Saturday, June 28, 2003 Univision and Hispanic Media Another partyline FCC vote looks set to hand another section of the media to the republican party. Univision and HBC, two of the largest Hispanic media outlets, are engaged in a merger negotiations which would result in 70% of the Hispanic media market being owned by a single company. Even the merger's backers such as Daniel Gross at Slate concedes that
Univision and HBC are controlled by non-Hispanic shareholders who are also major Republican donors. In the 2000 and 2002 cycles, Perenchio and his family gave $1.1 million to Republicans and $22,000 to Democrats, while Tichenor gave $289,000 to Republicans and $15,000 to Democrats. What's more, Clear Channel Communications Inc., the pro-Bush radio Borg, has a 26 percent stake in Hispanic Broadcasting and will wind up with a small stake in the new entity.
With radio, Univision would expand into a medium that is particularly powerful in the Latin market because Spanish speakers tend to rely on radio for information and entertainment more than other groups, and listen longer, according to research from Arbitron, the commercial rating service. (The company has a 30 percent ownership interest in Entravision Communications Corporation, whose radio stations are Hispanic Broadcasting's main competitor in many Latino markets, but the Justice Department has required Univision to sell most of that stake as a condition not to oppose the merger.) Ray Rodriguez, president and chief operating officer of Univision Networks, said in an interview that Univision needed the competitive advantages that the F.C.C. recently granted when it relaxed media ownership limits, though Congress has begun hearings to possibly to restore those restrictions.
Basically, relying on controvertial party-line legislation that could soon be overturned, and a 3-2 republican imbalance in the FCC, Univision -- a company owned by republican donor's and GWB's own ClearChannel -- hope to corner the Hispanic media market with almost 70% of revenue.
But what is good for business may not necessarily be so for audiences when they are left with fewer choices, critics of the merger argue. They say they worry about the pitfalls of too much media control, such as biased coverage in newscasts and the overplay of artists signed with Univision's labels on Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation stations.
All of which we have seen with ClearChannel already.
Concessions: -Yes, Univision's President donated 50,000 dollars to Gray Davis' Anti-Recall Campaign -Yes, Univision's audience can speak English too. However, surveys (see the NYT article) demonstrate a greater comfort level with Spanish and a tendency for news information to be gathered from radio news broadcasts within the Hispanic media audience.
Something to note: This is not like ClearChannel buying out Infinity Radio and thus controlling 70% of the English radio market. This is like NBC buying out ClearChannel, CBS and DISH Satellite TV and controlling 70% of the English media market at large. Univision is a television company and HBC a radio company.
Posted by Nikhil,
10:08 PM
-
Friday, June 27, 2003 Since the candidates aren't doing too good a job of spreading the word on their own, OnTheIssues.Org is worth this link.
Posted by Nikhil,
9:58 PM
-
MoveOn Results Dean did very well, but was kept below 50%. The Dean campaign is saying that he won the MoveOn primary in a "landslide," which is technically true. While it's a feather in his cap, he doesn't get the endorsement, or access to the PAC. MoveOn has hinted that they won't be running another primary to see if someone (read Dean) can break the 50% mark in a couple of months. Kucinch's campaign just mailed out a statement saying that "If early primaries are about beating expectations, then the clear winner of the MoveOn Primary is Dennis Kucinich ... No other campaign so mightily transcended its late start, made so much of its limited resources, and won so many votes despite lack of media attention or money to spend on phone banking." Perhaps Kucinich is right. The shoestring budget campaign beat the very well funded Kerry. This second place finish could bring a lot of attention to Kucinich.
Other items of note:Sharpton's unbelievably poor showing. Not only did he come in last of the candidates who were on the ballot, he was beaten by a write in candidate who hasn't even publically declared he's a Democrat. And in the second part of the poll, which asked whom each voter would enthusiastically support if their candidate didn't get the nomination, Sharpton was defeated by all, including Lieberman.
No one could even break 5% who wasn't in the top three who were allowed to send a message to the whole MoveOn list in the week before voting.
