Skip to main content

Only a month ago, Republicans were vowing to block yet another action that would help tilt democracy back in favor of the people.  (You know, the non-corporate kind.)

Republicans Back Down On Effort to Defund Transparency Rule

by Justin Elliott, ProPublica, June 20, 2012

The maneuver to defund the transparency rule attracted media attention and sparked outrage from outside public interest groups and Democrats.

But in a full committee hearing this morning, the Republicans backed down. Emerson offered a new amendment that removed the defunding language.

A Democratic aide on the Appropriations committee aide told ProPublica that the increasing attention on campaign finance after Citizens United made it difficult for Republicans to oppose the FCC’s transparency rule.  

“The backstory is that the majority thought they would slip this language in and no one would make a ruckus over it,” the aide said. “I don’t think the staff quite realized what they were getting into.”

What a difference some internet sunlight can make ... vampire squids and sewer rats, hate the sunlight too.

[Image Source: -- Vampire Squids, Vampyroteuthis infernalis]

Back in June, it was "business as usual" for Republican Congressmen, working on the sly to: enable millionaire donors to remain unseen in their millionaire shadows -- despite whatever the Supremes had said about the vital need for disclosing the very same.

For the R's it's all about grabbing power and keeping it -- their pseudo-constitutional rhetoric is only their vehicle for doing so ... just check their actions -- to test their motives.

Republicans Block Online Disclosure Of Campaign Television Ad Spending

by Adam Peck, -- Jun 9, 2012

The Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision has created a flood of television ad spending -- hundreds of millions of dollars -- from outside groups, corporations, and individuals. The Justices who voted for the decision and its supporters argue that disclosure is all voters need to make informed decisions. But yesterday, a panel of House Republicans moved to keep much of this spending in the dark.

A new FCC guideline that would have forced the nation’s top television stations to list the funders behind political advertisements online.

The FCC was going to put the purchasers of campaign ads on-line, for all the world to see. Republicans, taking their cues from their wealthy benefactors -- and from that "liberal media" -- were plotting and scheming to STOP these best-made FCC plans.

Republicans vote to block transparency on political ads

by Justin Elliott, ProPublica -- Jun 10, 2012

The FCC voted in April to require television stations to put detailed data on political ad purchases online. The information, which includes who buys ads, for how much, and when they run, is currently open to the public but is available only on paper at individual stations. Media companies have lobbied hard against the rule, and the National Association of Broadcasters recently sued in federal court to stop it. The rule is currently under review by the government and will not go into effect until July at the earliest.

[Image Source: -- The GOP  Horse race]

Afterall who really cares about Free Speech and "the free flow of ideas" when there are billions in non-competitive, take-it-or-leave-it Ad-rates hanging in the "free market" balance?

Certainly not those fading bastions of truth and fact-finding -- the for-profit media story-tellers and sooth-sayers:

Republicans block rule to put political ad buy data...

by Kim Geiger, Tribune Washington Bureau; -- June 08, 2012

Broadcasters, who are expected to reap as much as $3 billion from political ad sales this year, had lobbied heavily against the proposal, arguing that it would cost too much money and would force them to reveal information that would make them less competitive.

Stations are required to offer their lowest ad rates to political campaigns, so making the information easier for the public to access would help inform the station’s competitors and their other customers about the prices they’re charging. (Super PACs are not entitled to the lowest rates.)

Meanwhile, some in the media have sought to make the files public on their own. ProPublica has asked people to visit their local TV stations and submit the paper files for publication. And a group of journalism students from Kent State University, responding to a similar challenge from Bill Moyers, made a video illustrating how cumbersome the task can be.

[Image Source: -- Marinoni's Rotary Printing Press]

Thankfully ProPublica cares.  Cares about Free Speech and "the free flow of ideas." They have taken the initiative to track and expose the "dark money" ad trails wherever they can be be found -- when other forums for our bi-annual "national sporting event" have not ...

Meet the Media Companies Lobbying Against Transparency

by Justin Elliott, ProPublica, April 20, 2012

But now many of the country’s biggest media companies, which own dozens of newspapers and TV news operations, are flexing their muscle in Washington in a fight against a government initiative to increase transparency of political spending.

The corporate owners or sister companies of some of the biggest names in journalism -- NBC News, ABC News, Fox News, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Politico, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and dozens of local TV news outlets -- are lobbying against a Federal Communications Commission measure that would require broadcasters to post political ad data on the Internet.

Among them are:

    News Corp., which owns The Wall Street Journal and Fox News;
    Walt Disney, which owns ABC News and ESPN;
    NBCUniversal, which is owned by Comcast and includes NBC News;
    Allbritton, which owns several TV stations and Politico;
    Gannett Broadcasting, a division of Gannett, which owns USA Today:
    Post-Newsweek Stations, the broadcast division of The Washington Post Co.;
    Belo Cos., which owns 20 TV stations;
    Cox Media Group, which owns The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Austin American-Statesman and other newspapers and TV stations;
    Dispatch Broadcast Group, which owns Ohio and Indiana TV stations;
    Barrington Broadcasting Group, which owns several TV stations around the country;
    The E.W. Scripps Co., which owns TV stations and newspapers, including The Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tenn.;
    Hearst Television Inc., which owns 29 stations;
    Raycom Media, which owns TV stations;
    Schurz Communications, which owns newspapers and TV stations nationwide.

