The Instigator
KingYosef
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
MYTN
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

The media influences citzen support on behalf of Washington agendas.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/5/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,239 times Debate No: 1422
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (10)

 

KingYosef

Pro

On December 18th, The FCC voted to allow newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership. This allows companies like General Electric to buy newspapers to add to the slew of News channels already in their ownership.

Why is this a problem?

When large companies own the majority of news sources, the U.S. government allows them to use the public airwaves for free, creating a profit of billions of dollars. By doing this, the government holds considerable leverage over the companies who control the news. This allows the government to filter the information it wants to reach the general public. Since the majority of news sources are corporate owned today, this makes for a homogeneous perspective of national and international events.

Ex. of underground stories not reported widely...

-U.S. support of the Taliban between 1994 and 1997 so that Unocal could attempt to build a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Taliban occupied Afghanistan, to friendly Pakistan, essentially stealing Turkmenistan's oil.

-Current plans to leave troops in central Asia after fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq die down, to secure oil.

-The U.S. manipulation of Afghans and Pakistanis during the Afghan-soviet war, which included Osama Bin Laden, and was the building block for terror against the U.S. (I fully outlined it in the debate "in the battle to overcome terrorism islam is not the enemy, ignorance is")

-The Baker Agenda, The Bush Administration back in 2006, confirmed Iraqi oil as a fundamental premise for their presidency, Hence, the true purpose of the Iraq war manifests itself.

I chose the Middle Eastern related issues, because with proper research, anyone can see that we have been involved Middle East since the late 1970s, and that every time we have gotten involved there, after the troops leave, the oil conglomerates enter. Had the Media been reporting the actual events, and not their opinions, I am rather confident we would not be where we are today.

It is a sad fact that today's definition of the American Democracy is "the illusion of having a say". and a large part of this is due to the fact that the government, through the media, tells us what it wants us to hear. They do this in order to achieve the desired results of their Agenda.

I am not a conspirator, quite the contrary. I think it is necessary to understand the political landscape which exists today in order to act effectively in influencing government decision making, in other words, play their game. something Americans need to be doing.
MYTN

Con

Though the media has failed to fully analyze the historical aspects of our involvement in the Middle East, the reason is not because of corporate interests, because corporate interests are not the media's main concern and role. The point of the media for corporations is to provide higher ratings and therefore pay for revenue for that channel. We have seen this happen over and over with tabloid news, whether regarding to Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, that the media's main concern is ratings. The media then estimates the rating, or the "newsworthiness" of the issue, and deems whether it should be aired. The media does not report, for example, on the US involvement on overthrowing elected leader Mohamed Mossadeqh in Iran in 1953 and therefore causing the 1979 revolution because it is yesterday's news, and the media estimates that yesterday's news will not provide ratings. What will provide ratings is what happens today, because that is what people tune into the news for. People do not tune into the news to watch people analyze it with history and nuance, but people watch the news to watch...well...news. Were corporations able to distort news for their interests, there would never been a need for lobbyists. Corporations have other ways to set their own agendas, the news is merely another set of revenue for their company. The news is not an activist organization (except Fox, but even Fox is not based on Corporate interest), but rather one that relies on viewership and therefore funding. When news organizations solely base themselves on viewership, they will report only on things they deem will get ratings [sorry for such an unorganized argument, it's like two in the morning over here. And I hope my cynicism gets some empathy from you].
Debate Round No. 1
KingYosef

Pro

Sorry, wont be able to post rebutle, should have planned better, I will be back though for the next round.
MYTN

Con

MYTN forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
KingYosef

Pro

"Though the media has failed to fully analyze the historical aspects of our involvement in the Middle East, the reason is not because of corporate interests, because corporate interests are not the media's main concern and role."

A corporations interest is making money. When the government allows you to use public airwaves for free, resulting in billions of surplus revenue, they hold considerable sway over what they DONT want broadcasted. It is true what you say about historical events and ratings.

In my opinion, C-span is news. all they show is political events, not someone talking about political events.

What happens is the greater government influences corporations through their billion dollar blackmail to stay in line with the rest of the news, prompting Media outlets to disregard what they may view as considerable news that would make Washington angry, in fear of reprecussion.

It is the United States version of censorship.
MYTN

Con

Ok, lets get some definitions down first.

Media: Any news outlet owned by a corporation
Corporate interest: Making money (going along with what you said in your last argument, "A corporations interest is making money.")

"When the government allows you to use public airwaves for free, resulting in billions of surplus revenue, they hold considerable sway over what they DONT want broadcasted"

First off, I would like some evidence or anecdote in which a corporation actively interfered with news broadcasting that would infringe on their profit as a company, otherwise your argument has no foundation. We are basically debating on the intention of corporations on the media. While you are saying corporations use the media as a way to hide corporate irresponsibility, I am saying the media's main concern is providing high ratings and therefore revenue.

