Wednesday, June 11, 2014


From FAIR via AlterNet:

USA Today Calls Walmart Protesters "Party Poopers"

You see, the company's events are usually star-studded sessions, "like the Oscars with a little bit of business," as a company rep explains. Last year superstar Tom Cruise showed up.

And this year? USA Today says there are some things planned, and they don't sound so fun:

Ahead of this year's shareholders' meeting, a working-mothers group seeking higher pay protested in 20 cities this week, and dozens are expected to picket at the shareholders meeting.

Wow, way to spoil a good time.

More here.

Liberal media, liberal media, liberal media.  I've heard that refrain nearly my entire life, and I used to believe it, by and large, because that's what everybody said, all the time.  Actually, people continue to say it, especially conservatives.  As far as I can tell, the foundation of this assertion is twofold: first, most reporters tend to vote Democratic, and, second, the news media often reports things that conservatives don't like.  The second one we can just dismiss because it's stupid.  When reality doesn't fit your ideology, you change your ideology rather than bitch about reality.  The first one is only slightly more complicated.

I think that reporters probably do vote Democratic, but the Dems haven't been terribly liberal for a very long time.  Actually, when you throw out the so-called social issues, gay marriage, birth control, abortion, diversity, etc., the Democrats are over-the-top conservative, having bought into the Reagan economic consensus when Clinton and his New Democrats came to power in the early 90s.  So being a Democrat does not make you a liberal.  Actually, being a Democrat generally means that you embrace Reaganomics, neoliberalism, whatever you want to call it, conservative economics.  And that's why I'm not a Democrat.  Because they're not liberal.  They're a corporate capitalist party.

So it means nothing that so many reporters vote for Democrats.  Actually, it means they have a pro-business bias, which is conservative, not liberal.  And that ties very nicely into another observation generally ignored by the "liberal media" pushers: the news media are all big businesses, which consequently means that, in spite of reporters who vote Democrat, or, more likely, in perfect harmony with reporters who vote Democrat, the news media are composed of conservative organizations--this is assuming that you agree with me that capitalist corporations are, by definition, conservative.

And you see this pro-big business bias all over the place, all the time.  I mean, really.  Labor activists are "party poopers"?  Such a characterization could ONLY be formulated by a news organization that doesn't take labor seriously at all, which is basically all corporate news media businesses.  We used to see some big time labor reporting in this country decades ago, but that was before the news became big business.  Now all we have is business reporting, and screw the labor movement.  That's conservative.  Not liberal.

Because there is no "liberal media."*

(Okay, we do have the Nation magazine, and Mother Jones and the like, and MSNBC sometimes pushes against specific corporations, but never GE, and never the corporate system itself.  So there is a "liberal media," it's just describing a distinct minority, rather than the whole shebang.)