 |
John Edwards On Media Consolidation |
 |
At the Yearly Kos convention, I had the opportunity to ask a question about media consolidation to seven of the eight Presidential candidates present at the forum. My question was:
With only a handful of companies controlling the majority of news and information Americans consume, media consolidation and the lack of viewpoint diversity is threatening our democracy. How do you plan to support equal access to broadcast media?
The question was directed at Senator Dodd, and was then bumped over to Hillary Clinton. Dodd got a huge round of applause by pledging to stand up to corporations such as News Corp. not only as President, but also right now, during his time as a Senator. Clinton’s answer was less inspiring. She talked vaguely about competition and supporting net neutrality, but there were no firm proposals or pledges, only a promise to take a look at legislation in the future. You can see the full exchange here.
That question was not my original submission. In order to try and get a straight answer from the candidates, the parts originally included that dealt with net neutrality and increased broadband access for Americans were cut. I wanted to get a full answer on the three related issues from all of the candidates, and so I have emailed their campaigns. The first response I got back was from John Edwards, who pledged to answer questions from anyone who attended the Yearly Kos convention. True to his word, I received this message last week:
Jason -
Thank you for joining me in Chicago. I appreciate that you took the time to follow up on your questions about media consolidation.
The basis of a strong democracy begins and ends with a strong, unbiased and fair media - all qualities which are pretty hard to subscribe to Fox News and News Corp. The reality is that Americans deserve more news outlets - not fewer. It’s time for all Democrats, including those running for president, to stand up and speak out against this merger and other forms of media consolidation.
Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I had a great weekend in Chicago and was excited to see so many people out supporting the fight for transformational change in America. I appreciate the thoughtful questions about the important issues facing voters, and I hope I have answered yours.
Best Wishes,
John Edwards
I’m glad that Edwards took the time to write a personal response and I’m pleased with his answer. Creating more news outlets is a great goal and media consolidation is an issue that is far too often ignored, especially on the national stage. However, Edwards did not answer all of my questions, and so I’ve emailed this response to his campaign:
Mr. Edwards:
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my question. Your position is a heartening first step in the fight against media consolidation.
To follow up on the issue, I have a question and a request. First, what specifically would you do as President to fight media consolidation, ensure net neutrality, and increase broadband access for unconnected Americans?
Second, I would love to see you talk about this issue on the national stage a bit more. Media consolidation too often gets ignored by both parties, yet it is something people care about very deeply and something that touches nearly every aspect of our democracy. Any increased awareness from you on this issue would certainly go a long way towards winning my primary vote, and would most likely convince many others that John Edwards is the right candidate for the Presidency.
Thank you,
Jason
I will keep everyone here updated with respect to any response I receive, and of course I will post if I hear back from any of the other campaigns as well.
If you feel strongly about this issue, why not email the Edwards campaign (or any other campaign) about the issue along with me? The more pressure the candidates get, the more likely it is that media consolidation will be discussed in the future. Your help is appreciated, and if you get a response, be sure to let me know.
Wow, this is Soooooo bold - NOT! You want to hear a bold president speak with total disregard of consequences on this matter? How about a 4 min JFK audio - go to linked blog and type in JFK in search window, listen - you will be shocked. Then type in ‘constitution’ in the search window and listen to Michael Bednarik class on the constitution - tell me you have rights - go ahead!
“More media outlets” isn’t a very solid metric.
SOP for tinpot dictators is to create the illusion of democracy by creating more political parties. Of course, none of them end up being viable candidates and all are subservient.
–
The Banjo Players Must Die
If Edwards really said this, then he needs a new speech writer: the word should be “ascribe” (”to attribute to”) not “subscribe” (”to adopt as belief”).
The first 2 commenters have some good points, although not so much with the attitudes. (Psst, No. 1: it’s spelled Badnarik.)
OK, but here’s the problem — John Edwards is no network expert. Maybe his heart is in the right place, but his knowledge of the Internet almost certainly isn’t. Take for example Olympia Snowe and Byron Dorgan, who have sponsored a net neutrality bill. It’s way too restrictive, outlawing perfectly reasonable ISP pricing plans because packet prioritization sounds like “discrimination.”
But it’s not — it’s data management. Ask any network engineer — guys like George Ou at ZDNet or Richard Bennett at http://bennett.org/blog — “net neutrality” has been blow way out of proportion. I consult for a group in DC that opposes Dorgan-Snowe. We have a pretty good blog covering all these issues, if you click through my name. Take care.
Net neutrality is most certainly not being blown out of proportion. I think it’s no suprise that countries like Japan hold to net neutrality and common carrier models and are lightyears ahead of America in terms of connectivity, speed, and application. As a counter to Hands Off, check out http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/08/29/a-tale-of-two-cities/
Don’t you know the first rule of email? If you ask someone several questions in an email you will get an answer to the first question, maybe an answer to the second, and there is a vanishingly small chance of answers to any further questions.