The Humanist, May-June 1997 v57 n3 p3(1)

                 Reporting the world through conglomerate-colored glasses.
            (large media companies) (Column) J. Bonasia.

            Abstract: The corporate concentration of power in the media is becoming a major problem, but this topic is
            rarely broached in the mainstream media. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was not covered adequately in
            the press, just as corporate welfare rarely gets much attention.

            Full Text: COPYRIGHT 1997 American Humanist Association Most people realize that the ABC television
            network (and news department) is owned by Disney/Capital Cities, NBC by General Electric, CBS by
            Westinghouse, and CNN by Times-Warner. But one would never know these facts by watching the nightly
            news.

            The problem of corporate mergers does not appear on the national policy agenda. Few news programs, radio
            talk shows, or newspaper editorials debate the dangers of increased media concenration. So even if it's no
            secret that our primary perceptions of the world are filtered through the cloudy lenses of international
            entertainment, appliance, and weapons superconglomerates, this is not perceived as a problem to be solved by
            well informed citizens in a representative democracy. Perhaps it is because we are not that well informed after
            all.

            A fine example of this filtering effect occurred in connection with congressional approval of the
            Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Judicial action that followed, striking down certain of the law's
            censorship provisions. This may be the most far reaching piece of legislation signed in our lifetime, a law that
            literally defines the infrastructure of our nation's seemingly limitless telecommunications future. But if pundits and
            citizens concerned themselves with the bill at all--and most didn't--they debated the much ballyhooed v-chip in
            the context of its ability to keep certain material from children watching television.

            All told, the v-chip comprises only a negligible portion of the law, but that was what the media moguls wanted
            us to focus on--the decency issues--and so we did. The news strung us out on sensationalistic stories about on
            line debauchery and Internet sex and graphic violence instead of the more significant realities of financial
            bonanzas and regulatory giveaways to the already massive entertainment, media, and telecommunications
            combines.

            Along similar lines, important stories about white collar swindles are buried deep inside the newspaper, if
            reported at all, while the front page--and radio and TV news--is obsessed with lowly neighborhood hoodlums.
            Might this also have to do with corporate control of these media outlets?

            The real dirt is often placed on an inside page of the newspaper business section to avoid notoriety, unless it is
            just too outrageous and sleazy, like the tobacco executives who allegedly spiked cigarettes with nicotine or
            covered up the known carcinogenic effects of their products. In such extreme cases, the corporate criminals
            make the front page but, otherwise, you just don't read or hear about day-to-day corporate dealings unless you
            dig.

            One might ask why current debate on welfare reform rarely touches upon corporate welfare. Consider that, in
            1995, the federal government paid $7.6 billion in subsidies to defense companies alone to help sell their
            weapons abroad. That's $7.6 billion in taxpayer handouts in one year to enable private conglomerates like
            Lockheed Martin and McDonnell Douglas to peddle their spaceage weaponry for big bucks to smaller, warring
            countries. That money could have bought a lot of textbooks for disadvantaged students or provided housing for
            thousands of low income citizens. Instead, we invested it in a few American companies that profit from the
            blowing up of thousands of people overseas.

            This is the national information subterfuge at work. It means rarely telling citizens where their tax money is really
            going. It means distracting them with notions that their taxes are being sucked up by welfare recipients, foreign
            aid, and the National Endowment for the Arts.

            We don't broach the subject of corporate control as we should. We seem to regard it as taboo, for some
            reason. If anything, the topic causes a mere blip on the national agenda before we divert our attention back to
            kinder, gentler issues--like seances hosted by the First Lady, the latest risque cover of People magazine, or the
            most recent Michael Jackson scandal.

            As our world becomes racked with subtle technologies and an ever more cannibalistic economy, Americans are
            experiencing a transformation in the way we perceive society and, thus, perceive our own lives. We are
            bombarded with obvious corporate messages--in advertisements, commercials, and the like. Must they invade
            the rest of our world as well?

            J. Bonasia is a freelance journalist whose work has appeared in the San Diego Union-Tribune, the Memphis
            Flyer, and the Alternet Index, among many others.
 
 
            Article A19399178