The Evils of Chowmein

First it was marijuana and the ill effects it had upon non-whites; turning them into wild-eyed, sex starved maniacs.  Now, I'm sure that by now, you're more than well aware of the strange, voodoo power women have while being raped which allows them to just, "shut the whole thing down", but were you aware that rape "does not happen deliberately" and that rape is both "sometimes good, sometimes bad"?  Well, if you can't believe US Republican law makers about a woman's reproductive system, then you should be able to believe a few Indian ministers.  I swear, for every year we go forward, I think we go back a half a year.

Mickey Mouse and the Bitter Scrooge of a Priest

There are a lot of legitimate reasons to knock Disney, especially their use of slave labor in less than third world conditions to make all those trinkets on sale for ridiculous amounts, however, one thing I've always applauded them for is their open acceptance of gays, starting with their "Gay Days" and now this:

Mickey and the Priest

So kudos to Disney, but read down and get a load of the mean old priest who keeps the Scouts' money for popcorn sales.  Me things he would have kept the money anyway; the acceptance of gays was simply an easy excuse.

The Koch Brothers of the World

In his essay, titled "Why The Democrats' Koch Brothers Fixation?", Frank James posits a question that he never answers.

Why The Democrats' Koch Brothers Fixation?"

After passing on a few, apparently unverified, claims by politicians from both sides (equal time and all), James' summation is that demonizing the Koch brothers is good business for Democrat fund-raising.  James provides nothing but anecdotal evidence for his theory and seems completely ignorant of an idea that is at least as old as the early 1900s when Edward Sapir, and later, one of his students, Benjamin Lee Whorf, first hypothesized that language impacts a society which in turn impacts a society's worldview which in turn, impacts the language of a society.

Many more would expand upon this original idea, more of Whorf's than Sapir's thinking, and none more so than George Orwell and his treatise, "Politics and the English Language", written in 1946.  Rushing through time and pushing aside larger, and minute, detail and fact, the fixation which Democrats seem to have with the Koch brothers might have something to do with what drove George Lakoff to write "Moral Politics"in 1996 after he witnessed the successful Republican campaign to win congressional majority in 1994 with their "Contract With America" (or, as some have labeled it, the "Contract On America").  Late Lakoff would slim down M"Moral Politics" into his Reader's Digestesque primer for Democrats in 2000, "Don't Think Of An Elephant". A friend of mine was working for a Democrat senator at the time and "Elephant" was required reading.

Briefly, Lakoff claims that the Republicans have done a far better job of uniting behind the same message. Writing in the May, 2005 issue of Vanity Fair (here, reprinted on Sentient Times), Robert Kennedy Jr pointed out the meshing of the GOP's ability to get behind ideological messages and the right-wing media.

The Disinformation Society

It was that right wing media, specifically AM talk radio, the top 100 practically owned, lock stock and barrel by right wing political talk shows, which, for years, has hammered away at the meme, "...the George Soroses of the world..." as if there were an army of radical left-wing political funders who are, like some liberal zombie apocalypse (a recent fascination of mine. Zombie apocalypse, not a political zombie apocalypse in particular...) while completely ignoring their own Soroses of the world; people like the Koch brothers.

No less than the savior of undocumented Asian street walkers, Bill Maher, made comment of on his show recently:

Bill Maher, "Dead Man's Party"

It seems that the donkey party might be coming around to a less fractious nature, and one better adroit at towing the line.

So that's why, Frank James, you might be hearing the name of the Koch brothers more these days.

The Lock Down of Religious Battles Gets Tighter

Not to be outdone by that upstart religion which is not even 1500 years old, yet insists on bending everyone over and under its knee, the American Religious Right has decided to continue the anteing by continuing their backwards slide from science, while relying upon science more and more every day:

Belief in Evolution Dwindles Amongst American Republicans

While I would not venture to claim that 11% equates to "plunging" numbers, what I think is more telling is the time frame within which this has been happening.  And, perhaps more important; how has this been happening?  In other words; how has the message been sent, and received?

The Privatization of Communication

In the landmark, Dartmouth College v. Woodward case, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of private institutions against public influence.

Later, after the 14th amendment was ratified to the US Constitution, corporate lawyers would argue, and usually successfully, the word, "person", as used in the 14th amendment to identify people granted equal protections because corporations, rather than lifeless businesses, were really extensions of the people who had created, owned and operated them.  Although the wording of the 14th amendment does not include any mention of businesses nor corporations, and it seems clear to most who have studied it that its original intent was not in support of those, it has been used, time and again, on the behalf of businesses and corporations, to create a sense of "personhood" when it comes to corporations and the law.