Just shy of 25% of MoveOn members were willing to vote for a candidate who had been pro-war. Here are the results:
43.87% - DEAN 23.93% - KUCINICH 15.73% - KERRY 3.19% - EDWARDS 2.44% - GEPHARDT 2.24% - GRAHAM 2.21% - BRAUN 2.01% - UNDECIDED 1.92% - LIEBERMAN 0.93% - Wesley Clark 0.53% - SHARPTON 0.24% - Al Gore 0.19% - Hillary Clinton
Also, read Drake Bennett's article in the American Prospect about how the neocon "counterproliferation" strategy vis-a-vis nuclear weapons may very well make the world a more dangerous place. I'm not so sure Bennett characterizes the neocon strategy correctly (his evidence seems to rest on a misquote of Charles Krauthammer), but the second half of the article makes a strong argument for a more multilateral approach to non-proliferation.
Posted by Brad Plumer,
1:59 PM
-
Dems and national security, again
The National Review is certainly guilty of tossing out crude caricatures of the Democrats from time to time, but this sketch by Clifford May is pretty accurate:
Democrats have a choice: (1) Restore their party's credibility on matters of war and peace, or (2) bet that another scandal will get voters angry enough to again throw the Republican rascals out of the White House.
Democrats such as presidential hopeful Howard Dean, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, and Sen. Carl Levin and favor option (2); they're looking to the Carter election as a model. But not content to pray for a new Republican scandal, they're hoping to manufacture one by transforming the mystery over what's become of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction into a scandal.
Too true. We have yet to hear any of the Democratic candidates throw down the gauntlet and force subtantial debates over national security, terrorism and foreign policy. Instead, they're hedging their bets against a potential scandal that a) is tenuous at best, b) could easily backfire and c) probably won't rile up the vast majority of Americans. Now the WMD "lies" should be taken seriously, and the Dems are wise to pursue it. But by making it the primary issue-- strike that, the only issue-- they will lose credibility and fail to create the sort of coherent policy vision that will sway opinion and garner votes.
Kos has a great post today on how our troops are beginning to realize that they're being shortchanged by the Republicans. The widely-read Army Times published a bitter editorial today, excoriating Bush's military cuts. Kos' afterword is short and to the point:
(Every presidential candidate and every elected Democratic official needs to be on the case right now. You have the facts. Use them!)
Seems about right.
Posted by Brad Plumer,
1:50 PM
-
More Ridiculing of homophobes
The queers have won when instead of arguing with the homophobes the queers just ridicule the foaming homophobes. This from anticmuse about Scalia's 'argument' against gay rights:
Second of all, could Anthony Scalia be any gayer? Why isn't he posting in the Corner -- he's that gay.
Check out the hissy-fit he throws in his dissent, basically predicting that overturning Bowers will lead to utter chaos, real wrath of God type stuff! Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness, earthquakes, and volcanos! The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifices, dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!:
State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding. That's right, folks, he just argued that the getting the police out of gay people's bedrooms will lead to pig-fucking. (Or, worse: touching yourself.)
Wahhabis used to be mercilessly persecuted by Saddam, who feared their Taliban-style version of Sunni Islam. Now, however, there is growing suspicion that the once banned extremists are teaming up with the dictator’s old Baath Party loyalists to create the beginnings of an underground insurgency.
Posted by Nikhil,
10:43 AM
-
Why? Howard Dean (or one of 30,000 minions, apparently) sent many of you a long letter asking for money (http://www.deanforamerica.com/contribute, in case you're interested). In 9 paragraphs of weak Bush bashing, Roosevelt praising and campaign-finance-manager praising Dean was unable to say one thing about what he wants to do when he gets into office. Doesn't that have something to do with whether or not people should give him money?
Posted by Nikhil,
5:58 AM
-
The Monkey King Cometh Some of you may have noticed that Joseph Waligore has started blogging here at FreeDartmouth. Yes, that is my father. He is from the class of 1977. Welcome, Dad, and be good.
