A usual Bush stooge striking a blow against Big Bizniz greed and selfishness? For a change, we salute FCC Chairman Kevin Martin

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin (center) -- for once on the same side as his usual antagonists, Democratic commissioners Michael Copps (left) and Jonathan Adelstein (right) -- is under siege from the Bizniz Right.

by Ken

If you had asked me anytime before the past week, I would have said that FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is a low-down weasel, exactly the sort of scum-sucking weasel you'd expect to be put at the helm of a regulatory commission under the Bush regime, in the tradition of Michael Powell. But now on one crucial issue he has actually separated himself from right-wingers' normal "whatever big bizniz wants is good for the rest of youse" philosophy and appears to be joining the two Democrats on the commission, Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, in blowing the whistle on some corporate bad guys and striking a crucial blow for the ever-endangered concept of net neutrality.

And, naturally, the full wrath of the Bizniz Right is falling on poor Kevin, notably in the form of a blistering editorial in -- you guessed it -- the Wall Street Journal.

Our friend Matt Stoller of OpenLeft, an indefatigable crusader for net neutrality and the relatively open Internet it makes possible, writes in a post today, "When Republicans Get It Right: FCC Chair Kevin Martin": "I keep rereading the WSJ in disbelief. Literally everything in it is untrue or highly misleading."

Matt sets out the background:

Here's what's going. Some time ago, the cable giant Comcast began illegal blocking access its subscribers had to file sharing software in its first documented instance of violating net neutrality, or the principle that similar types of data on the internet be treated equally. We know that Comcast likes to censor -- it blocked ads critical of corrupt Democrat Chris Carney because they included criticism of Comcast contributions to Carney -- and we know that if it is not stopped, it will eventually shape the internet the way that China shapes the internet, for its own political and financial purposes. That's not an indictment of the company, incidentally, more of a recognition that powerful organizations that control communications networks and have content to sell have a business and political incentive to block alternate viewpoints and content.

To the surprise of, well, pretty much everybody, Chairman Martin has agreed with Democratic Commissioners Copps and Adelstein that Comcast had been caught red-handed doing something that is clearly forbidden and that the FCC has to step in. The fear now, though, is that, with a final vote on the question about to come up, our Kevin may need all the support he can get to withstand the unbridled fury of the Greed and Selfishness Establishment.

Matt is only too happy to take you through the astonishing tissue of fabrications and misrepresentations the WSJ has strung together; by all means check out his account. The key thng right now is to make sure that Chairman Martin and all concerned hear some loud outcry in support of the common-sense blow this unusual FCC majority seems poised to strike for fair access to the Internet.

#

How do you push back against Bush regime bullies? Well, you can start by standing up to the SOBs

1. THE BUSH REGIME'S INFORMATION SUPPRESSORS RUN INTO A "STRAIGHT-TALKING TEXAN" JUDGE WHO BELIEVES IN THE LAW

We know, of course, that there's practically nothing the Bush regimists hate more than facts. In that gorgeous Daily Show phrase, "The facts are biased." One thing they definitely hate more than facts themselves is those facts' escaping their vault-tight containment. Regimists' basic attitude toward letting go of information--of just about any kind--is approximately:

For us to know,
for you to go fuck yourselves.

Nobody has fought the regime's stranglehold on information--information that by rights belongs to us, the people who employ those criminal scumbags--more stalwartly than CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington). And yesterday U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth (who, it might be noted, headed the FISA court from 1995 to 2002--in which connection he was described by CNN's Henry Schuster as "a straight-talking Texan") ruled in favor of CREW, handing the Bush regime a notable setback with a common-sense judgment that the Secret Service's White House visitor logs are public records subject to the Freedom of Information Act--just as they have always been considered to be.

As Michael Abramowitz reports in today's Washington Post:

A federal judge ruled yesterday that White House visitor logs created by the Secret Service are public records, and he ordered information involving the visits of nine conservative Christian leaders with Bush administration officials to be released to an advocacy group.

The dispute involved an effort by the administration to keep secret the records, which have traditionally allowed the news media and Congress to keep tabs on who has visited the White House or the vice president's residence. Administration lawyers have taken the position that the logs are presidential records, outside the scope of the Freedom of Information Act.

U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth rejected this argument, saying the records qualify as "agency records" subject to disclosure. He also rejected the claim that the records should be kept secret to preserve the confidentiality of presidential and vice presidential deliberations, noting that even a Cheney aide testified that the purpose of the visits is not apparent from the documents.

"Knowledge of these visitors would not disclose presidential communications or shine a light on the President's or Vice President's policy deliberations," Lamberth wrote in his opinion.

Officials with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which sued to obtain the records, expressed satisfaction. "CREW is pleased that the judge saw through the White House's transparent attempts to hide public documents from the American people. We look forward to sharing the documents we obtain through this lawsuit," said Executive Director Melanie Sloan.

