The Obama administration has made state-corporatism a cornerstone of its economic plans, taking over businesses, forcing them into bankruptcy and handing out the spoils to their cronies and allies. But at least in the financial and auto industries there was some effort to resist, and many of those companies are still trying to buy back their freedom. What ABC is doing is many times worse, because they are volunteering willingly for a government takeover, offering themselves up as propagandists without considering the consequences. Perhaps they see a future where the state controls all media and they want to get in on the ground floor and have a favored status, but that just makes them like the slave who turns in the runaways hiding in the barn to the slave-catchers. He may get more scraps from the master's table but he's still a slave and he's also a traitor.
Journalists used to believe that they had a responsibility to keep politicians honest and hold their feet to the fire. Woodward and Bernstein didn't go to Nixon looking for ways they could help him promote his pet projects. When the press becomes nothing more than another arm of government, promoting the party line and dishing out propaganda, the people have lost one more essential safeguard of their liberty. ABC has decided to leave integrity and objectivity behind and become nothing more than shills for an ideology and a style of government which they believe in. Whether you support socialized medicine or not, this trend in the media should scare you. It's the death of the independent press and the beginning of state-run media. I halfway expect to hear the strains of "Moscow Nights" over the credits on ABC as I did on every radio or television newscast when I lived in the Soviet Union formally confirming that the media has gone from watchdog to lapdog.
Join me and many others in boycotting ABC, starting on Thursday and continuing through their summer line-up of very little but tawdry reality shows. You won't be missing much and you might be striking a blow for freedom. Though it's entirely possible that if we manage to dry up their advertising revenue they'll just get bailed out and taken over completely by the government.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Arch Conservative
Whether or not you, I or anyone else boycott ABC starting this Thursday Nalle, the old guard media are already in their death throes. Most major newspapers are experiencing dramatics downturns in circulation. No one watches anc, nbc, or cbs nightly news anymore.
It's all about the cable news networks like fox, cnn and msnbc, where fox kills the other two by the way, talk radio and the internet.
That is why the facisct left in this country has already tried (unsuccessfully) several times to put big brother's footprint all over talk radio and the internet.
For all the rhetoric about being open minded there is nothing quite as intolerant, close minded, and aggressive in silencing dissent as the modern American leftist.
2 - M a rk
On Thursday the 24th of June ABC will give over most of its programming schedule to custom programming, much of it direct from the White House, dedicated to promoting and publicizing the Obama administration's multi-trillion dollar healthcare plan.
Dave, it will be interesting to see if your partisan choice of words --'promoting'-- accurately describes the spectacle. It's your fault now that I cannot boycott the station tomorrow. Ironic as I haven't tuned in to ABC in years.
3 - Dave Nalle
You've got a point, Arch. It's arguable that a marginal network like ABC was forced into this by an increasing awareness of the failure of their business model and their inability to compete in a changing media marketplace.
Dave
4 - Dave Nalle
It's your fault now that I cannot boycott the station tomorrow. Ironic as I haven't tuned in to ABC in years.
It's easy to call for a boycott, because based on the quality of their programming most people with an IQ over 80 are already effectively boycotting ABC anyway.
Dave
5 - Cindy
Boycott everything! (almost)
6 - Bliffle
Aw, poor litle Davey is upset that the Obamas have outflanked the commercial and moneyed interests that have dominated the media for so many years. Poor baby.
It's also possible that the Obamas may outflank the Congress as well, which, under the whip of their masters the Lobbyists, has been adamantly against the public option in spite of 75% support in the polls.
Why, you don't suppose that Obama is a better strategist than the collected Brain Trust of the vested interests, do you?
In any case, it's unlikely I'll watch since I haven't watched ANY commercial station in several years (too many commercials, 20 minutes every hour and inching up to 25 minutes) and at the rate that Establishment Public TV is accumulating commercials I'll probably stop watching TV altogether. Too bad, as it's just becoming watchable, what with HDTV and subchannels. Oh well, another bad decision: we voted to have mre expensive bland programming instead of a few good programs.
7 - MarkSaleski
For all the rhetoric about being open minded there is nothing quite as intolerant, close minded, and aggressive in silencing dissent as the modern American leftist.
totally untrue. i freely support the dissemination of unlimited amounts of ignorant spew.
all hail b.c. politics commentary.