Posted by Timothy,
1:50 AM
-
Thursday, June 26, 2003 Nike The BBC Reports
The US Supreme Court has said it will not rule on a case that could have defined the difference between free speech and advertising - thus allowing a lawsuit against Nike to go ahead. The case revolves around the question of whether Nike subcontractors in Vietnam, China and Indonesia run sweat shops where workers are abused. Nike launched a public-relations campaign to reject the allegation in the 1990s, leading activist Marc Kasky to sue them - claiming that Nike was engaging in false advertising.
Posted by Nikhil,
9:31 PM
-
Santorum Love Dan Savage, of savage love sex advice fame, wrote a column a few weeks ago about Rick Santorum. Savage said that his readers should name some sex thing after Santorum. The winner was the fecal matter that congeals around KY Jelly. This stuff is now called Santorum. I think this tactic of ridiculing any right wing homophobes is great. Rather than debating these homophobes it is better to ridicule them. Debating them only encourages them and gives them prestige among their base. Ridiculing them makes them ridiculous, not courageous. Here in central rural Wisconsin the word Santorum has already come into popular usage with some people saying worried they shouldn't have anal sex because they don't want the Santorum to get on the clean sheets.
Posted by Joseph,
2:30 PM
-
Wednesday, June 25, 2003 Hey, it worked for the Serbs...
Balkinization is definitely a blog worth reading, written by a Yale Law prof. Most importantly, he's got a couple of in-depth, must-see posts on Patriot Act Jr. (For those with free time and a solid stomach, you can read the full text of Ashcroft's baby here.)
Posted by Brad Plumer,
3:31 PM
-
Kausfiles: US in the way of inspectors' success "This is the view of the inspectors, that they are not getting American intelligence because there are people in the Pentagon who fear that giving them intelligence will make them find things." according to Kaus on Slate.
Posted by Nikhil,
3:31 PM
-
Neighbors gather for reading about war, sex Just wanted to report a highly successful reading of Lysistrata, Aristophanes' ancient anti-war comedy, organized by my neighbors here in Fresno. The 4th century B.C.E. drama, rife with double-entendre, portrays the women of Athens and Sparta who decide to withhold sex from their husbands in order to bring an end to the Peloponnesian War. The reading was part of a worldwide effort (see website here) that included a star-studded reading in New York and a performance in 28 Silsby. Did anyone go to the Dartmouth performance?
Posted by Karsten Barde,
3:31 PM
-
As seen on Dartlog "Clint Hendler sounds like a ninety year-old man when he gets excited"
Clint, you've stirred the ire now. You should be glad. To be called a ninety year-old from those who hold the political opinions of ninety year-olds is no small accomplishment.
Posted by T. Wood,
3:31 PM
-
Amit's Blog Shallow has reached a new height.
If you're looking for something to do during those long summer days and also want some insight in the neo-con thinking -- a good rental is Canadian Bacon. You may be thinking, "Since when is FreeDartmouth a blog for movie rental reviews," but stay with me. From RottenTomatoes.com:
In this wacky satire on the cold war mentality, the president of the United States and an arms manufacturer find it in their best economic interests to plant rumors of a potential nuclear attack--by Canada. Then, following a border incident at a hockey tournament, a patriotic sheriff and his deputies plan a counteroffensive...with hilarious results. Directed by activist-writer-television mogul Michael Moore, CANADIAN BACON combines the talents of John Candy and Dan Aykroyd with such actors and comedians as Steven Wright, Rip Torn, and James Belushi. The film is reminiscent of the terrific Peter Sellers vehicle THE MOUSE THAT ROARED, which dealt with the Duchy of Grand Fenwick declaring war on the United States in order to lose and receive millions in reparations.
The parallels to our current international scene are eerily familiar... and the movie raises some interesting underlying political questions such as whether we, as Americans, are fundamentally uncomfortable with peacetime.
