Media Finance Reform

The situation:
A new and glorious dawn is about rise on American politics. A campaign finance reform bill sponsored by the only two honest politicians in America, McCain and Feingold, has a very good chance of being signed into law. When this happens the people will get their government back. No longer will money be allowed to taint politics. All politician will vote their consciences and all kinds of great projects that the soon to be out of work lobbyists have held up will quickly be passed. Great men and women will be attracted to politics again and we will no longer be forced to choose between mediocrities.
However, there is a dark cloud looming over this new day.
The problem:
There is one corporate interest left out of campaign finance reform - Big Media. Currently they have a big say in politics and when the other coporations are stripped of their influence it will be even bigger. Most americans get their news from news organizations owned by giant corporations. These media companies can control politicians by deciding what is news and who gets covered. This is clearly wrong, after all Dan Rather gets only one vote but his influence is much greater than that of the average man. Ask yourself, if you called your Senator and wanted a meeting what would happen? How about if Brokaw, or Ted Turner called? They would get one and you would not.
The solution
Media Finance Reform:
Any television station offering “news” or opinions about politics or politicians will only be able to charge 10$ a minute for ads on its programs. Any radio station 5$ a minute. Magazines and newspapers 10$ per ad and no more than 25 cents for a cover price. Internet web sites no more than 10$ per ad per week.
But how will people find out about politics and politicians. If they want to media outlets may carry verbatim transcripts of speeches or policy papers. This will rescue politics from being just so many sound bites and will make politicians concentrate on intelligent policies on real issues. To ensure this is done fairly if a media outlet lets one candidate have a transcript or position paper on that outlet must let all of that candidate’s opponents have a similar opportunity provided that the party represented obtained 25% of the vote in the previous election.
Some say this might be unconstitutional but the 1st amendment only guarantees freedom of the press and restricting ad money is not the same as restricting the press.
The result
Clean government, high minded campaigns, and no one individual or company will have any more influence than any other’s

Sic transit gloria munda.

:eek: NO, then the media will control nearly all public speech, as you have noticed. At least until the pols stop slapping each other on the back and run off to exploit all the loop holes as everyone knows will happen.

Any advert? Well, all newspapers would go out of business under such a scheme and this clearly violates freedom of the press. But, doing that to TV and radio stations is fine by me. Once they all go out of business (or cable costs $1000 dollars a month anyway) we can return control of the airwaves to the masses.

Arbitrary! What happened to equal justice under law?

I think you may be giving them waaaaay to much credit.

politics = money = power

Money can not “taint” politics, there is no difference.

Ummmm…

What about Unions?

Yeah right.

This proposal does nothing to restrict the press.

Nothing to see here folks…move along…move along…

What about the winner? I thought they were campiagning specifically to gain more influence than the losers.

Though this proposal may slightly interfere with freedom of the press there must be a trade off between rights. I mean does not the government have a responsibility to insure that Big Media doesn’t take over our government. You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.
McCain and Feingold are not only the only honest politicians but also the most courageous, look how they have stuck to their guns despite being nightly raked over the coals by Big Media.

The point about unions is a good one. We do need Union Finance Reform. How about a rule that no one who is a member of a union may speak out for or against a candidate or party unless they are making minimum wage.

:eek: No there mustn’t!

As I said before (in the McCain-Feingold is a bad idea thread), no one has ever been trampled to death due to a political advert. Although I gave up my argument on that thread because my opponents were making just this kind of non sequitor, and didn’t seem to care much about liberty, I continued it in 2sense’s Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech thread.

OK, now you are just trolling :wally Hey, I know – let’s just shoot everybody. That would fix everything!

What are you, kidding? Do you watch the news? The media love John McCain, and I mean love. They did everything they possibly could to get him the Republican nomination over Bush. The media could not have their collective mouth around McCain’s dick any more than they do now.

Do you have any concept whatsoever how much it costs to produce one half-hour of TV news, one half-hour of network radio news, or to publish a major daily newspaper?

OK, I’m going to get these all out of the way so I can answer this a little calmer.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek::eek: :eek:
Good. whew. All right, let’s begin.

  1. We have television stations right now that show an unbiased look at politics, that doesn’t resort to sound bites and shows a complete story of what’s happening in the capitol: C-Span and C-Span 2. Do you watch those now? I sure hope so because that’s exactly what you’re proposing ALL stations turn into if they’re reporting political stories.

  2. No reporter, lemmie repeat that for you, NO REPORTER (should I bold, underline, and italicize that?) goes into journalism to tell someone else’s story. They tell their story with their words. They do not rely on their subject to hand them their article for them. Columnists don’t earn their living by setting into print a verbatim speech. In fact, based on the proposed plan, you’re virtually guaranteeing that no self respecting journalist stays in the field of politics, money issues aside. Heeeeey, speaking of money:

  3. 1.3 million dollars. MILLION. That’s what it costs to run 30 seconds of airtime on the Superbowl. Full page ads in the NY times cost, I would estimate, hundreds of thousands of dollars. It’s set at that much because a) companies will pay that much for an ad and b) they have to pay their employees. This is more than just the writers. People that hold the camera or copy edit the text aren’t doing it to work off their community service obligations. This is their job. You’re asking them to go from 1.3 million to $5? Would you take a paycut down to .000001 dollars an hour? Me? I would rather be making Nike shoes in a sweatshop.

  4. Allow me to get preachy here for the other side. Journalists are the saviors of democracy. They are the fourth branch, checking and balancing the powers of the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative powers that be. They are what stand in the way of complete corruption and the downfall of society.
    Ignore temptation island. Ignore even the National Enquirer and Entertainment Tonight. Crap, all of them.
    I’m asking you to imagine a government that imposed such hard criteria for political reporting, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein never entered the profession. They uncovered the Watergate scandal! But why would they ever become a journalist when they wouldn’t even be paid minimum wage and their job consisted of setting into type a politician’s speech? Iran/Conta, Whitewater, hell the Cuban Missle Crisis. They’d all go unreported.

What you’re asking for is a country where the only news we got is what the government decided was acceptable for publication and provided to us. I cannot accept that. I can’t understand how you can either.

I see. Puddleglum’s an idealist.

Here’s what you do, my friend… sit down, take a deep breath, and chant “It’s not gonna happen” a thousand times. You’ll feel lots better. Really.

Ahhh…

Such a shame to start using up some of the best lines of the year in January. I hope that in December, when the line of the year awards get handed out, we are able to think back and remember this gem:)