2. MAYBE FINAL CONSOLIDATION OF THE CORPORATE CHOKEHOLD ON U.S. MEDIA WON'T BE SUCH A CAKEWALK AFTER ALL

With the clock possibly ticking on Republican control of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), it becomes increasingly important for superstooge FCC Chairman Kevin Martin to ram through new rules accomplishing the Bush regime's desired acceleration of the consolidation of American media in the hands of a few right-wing propaganda (and money-minting) titans like Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. and radio monopolist Clear Channel. Today's news is the stirring of some organized pushback.

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) had a big day yesterday. In addition to joining nine Senate colleagues in voting against cloture of debate on proposed extension of the Protect America Act, she sent a stern letter to Chairman Martin, cosigned by a bipartisan group of 24 other senators, warning of congressional readiness to step in. Her office issued this press release:

WASHINGTON, DC--Monday, U.S. Senator Cantwell (D-WA) and a bipartisan group of senators wrote to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin Martin telling him that if the FCC proceeds to take final action on his proposed media ownership rules on December 18 without giving the public enough time to comment, she will immediately introduce and move legislation to revoke and nullify the December 18, 2007 rule. At a Commerce Committee Hearing last Thursday, Cantwell expressed to Martin her concern that the FCC’s proposed new rules will increase media consolidation and hurt competition, diversity, and localism.

“Congress is certainly not afraid to take action against the FCC,” said Cantwell. “Time and again we’ve told the FCC that if it moves forward without adequate feedback from the public, there will be consequences. There are consequences to ignoring the American public’s right to participate fully in the rule making process. In the Senate, we’re going to make sure that if we have to pass legislation stopping the FCC, we will.”

Martin introduced his proposed rules to eliminate the longstanding prohibition of common ownership between a daily newspaper and a television or radio station on November 13, 2007, four days after the FCC held a public hearing on media ownership in Seattle. At the hearing, nearly 800 Washingtonians spent nine hours sharing their viewpoints with the FCC-- the vast majority in strong opposition to increasing media concentration. Martin plans to bring the proposed rule up for a vote on December 18, 2007, even though the public has had only three weeks to comment on the proposed rule, and the FCC has had one week to review those comments.

Cantwell will also continue her work with Senators Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and others on the Media Ownership Act of 2007 to restore a deliberative process to the FCC’s rulemakings on localism and media ownership. A major piece of the Act strengthens the public’s ability to comment on proposed rules.

Cosigning the letter with Senator Cantwell were 20 Democrats, 1 Independent (no, not Holy Joe--don't be ridiculous), and 4 Republicans:

Ted Stevens (R-Alaska)
Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota)
Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)
Trent Lott (R-Mississippi)
Hillary Clinton (D-New York)
Barack Obama (D-Illinois)
John Kerry (D-Massachusetts)
Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)
Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)
Kent Conrad (D-South Dakota)
Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
Mark Pryor (D-Arkansas)
Blanche Lincoln (D-Arkansas)
Robert Casey (D-Pennsylvania)
Dianne Feinstein (D-California)
Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)
Bernard Sanders (I-Vermont)
Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin)
Bill Nelson (D-Florida)
Joe Biden (D-Delaware)
Jon Tester (D-Montana)
Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut)
Larry Craig (R-Idaho)
Barbara Boxer (D-California)
Robert Menendez (D-New Jersey)

#

FCC CHAIRMAN KEVIN MARTIN: SNOTTY LITTLE REPUBLICAN SOCIOPATH

-by Noah

While media outlets distract the populace with the doings of barely sentient human-like cretins such as Britney, Paris, and Pat Robertson, endless 24 hour coverage of the latest kidnapped white girl (apparently kidnapped "others" don't rate unless they're the grandchildren of a right-wing congressloon taken by their mom), OJ's life story, constant attempts to get you to focus all of your frustrations on immigrants so you'll scapegoat them instead of the real corporate culprits, put criminal former Congressional leaders on camera 10 hours a day, enrich them and proclaim them experts on everything from tax code to God's will (like they'd know), something much more insidious is going on.

Our corporate media is becoming one very dangerous, mind-numbing, opinion controlling voice, hypnotically drilling its corporatist slogans into the public mind with that ONE voice. No diversity of
opinion. Forget Pravda. Forget Hitler's Big Lie. The world Orwell warned us about so many decades ago is here. Instead of telling you that the Food and Drug Administration has been gutted to the point of e.coli death by spinach dysfunction by the current criminal Lex Luther wannabe in the People's White House, they'll pump up the fear level about mystery plagues that are on our doorstep, due any day now, brought to you, no doubt, by the dreaded immigrants, or, worse, the Muslim family that's been living next door to you for the last 20 years. Instead of telling you who is profiting from the war, they'll tell you it's a war against terror and not a war for oil profits. They also won't tell you that while Saudi oil is now $100 a barrel, Venezuelan oil is half that. Why won't they tell you? Well, maybe it's because the biggest crime family in our country has "a close personal relationship" with their buddies, the Saudi royals while their relationship with Hugo Chavez is... not so good. They won't get their cut of the booty with the swarthy Latino guy. The media even tell you Chavez is nuts. Yeah, like Saudis who flog rape VICTIMS with 200 lashes and hold public beheadings every Tuesday afternoon are sane! Can anyone convince me that Bush is sane? Don't waste your valuable OJ News time trying. Saddam's biggest crime was that our leaders weren't getting a piece of the action. Chavez better watch out. How often do you hear that on your TV or read it in your paper or weekly corporate news rag? Nope, it's all Britney all the time. Everyone likes to run down the street to see the car crash.

