'MSM' is NOT mainstream! Use 'news monopolies'

Mainstream media is a misnomer, and beside it is way to flattering as well. It suggests a 'widely accepted' or an 'accepted by majority' undertones. It is defenately misleading in a time when nearly half the 'consumers of news' getting it from alternative news source. Indeed this better half is not only consumers, but many times participators as well in the newsmaking process. The trend show, that popularity of the alternative media is rising, with the coresponding decline of MSM.
I heard the term 'corporate news media' a few times before. Would that term would be more acceptable?

I have been using the term "corporate media" but that includes all the entertainment, sitcoms, reality, sports, etc. And there is something to that, especially when its advertising supported, it's ALL propaganda. But I can see that "news monopolies" is the way to go for the NEWS specific entities like FOX News and CNN and whatever - and that's a good target to concentrate on.

Yeah, I like it - they're monopolies because they are in the exclusive control of global capital. "Exclusive control" is the dictionary thing for "monopoly". People and real journalists have no control there at all.

Thanks for the thought.

getting the weather, about the only semi-reliable information you can get from the crystal box, I noticed the corp. media, news monopolies, and infotainers keep repeating govt. propaganda like parakeets. When you repeat something over and over the same exact way, it's a sign that only you believe what your regurgitating, you've convinced yourself.

It's becoming comical to see their mistakes, a 3d splash interrupts the weather for, DUN DUN DUN, "THE IRAQ CONFLICT"...yet when the infotainer speaks I hear "Iraq War". Wich is it? War, conflict, altercation, occupation?

Next was the "terrorist mastermind" zarqawi sideshow. C'mon, if he was a mastermind he certainly wouldn't be hanging out in Iraq, Bin laden isn't, and I thought he was a mastermind...cuckoo, cuckoo

they also were kind enough to grace me with their analysis of "radical cleric" al-sadr. Radical? For crying out loud, we should start using, "activist president george bush", "fundamentalist evangelical tom delay", "unamerican congress", "lawless politicians", and on and on and on.

If you want to call them something, that will stick, you must repeat it over and over for the american people to understand. News monopolies is good, but it doesn't hurt as much. What if all the news did was talk about entertainment(almost), then it would be an entertainment news monopoly.(infotainment)

I find people understand corp. media. Because many people have been shafted by the corporations(there is also a movie to help the gullible understand). corp media=corp. interest=corp. profit. Following the news monopolies model, I feel this will result in more laws to control the evil corporate media(actually independent media). However, nothing stops you(in a free society), to create your own monopoly. For instance a truth monopoly.

Rather then say, "news monopolies did this today", why not shine light on the alternative. Independent media paves the way to break up those monopolies. "what is independent media", someone might say. If someone asks you what is a news monopoly, they will think your talking about a conspiracy and tune you out(gullible people don't like to feel stupid). Instead, introduce them to "independent media", this helps people bridge over to the realization that they have been duped by the news monopoly on their own. Self discovery is more enlightening.

Corporations like to make money, if talking about michael jackson makes money, what can you do? Some people don't like to hear it, others thrive on knowing who is controlling what(and them), at least in a country where free press is part of the constitution. From the church comittee we learned that the intelligence community had infiltrated the media. Are journalists liars, or do they fear assassination once they discover they have been pushing lies? Do some cave in and "sellout", of course. Independent music is better then corporate music, independent food is better then corporate food, and ultimately, people will and are realizing that independent news is better then..."corp. news/media".

The problem, is that the feds know this too, so they will introduce "laws" to make sure everything is fair and square(meaning strangling the real free press/independent media.)

Focus on the positive, give people answers in the sound bytes you develop. Let the words explain themselves but also provide the alternative all in one shot. If your going to convince people your way is better, you have to hold their hands, lead them to the water, and hope they drink.

Keep referring to star wars and the neocons, over and over, they hate that(because everyone loves the rebels). Use sound bytes over and over. "fundamentalist evangelical senator tom delay said today....". I agree with your news monopolies, but, unfortunately, in order to break through, your going to have to market the truth and attack the sources. News monopolies just shines light on this big ominous scary powerful entity, I would rather put them in their place and steal the market(or help create a new one), using their blunders against them. Let them make the moves and then point them out(just like they point out that zarqawi is a "TERRORIST MASTERMIND"). I don't think he's a mastermind, if he was, he'd be living the good live like bin laden(maybe he is). corp. media=corp. interest=corp profit=tune in to independent media.