8 - Dave Nalle
Bliffle, there's fine programming on TV if you're willing to pay for it. As for the rest, it's determined by a free market responding to what the people want to watch. I know that scares you, but I'd rather pay for good TV or take the peoples choice than have a board of media commissars working for the government deciding what is wholesome and politically correct for us to watch, which seems to be what you would prefer.
All together now, for comrade Bliffle...
Na slishni v sadu dashe shoroxi,
Vse zdes zaterla da utra.
Yesli v znali vui, kak mnye dorogi
Podmoskovnia vechera.
Dave
9 - roger nowosielski
You've got to do it right, Dave.
Here it is.
Russians may be motherfuckers, but they've got soul.
10 - Bliffle
As I said: "Oh well, another bad decision: we voted to have more expensive bland programming instead of a few good programs."
11 - roger nowosielski
I'd say that no TV programing can match print media. The idea is not to be overwhelmed with images but to be stimulated to think.
12 - Dave Nalle
Roger, did you miss the video link in the text of the article?
Dave
13 - M ark
So which died? The fourth or the fifth? Portrait of Dave as a Quick Change Artist.
14 - roger nowosielski
I guess I did, Dave. Sorry.
You've got to love that song, though.
15 - roger nowosielski
PS: Just sent you a short piece, if only to demonstrate a more lyrical style.
16 - Dr Dreadful
M ar ... (!) k:
Thank you. I knew I wasn't going crazy. Well, I may be going crazy, but that's not a symptom.
17 - Baronius
Dave, what about CBS's unsubstantiated attack on Bush in 2004? or the NYT suggesting McCain had an affair with a lobbyist in 2008? or ABC hiring a Clinton staffer as a political reporter? or NBC's anchor bowing to President Obama? Why do you believe that Thursday constitutes a change in the relationship between the Democratic Party and the mainstream press?
18 - roger nowosielski
I was under the same impression. All along, the Fourth Estate, I thought, was the press. Did Dave throw us a curveball?
19 - Dave Nalle
Dave was temporarily curved but corrected the article. So many estates, it becomes bewildering. Currently we're using "fifth estate" to refer to the blogosphere and "fourth estate" for the media/press.
Ironically, although the article text updated immediately, the new BC software has some issues with updating the title and the section listings. Makes it all that much more mysterious.
Dave
20 - Dr Dreadful
Given that the mainstream media is a pale shadow of its former glory, isn't fretting about whether they're in bed with the White House a bit moot?
ABC's (and the other two's) idea of political journalism these days reminds me of Denis Healey's famous description of debating the then-Chancellor* Geoffrey Howe in the House of Commons as like being savaged by a dead sheep.
* For our American readers, the Chancellor is analagous to your Treasury Secretary.
21 - Dave Nalle
Amusing analogy, Dr. D, but there really is a relevant concern about what happens when the press gives up its watchdog role to become a lapdog.
Dave
22 - zingzing
i love that archie can follow "[...] cable news networks like fox, cnn and msnbc, where fox kills the other two by the way," with " [...] For all the rhetoric about being open minded there is nothing quite as intolerant, close minded, and aggressive in silencing dissent as the modern American leftist" and not see how pointless his statement is. if the left was any good at, or had any interest in, silencing dissent, then fox wouldn't be #1 on the television. the only thing that keeps fox #1 is the stupidity of the american people.
23 - zingzing
"Perhaps they [abc] see a future where the state controls all media and they want to get in on the ground floor and have a favored status..."
while i would have to say that's a bit of a paranoid fantasy (the type of one that dave lives in these days...), i can see the point.
however, i also see the point in keeping the american people informed, as long as this is not a propaganda thing. of course, dave, you'll never know. i'll never know either. i don't have a tv. but such is life.
you do know, of course, that a vast majority of americans still get their news from the boob tube. there's a line that shouldn't be crossed, but i'm not sure if he's near the line yet. you'll have to watch to see.
curious much? or too principled to know what you're talking about?
24 - Baritone
I'm a bit curious as to how all of you seem to know how bad network programming and news have become since apparently none of you watch it?
B
25 - Joanne Huspek
I gave up on the "networks" a long time ago. Just like I gave up on Michigan produced wines. But (Baritone) even I slip up and buy a bottle of the local stuff, just to see if things have improved. I do the same with TV. You don't need to watch an entire program (or drink a whole bottle of wine) to know it has little or no merit.