Glenn Reynolds:

"A READER AT A MAJOR NEWSROOM EMAILS: "Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working." I asked permission to reprint without attribution and it was granted."


Of course this has been true for a while and it's all the more reason that The Conservative Consumers Union is needed. Again, the CCU would use the buying power of American Conservatives to go after MSM news organizations where it hurts - in the advertising revenues - to pressure these news organizations to print the WHOLE truth and not just their biased little end of it.

Most if not all of MSM is owned and run by companies that exist to make money. The lion share of that money is in advertising. Simply put CCU would work to hold advertisers accountable for their backing of biased media coverage by withholding patronizing their products. This would be more than a letter campaign, or phone calls and emails, but would be all encompassing. For instance running ads that expose advertisers and media figures for their bias while asking others not to support them would be one approach.

How effective would this be? Studies have shown that a lot of advertising is in fact geared towards conservatives, espcially those who are successful have families and money. While liberals fall into this category the numbers aren’t as great.

In short it’s good old fashion people power.

We all know that the media has been ignoring many of the scandals and stories about Barack Obama because by their own admission they are rooting for him to win the election. MSM outlets feel that they simply do not have to answer to the masses and report their view of things and to those who disagree it’s “eat cake”.

However if enough pressure would come to bear on the advertisers of CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN and yes even FOX, that might just change.

We know it does for we have seen accountability forced on media by the great work of bloggers and other new media people. Just last week this blog - along with others - called for a boycott of US Weekly for that trashy cover of Sarah Palin and son Trig. The result was over 10,000 subscriptions cancelled. At the present subscription price that cost the magazine over $250,000.

Remember that one person forced CBS to cancel a mini-series on Ronald Reagan back in 2003.

They say money talks and they are right. It does talk and the power of it can force the powers over these outlets to get it right, or get off the air.

Again, this is just a concept, but in the process of making it a reality.

1 comments

  1. Howard  

    10/01/2008 12:02:00 PM

    Your presumption that media is in business to make money is false. Look at all the "hate America" movies that all lose money. Look at how many newspapers have just folded up without a wimper. Ditto the magazines.

    The owners and managers are left wing idealogues to whom money, success, and winning are all evil. Most are part of multi national conglomerates that are immune from any pain when one of a thousand owned affiliates lose money. They all go to the same parties, same clubs etc., and it is a social thing. Making money is bad. Only when some of their stars revolt is anything done. MSNBC was shocked when Andrea Mitchell and Dick Gregory went to Immult at a meeting and just exploded at him because of the diluting of the NBC news department because of Matthews and Olberman. Just like magic both have been moved to invisible time slots. Money had nothing to do with it, left politics is Immults thing.

Support our Vets!



Macsmind - Official Blog of The MacRanger Show on Blog Talk Radio