Posted by Dan,
2:48 PM
-
Tuesday, June 24, 2003 Kaplan on the American empire
interviewer: You mention that U.S. dominance could end in a few decades. Why such a short amount of time? What sort of world do you see emerging after that?
Kaplan: "Hopefully it will last only a few decades. If we have this much power in the world a hundred years from now, we would be far less benign and idealistic than we are now. I think it's a good thing that we should only be the preeminent power for a few decades. I can't in detail describe the world that's going to come next, simply because it hasn't happened yet. I foresee a global system in a few decades that will very roughly resemble the Han Empire that emerged in China in around the second or third century BC. The Han Empire, which governed much of today's China, was not a dictatorship ruled from a central capital. In the beginning, at least, it represented a grand harmony of diverse peoples and systems that despite all their power struggles found out that it was in their self interest to limit their own power for the sake of the greater whole. So while a single country didn't emerge, a loose web of agreements emerged that was a system, even though it wasn't a central government.
In other words, I'm not predicting a world government. What I am hoping for is a kind of world governance that's loose, informal, undeclared, and allows for a number of organizations—regional, global, and great powers—to work together toward the larger good. I don't think we're there yet. And because we're not there yet, I think it's very important that the preeminent military power in the world is also a liberal power, and that it serve as an organizing principle until this system of global governance emerges."
---
Robert Kaplan thinks that an emerging American empire is the best way to create a peaceful global system. Read the full interview here (his corresponding story is in the July Atlantic). He seems awfully confident. Is the government really all that benign and idealistic right now?
Posted by Sarah,
2:12 PM
-
Petty Larceny Dean on Washington insider Democrats:
They’re not very welcoming of outside candidates; it is a bit of a club down there. The Democratic Party, the candidates from Washington, they all know each other. They all move in the same circles and what I’m doing is breaking into the country club.
Moments later, after realizing that the methaphor struck little to close to home:
That was unfortunate. … Please don’t put that aphorism down in the paper, that would be hard on my son.
Posted by Clint,
1:32 PM
-
Monday, June 23, 2003 Islamaphobia Shobokshi, a businessman and Arab columnist (who was educated in Tulsa, of all places) argues that Islamaphobia is a far more common -- and far more accepted -- form of racism than Anti-Semitism; he blames George Bush (amongst others.)
In 1984 I went to attend a lecture at Oral Roberts University, a major evangelist institution in America, but I was politely refused entry. I later found out that I was denied entry because I had facial hair. I did not make a big deal out of this. I thought to myself, “Maybe the event was sponsored by Gillette.” Years later, I wondered how ironically similar this ignorant mindset is to that of extremist from the Muslim world, who would not welcome me because I don’t have enough facial hair. The US has indeed changed. That mindset is today in power and its values affect global foreign policies and the livelihood of millions around the world.
Posted by Nikhil,
10:58 PM
-
Arab News James Zogby writes in an Arab News/Al-Jazeerah (not Al-Jazeera, two seperate things) op-ed:
I left the unpaved and dusty alleys of the camp and entered one of its homes where I found another world. There was a courtyard under a trellised grape vine. The homes were small and somewhat tattered and, on inspection, I noted that the grape vines had been planted in a barrel. But they were homes, a proud recreation of Palestinian village homes. These families, like so many others I would meet, had not surrendered to despair. For them Palestine was not just a memory, but living reality. They carried Palestine with them. They made it come to life in their stories and their new temporary homes. And to it they were determined to return. What, in the end, captured me was the beauty of those memories, and the power of this hope. The stories these refugees told were so achingly vivid in detail, so raw in the emotion they conveyed, and so right in the simple justice they demanded. It was this, I came to believe, that had kept Palestine alive. It was this, not highjackings or Kalishnakovs, that won support for a just cause and demanded a response from the world community.
Posted by Nikhil,
10:52 PM
-
My Holy War: What do a vicar's son and a suicide bomber have in common? Written by Jonathan Raban in The New Yorker, link to the article in pdf format here.
