

Mark  wrote--

>But there are plenty of Democrats and progressives with big  money.

If that is so, and I have no reason to doubt it, why have Dems  and 
progressives been so slow in supporting progressive radio?  The  
problems of Air America have been all over the media (I'm in radio 
and  I know a lot of the people involved), but beyond their financial 
woes is a  bigger story-- a number of progressive talk hosts (not all 
of whom are  from Air America) are doing the Lord's work, telling the 
truth and  exposing the other side of the issues; yet they have few if 
any  sponsors.  I may not like commercial radio, but I love the fact 
that  people like Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller, Rachel 
Maddow,  and others are trying their best to inform a public that has 
been sadly  mis-led by the right-wing noise machine.  I am puzzled by 
how few  progressive organisations advertise or actively support these 
talk show  hosts.

Donna L. Halper, Journalism Dept. Emerson College Boston  MA     



this has been a very hot topic in the progressive new media community.  there 
are many theories about why wealthy progressives don't invest as much as  
right wingers in media infrastructure.
 
i have many thoughts about this.  but my most basic one is that  wealthy 
progressives, for the most part are not marketers nor do they understand  the 
power of television and radio as vehicles for shaping the mass culture and  
political context (or "frame" to be Lakofian).  the modern republican party  is 
built on a marketing mindset.  within that mindset media is an extension  of 
advertising and branding.  wealthy progressives, on the whole, both  don't 
understand this approach or have contempt for it (and much of it certainly  deserves 
some disdain).  but this is what works.  we are a marketing  culture.  the old 
media in particular has now virtually merged with  the marketing culture: news 
is entertainment is advertising.  the today  show is a cross-promotional 
advertisement with some mcheadlines of news.   the media sells stories in the same 
way hollywood does.  iraq for years was  a hollywood drama, without the 
bodies.
 
in wag the dog, robert de niro tells dustin hoffman, playing a hollywood  
producer, that he needs a "pageant" to divert attention from the little sex  
scandal surrounding the president.  that is what the republicans do so  well. they 
provide pageants for the media. 
 
to counter this, you need an altenative media infrasctructure backed by  
billions of dollars.  wealthy progressives are more interested in giving  money to 
candidates than in laying the media and think tank infrastructure for  the 
long term.
 
the republicans understand how to build brand identity and shape mindsets.  
wealth progressives, for the most part, don't.
 
mark karlin
editor and publisher
buzzflash.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/post_mgp-forum.org/attachments/20061029/8d2457f0/attachment.html