How'd it come to this? It started with old senile Ronald Reagan's unholy lust for deregulation and his repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, a doctrine which mandated equal time provisions. It continued up through the present, enabled by some of the worst Presidents (including the absolute worst) this country has ever had. I now include cigar aficionado Bill Clinton. After all, it was he who between chasing plumpers around his desk in the Oval Office, found time to sign the Telecommunications Act Of 1996, a bill that was sold as a chance for the little guy to own a TV station. Yeah right. Now, due to the resulting merger and acquisition mania, you or any minority investor can buy an FM radio station, as long as they can meet the ever rising price tag, which zoomed to $200 million because of Clinton's pen. What the act was really designed to do is what it did. That one thing undid a lot of whatever good Clinton did for the country. It headed us down to Orwell land and totalitarian government. It removed restrictions on just how many media outlets a corporation could own. The result was a bunch of goons in San Antonio creating Clear Channel and buying up every station they could get their slimy money on. Now, instead of thousands of individual shows, you get the same damn one where ever you go, in the country or on the dial. All programming will soon come from one place. You already don't hear of the many Bush scandals and crimes in the mainstream media. Don't get me wrong. Clear Channel is not the only one of its nefarious kind. There's Infinity and a few others, all structured along the same lines. Just six media conglomerates control virtually everything you see and hear in the media. That goes for Radio, TV, Papers, Magazines, Books, and Films. Where there once was a multitude of diverse programming and opinion voices, now there is just a handful. Soon the mergers will increase and eventually there will be just one, kinda like State Radio; you know, like they had in the good old days of the Soviet Union. Just who won the Cold War anyway? What's happening to our media is the stuff that totalitarian governments are built on.

Dictators have dreams too. Their's consist of, among waterboarding and other delights, a media which just parrots government and corporate press release hand outs, kinda like the New York Times reporting on WMDs in Iraq. It isn't just Congress that protects Bush from Impeachment, Conviction, and Imprisonment for high crimes and the treason of outing CIA agents.

Now, the FCC wants to go even further. Despite a massive public outcry, FCC Chairman, Kevin Martin wants even more media consolidation. He's doing Bush's bidding. He wants to lift a ban on one company owning both a TV outlet and a newspaper in one market. Keep in mind that the FCC's charge is to ensure diversity, localism, access, and fairness. These concepts are an anathema to Republicans  and dictators. Showing typical Repug disdain for "ordinary citizens," Martin argues, unconvincingly, because like always with Repugs, the reality-based facts just don't back him up, that newspapers will wither and die unless they can have a TV station too. I would argue that our nation's newspapers would sell more copies if they actually had something people wanted to read other than government press handouts which go unedited and unquestioned by "reporters" and "editors" who would fail a junior high school journalism class. TV stations already have canned, prepackaged programming from government agencies that they run as news. Fake is fake, no matter what the media calls it. On top of all of this, the average profit margin of a typical newspaper in this country is a healthy 17-18%. That's higher than the average Fortune 500 company. So, who's suffering? In addition, two-thirds of our papers are already owned by conglomerates.

Martin also deviously claims that lifting the ban would only cover the Top 20 markets. Not so. He conveniently fails to mention a loophole that would open up all markets to the same corporate monopoly. I guess he forgot, but then, snakes like this heinous Bush tool (His previous job was General Counsel for Bush/Cheney during the Florida recount.) are not exactly in favor of Freedom of Information and a free exchange of ideas. Thomas Jefferson once said that if he was given the choice between a government without a free press or a free press without a government, he would opt for the latter. Kevin Martin is no Thomas Jefferson. If people like Martin have their way, coming generations of Americans will never even hear about Jefferson OR that little document he wrote called The Constitution. Like another Bush crony, Alberto Gonzales said about the Geneva Conventions being "quaint," I guess Martin feels same about The Constitution. We already know his boss does.

Finally, some reserved types would say we shouldn't get personal when writing about enemies of the country. I'm not one of those. Better men than cloying, sycophantic Kevin Martin have sold out their integrity for lowlifes like Bush and the chance of a very profitable post administration career in the corporate sector. Let's see what media corporation Martin ends up with in a high paying gig. Colin Powell, who's son Michael preceded Martin, was at least once thought to be a man of integrity before he threw it all out the window and lied, not just to his country, but the entire world about WMDs. Kevin Martin doesn't even rise to the stature of Chemical Ali, and, if you look at him in the video (below), Kevin needs a tailor REAL BAD. What's with those pants Kevin? Yeesh!