Posted by Nikhil,
8:30 PM
-
Live from Burlington I haven't been able to watch the full Dean announcement speech (text and video are now available at Dean's website), but the part I caught had Dean's head back dropped by an enormous "Vote for The Green Party" sign. A crude, but effective tactic.
Back in the day, I once held a sign behind the head of the mayor of Louisville that read "Stop Police Abuse" as he praised Martin Luther King Jr. at a memorial event. The mayor opposed the creation of a Civilian Review Board that could investigate police malfesience extra-departmentally. At the time, Louisville police or corrections officers had had six people die from excessive force in the past 13 months--five of them black.
I think Dr. King would have liked a bit of civilian review in a situation like that.
Posted by Clint,
6:40 PM
-
Michigan Affirmative Action Case Decided Links round-up here.
Posted by Timothy,
2:55 PM
-
Less than a week before the EU/US Summit scheduled to begin wednesday, New Zealand tabloid The Scoop published this editorial that most will agree jumps the gun a little, but is interesting none-the-less.
Posted by Nikhil,
3:52 AM
-
Sunday, June 22, 2003 What many will remember of Mahathir, Indonesia's slightly insane Prime Minister, when he steps down in October will be the landscape of Malaysia forever changed by his phallic obsessions. From the Petronas towers, to the oblisks and vertical statues outside Malaysia's oldest cities, Mahathir has proven his adequecy as a ruler.
Mahatir's party, however, hopes that the PM's more subtle legacies will also be preserved. To this end, the UMNO Conference yesterday decided to establish an "Institute of Mahathir's Thoughts" charged with preserving for posterity jewels of wit and wisdom such as: "Our race has progressed to the stage where we can thumb our noses at the Mat Sallehs [whites]" [said while wriggling five fingers off the end of his nose.] (Mark Baker/Sydney Morning Herald), " "Malaysia is not near Singapore; Singapore is near us," and "Leaders come and go/To inherit the struggle of our race/Twenty-two years pouring in contributions/For religion race and nation, Now the time has come to leave/When UMNO is standing proud/All are praying with tears/Thinking of the fate of the community's members."
The institute will probably leave out sections from his speech last year where, crying, he announced that he would step down within a few years. In between sobs, the Straits Times reported, he was heard chiding senior party members for disrupting his speech.
Mahatir's policies, however, were far saner than the man himself and can be credited with sparing Malaysia much of the potential fallout from the post 1997 economic situation in Southeast Asia. Hopefully his successor, Abdullah Badawi, will pay a little more attention to gaining some credibility for the Malaysian government, and thus for it's anti-Bush foreign policy and for ASEAN as a whole. Hopefully, he'll also be a little nicer to Singapore.
Posted by Nikhil,
10:19 PM
-
Edwards Has Made A Speech And surprisingly, it isn't a carbon copy of the "my dad was a millworker and I went to UNC, not Yale. God bless America" speech that he normally makes. In a strange attempt to make himself seem more capitalist than the capitalists, Edwards supported tax cuts, 'small businesses' and so forth. He then contrasted this with Bush's tax cuts for the rich (which he claims shifts the tax burden onto the middle classes through increases in local, property and sales taxes) and accused Bush of not adhering to capitalist values of hard work, innovation and frugality. Comparing Bush's policies with socialism in that it "corrupts the very nature of our democracy and our free enterprise tradition," Edwards claims that he is the true capitalist, having adhered to capitalist values of hard work, innovation and frugality to get himself (wait for it) from being the son of a millworker to becoming a senator (c'mon, how could he not include that).
William Saletan analyzes based on this published version of the speech.
Posted by Nikhil,
9:13 PM
-
Daily D: Meanwhile, Back at the Ranch Will Browning '78 writes this strongly worded editorial in today's The Dartmouth:
That's right: we Americans are victims of the Big Lie, the Great Myth that we are safer now because of our government's vicious creed of greed, because of its cruel, thoughtless and ill-considered use of American military might in a cause unworthy of a single drop of human blood -- no matter what its nationality. Quite enough of it has been shed already, thank you.