(ProPublica has been inviting readers and other journalists to send in the files to be posted as part of our Free the Files project.)

Here's the people-cobbled version of what new FCC Regs had intended.  All on-line no less.

Gee, it is the 21st Century in America, afterall.  Sort of.  Could be.  Maybe.

Free the Files -- ProPublica

If TV Stations Won’t Post Their Data on Political Ads, We Will

by Daniel Victor, ProPublica -- March 20, 2012

[...] the files could be a window into what may be otherwise undisclosed spending by “dark money” nonprofit groups that are playing an increasing role in the elections.

As our PAC Track interactive chart shows, Restore Our Future has spent more than twice as much as any other PAC so far — nearly $37 million.

There's no telling when our Traditional Corporate Media GIANTS will actually get around to it -- disclosing those hundreds of millions they collect -- from those shadowy figures, intent on buying our elections.

Afterall they're too busy selling those take-it-or-leave-it Ad-Buys, front-row seats to their latest and greatest horse-race -- to actually have to stop and worry about such trivial things.

Things like Transparency and Disclosure ... like democracy and the voice of the people.  Like treating the power and responsibility of the Press, with the respect that it deserves.

You know, like the "founders intended."   Who's got time for that?    

Someone's running for Office for Pete's sake.  Stop the Presses!

[Image Source: -- Wheel of Fortune]

Jeesh, Vanna can you help them buy a clue.  And remind them, about that puzzle hint again:  

"What the Corporate Media is really all about?"  Get ready Joe Six-pack, it's time for you to take your next spin again ... ready, set, Vote!

Originally posted to Digging up those Facts ... for over 8 years. on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 06:44 AM PDT.

Also republished by The Federation.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (12+ / 0-)

    What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
    -- Maslow ...... my list.

    by jamess on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 06:44:06 AM PDT

  •  Business as usual (5+ / 0-)

    or Business of the People?

    These are the stakes: a Speaker Boehner or a Speaker Pelosi
    by jamess -- Jun 22, 2012

    Working-Class Whites a Barrier to a Dem House

    Analysis: Unlike Obama, House Democrats will have trouble forging a majority without that demographic.

    by Josh Kraushaar, -- June 20, 2012

    Democrats are well positioned to pick up seats in the Chicago suburbs (Reps. Joe Walsh/Robert Dold), Denver (Rep. Mike Coffman), and around Las Vegas (Rep. Joe Heck), but could give nearly as many seats back in areas spanning from working-class southwest Pennsylvania (Rep. Mark Critz), coal-producing southern Illinois (retiring Rep. Jerry Costello), rural Little Dixie (retiring Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma) and the expansive countryside of upstate and western New York (Reps. Bill Owens/Kathy Hochul).

    This isn’t a trivial matter. If Democrats struggle to broaden their brand, they will need to thoroughly dominate in the Democratic-trending suburbs to win back control. In 2010, the National Republican Congressional Committee focused on largely white, conservative districts held by veteran Democrats as the gateway to a majority, and succeeded beyond their expectations. A GOP-dominated redistricting process and untimely retirements from Blue Dog members, such as Boren and Rep. Heath Shuler, have offered up fresh opportunities to go on the offensive.

    That reality is making things difficult for Democrats to gain a net of 25 seats to regain the majority. On the top of Democratic target lists are vulnerable Republicans representing white working-class districts, such as Rust Belt freshmen Reps. Bill Johnson and Jim Renacci (Ohio), Sean Duffy (Wisconsin), andDan Benishek (Michigan). Democrats believe the members’ votes for Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget give their opponents a potent line of attack on entitlements. But complicating their prospects are Obama’s weak approval numbers, which in those districts are considerably worse than his middling national approval ratings.

    Meanwhile, in the redistricting process, Republicans paid careful attention to shoring up the districts of vulnerable suburban Republicans, who regularly faced tough reelection campaigns. Members such as Reps.Steve Stivers (Columbus, Ohio), Steve Chabot (Cincinnati), Jim Gerlach (Philadelphia), Pat Meehan(Philadelphia), Daniel Webster (Orlando), and Kevin Yoder (Kansas City, Kan.) are now favored to win another term. The gains have largely offset the new opportunities Democrats have in California and Illinois.

    What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
    -- Maslow ...... my list.

    by jamess on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 06:49:49 AM PDT

  •  The time you put into this shows (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZedMont, jamess, jedennis

    Excellent work, jamess.  Hotlisted so I can refer to it, tipped and rec'd as well, and if I can figure out which groups I belong to that this fits I'll republish it too.

    -7.75, -8.10; All it takes is security in your own civil rights to make you complacent.

    by Dave in Northridge on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 08:11:21 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site