I will provide ONE example in which the media used a story that provided high ratings and revenue, while at the same time exposed corporate and political irresponsibility, which would OBLITERATE your thesis:

JAMIE LYNN SPEARS
Jamie Lynn Spears, most famous for playing on Zoey 101, got pregnant. This news was sold to every news outlet available. If Spears is exposed, she would have to resign from her posting on the show, and therefore Nickelodeon, the network that owns the show, will lose revenue. Nickelodeon is owned by parent company Viacom, who also owns CBS News. Now, based on your thesis, if Viacom did not want to lose revenue and keep Jamie Lynn Spear's pregnancy a secret, they would have pressured CBS News not to publish the story. But alas, CBS News published the story despite the loss revenue parent company Viacom would face in the situation that Jamie Lynn Spears would resign. BUT, CBS News did earn a profit from reporting on Jamie Lynn Spears (not enough to make up for the lost revenue from Zoey 101 of course!). Therefore, revenue from a news organization is the main concern for a corporations, NOT protecting corporate interests.

(prepares to receive some hate comments)

"What happens is the greater government influences corporations through their billion dollar blackmail to stay in line with the rest of the news, prompting Media outlets to disregard what they may view as considerable news that would make Washington angry, in fear of reprecussion."

Again, I would need evidence and anecdotes for you to support your claim. In terms of making "Washington angry," here is a list of words: Edward R. Murrow, Gulf of Tonkin, Walter Cronkite in Vietnam, Nixon impeachment, Iran-Contra, etc. In these instances, the media did not receive repercussions, but surely did make Washington angry.

PS- I'll come up with a better example next time.
Debate Round No. 3
KingYosef

Pro

KingYosef forfeited this round.
MYTN

Con

MYTN forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by MYTN 9 years ago
MYTN
I agree with everything you say. The only thing I disagreed with KingYosef was their intentions on why they only have news on things that aren't newsworthy. While KingYosef claims that it's because they want to keep Americans clueless about corporate interest, my reasoning is that they're basically lazy and want to go for cheap ratings.

So again, we do not disagree on what their actions are, but we do disagree on why they do what they do.
Posted by patrock2 9 years ago
patrock2
Even though KingYoseph didn't make all the rounds he made his point well in his opening argument..
News outlets do cave to pressure from their parent companies and from the White House. Proof of censorship abounds MYTN, just google and you'll be up all night reading. We only hear (newscasts-especially FOX)what the power brokers want us to hear. How can you tell? We live in a global society, many things of import are happening everyday. Yet what do get to listen to on nightly news? Britney Spears,Jamie Spears,Paris Hilton; I might as well read the Enquirer;and the SAME news all day long? I am homebound so I know. My last point: The news media even concedes that there are instances when they themselves create the news stories-
eg: all this time wasted discussing Patriot's Quarterback Tom Brady-foot cast or psyche out? Meanwhile women and children are busy dying in Darfur and many places around the globe-Why don't they run that 3 times/day and not Tom Brady?-It is more about the dumbing down of America; news- bites instead of news stories because 'studies' indicate that "Americans can't pay attention long enough for in depth stories-who funded that survey I wonder? Nice to know how well we are regarded by these corporations..

-you can't protest what you don't know about-

Then ratings are the next most important consideration. In this country I remember when we had several independant news organizations- now all we have the Associated Press-the rest (UPI for instance)are gone.
For real info you have to research the issues and READ other countries news reports for more in depth coverage.
Posted by Black.Nite17 9 years ago
Black.Nite17
This debate is fine and this comment is longer than 25 characters
Posted by inrainbows 9 years ago
inrainbows
on this topic, i agree with you KingYosef...
Posted by dayntwillrise 9 years ago
dayntwillrise
The media has incredible sway in how things turn out. Look at what happened in Iowa, little old white ladies got so scared that Hilary was going to win that they came out in droves, and thus put Hilary back into the race.
Posted by Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
Actually you are a conspirator. Conspirator good if they present evidence. And you do :D
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 11 months ago
U.n
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited more turns.
Vote Placed by LakevilleNorthJT 8 years ago
LakevilleNorthJT
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Randomknowledge 9 years ago
Randomknowledge
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by KingYosef 9 years ago
KingYosef
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by righty10294 9 years ago
righty10294
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Black.Nite17 9 years ago
Black.Nite17
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by patrock2 9 years ago
patrock2
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by MYTN 9 years ago
MYTN
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
KingYosefMYTNTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30