Replacing the Federal Radio Commission by the enactment of the Communications Act of 1934, the FCC was created primarily to "make available so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication services with adequate facilities at reasonable charges."

Falling under its jurisdiction of public access to channels of communication was telephone service, which, after some small ingress by other telecommunications companies in the area of long distance calling, ultimately led to the dissolution of At&T's monopoly of American phone services.

However, by that time, 1982, several changes were underway in the world of US media: the rise of cable, and later, satellite television; computers and the Internet; and cellular phones.

Although the history of cable television dates as far back as 1924, it began in the US in 1948 as a way of concentrating a radio signal's power in order to reach distant communities where over the air transmissions were hard if not impossible to receive.  Originally called Community Access, or Community Antenna Television (CATV), this service was provided free until one year later when a subscription fee was charged for use.  This fee, in part, was a result of the franchise fee levied by counties and cities for use of public land and right of way.  As a result of being appointed arbiters of public land and its right of way,  This franchise fee is set in negotiations between local governments and cable providers after local governments determine which media companies will have access to their public based upon the outcome of bidding competition.  Government municipalities are guaranteed a maximum of 5% of a cable operator's gross revenues which in turn is supposed to be used for as public, government and educational television.  The cable companies in turn, offset the franchise fee by passing off its cost to the cable customers.  In other words, local governments select what their public has access to, not based upon reliability, choice or quality, but rather, who can pay the most amount of money for access to public property and right of way.  The winners of these bids then defers any and all costs onto its customers who have little to no choice in their selection of cable accessed media.

Meanwhile, shifts in technology which favored the use of cable over traditional broadband (rabbit ears) televisions meant that what we are really buying these days are not televisions in the classic sense, but rather, large and expensive monitors.  Additionally, the rise of Internet and cellphone use also precipitated s shift away from traditional sources of communication; airwaves and telephone lines, to newer, non-traditional sources; digital signals and satellite transmissions.

In 1949 the FCC introduced the Fairness Doctrine, designed to require "equired the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced".  However, in the late 70's, a new technology used across television signals, teletext, was becoming popular.  So popular and so limited a resource, that the FCC declared it immune to the Fairness Doctrine.  In 1986, the US Supreme Court ruled that teletext technology was indeed not subject to the rules of the Fairness Doctrine.  And, to obliterate any further misunderstandings as to the application of the Fairness Doctrine, the US Supreme Court simply ruled it out of existence in 1987.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 ordered the FCC to conduct a biennial review of its rules to determine whether or not they were still in the "public interest" in light of newer competition.  That public interest was what the FCC was originally established to safeguard.  However, as a result of that act and of a slow deregulation of big business, more and more avenues of communication and media have been bought up by fewer and fewer companies with one result being that over 4,000 previously independent radio stations have been bought out and minority ownership of television stations has dropped to its lowest figure since 1990.

In 2003 the FCC, with one public hearing held, voted to virtually eliminate any and all regulations regarding bans on media consolidation.  That was later over turned in 2004 and the US Supreme Court turned down an appeal to that ruling.  However, in 2007 and 2013, the FCC again moved to relax multi-ownership rules.

In 2004 the FCC granted digital TV licenses to all previous owners of analog TV licenses without an auction, meaning in essence, that only those larger companies with already held licenses were granted access to the impending new technology.  Later, the FCC ordered all national and local TV stations to switch from analog to digital capacity and therefore, forced the public to switch out their old televisions for new ones capable of receiving digital signals.  As of June 12, 2009, all full power analog terrestrial TV licenses in the US were terminated.

Due to resentment over ever-increasing cable and satellite TV fees and an increase in the availability of movies and TV shows online, more and more people began to cut their ties with the fewer and fewer Big Media corporations.  However, those cuts could only extend as far as their television sets; Big Media still owns the phone lines and our access to the Internet.

That is a simplified and loose history to what has happened to the "public interest" in access to communication.  Robert McChesney writes about this extensively, but his book, "Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times", is probably the best, close up look at what has happened to the media in the US.

Finally, this article which was recently released on The Verve's site gives a chilling look into what is happening to the Internet:

The internet is fucked

Sweet dreams!