Conscious Choice: Radio Media Reform Now!

February 2005 | Choice Feedback

Radio Media Reform Now!

I want to thank you for publishing the (Jan.) article, “Battling Media Giants for Control of Chicago’s Radio Dial” by Barbara K. Iverson on radio ownership consolidation. Although I had heard in the news about the recent FCC changes allowing ownership of multiple broadcast outlets, I didn’t realize that fully 65 percent of the radio stations in Chicago are owned by just a handful of corporations. The graphic illustration really made the point.

I also appreciate the suggestions of how individual citizens can take action with specific e-mail addresses. So many times I read something that gets me charged up but then I have no idea of how to make an impact. Keep up the good work.

Barbara Winkelman, Chicago

I WOULD like to compliment you and your publication on the highly-informative and inspirational cover story in January’s issue. From its anecdotal opening onward, “More Stations, Less Variety” represented the kind of well-researched, responsible journalism we so desperately require. While offering a national overview, it maintained a regional outlook that kept it relevant. It led swiftly and safely through the potentially rough waters of FCC history and policy. Admitting the depressing (even dangerous) current condition of on-air journalism, Dr. Iverson encouraged optimism. The numerous examples of public outcry and resulting policy change provides hope. This is inspiring. This is good writing (and editing). This may not be what commercial media is today but it’s what we need. Thank you for providing it. Keep up the good work.

Enthralled Reader, Walter, Internet

THE “CORPORATIZATION” and “homogenization” of the media has really alarmed me for several years. I have attended lectures and symposiums on this subject, read many books and articles, subscribed to newsletters and organizations fighting for media reform, and tried to stay informed about what’s going on in my city, state, country, and world without getting stuck in the muck and drivel of mainstream media. I was delighted to read “More Stations, Less Variety.” It gave a wonderful historical review of what has happened to radio in America as well as a compendium of options for making our voices heard above the mega-conglomerate din. A friend sent me the link to this article, and I liked it so much that I passed it along to everyone I know.

Priya Hudson-DiTraglia, Wimberley, Texas

Silent Sports Fan

I WAS DELIGHTED with Bob McCray’s article on “Silent Sports” in your December 2004 issue. I’m happy to know that someone beside myself finds winter to be refreshing and beautiful.

Although I’m not into winter sports, I love photography and quiet serenity and am tired of having people constantly raining on my parade by complaining about the cold and the snow.

The way I see it — If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen — but at the other end of the thermometer!

Robynne Wallace, Chicago

Remembering Brother Wayne

THANK YOU for remembering Brother Teasedale in your December issue editorial. I, too, knew him only briefly — he gave the first day of Lent sermon at Grace Church in Printers Row 2004. We connected in a sort of surreal way. In the coffee hour after the service … we had [an] instant in-depth conversation. He advised me later to research into becoming a shaman — which I am now doing.

Thank you again for remembering him and also for enlightening us on a monthly basis. We are here in this life, who knows for how long; it is not a rehearsal.

Richard Newton, Chicago

Beef Up Tsunami Relief

THE INITIAL response by the world’s richest countries to the earthquake and tidal wave disaster in Southern Asia has been pathetic. While many of these countries have poured billions into invading and bringing misery to the people of Iraq, they cannot seem to find anywhere near enough money to seriously help the mainly poor people who have been made destitute by this natural disaster.

The U.S. government pledge of $35 million contrasts sharply with the $152 billion it has spent in its invasion and occupation of Iraq. Its initial pledge of $10 million was less than it spends in a single hour of occupying Iraq.

The British government has pledged only $1.7 million, while spending many billions in Iraq, and the European Union as a whole has pledged only $5 million.

Australia has promised $35 million and some practical assistance — despite spending close to a $1 billion on the Iraq war so far. In contrast, ordinary people in Australia have responded with humanity and solidarity. The people of Victoria alone pledged almost as much as the British government in one day.

The economic rationalists who run most of the world’s governments obviously believe that killing people is more rational than saving lives. It’s time to reorient their priorities to human need, not war and corporate greed.

Socialist Alliance International, Internet

We Must Go Deeper

IN MY judgment, our friend Paul Hawken “Is Your Money Where Your Heart Is? The Truth About SRI Mutual Funds,” ( Conscious Choice, Oct., 2004) has done something that must be named and rejected if our values are to be perpetuated in mainstream society.

In criticizing the Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) mutual fund industry he created a simple and unrealistic polarity, the equivalent of “for our troops-against our troops” or “against the UN controlling America-for the UN controlling America.” I know of no one for the latter in either case.

Paul created the dichotomy of “for greed-against greed.” He then placed SRI in the “for greed” camp. This Madison Avenue sales technique currently being used so effectively by Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, and the Republican Party works well in a sound-bite media world where you have the ability to sustain it as the context for the conversation. Given this simple, unrealistic choice, many will not see through the ruse and choose to be on your side because it is the only reasonable option.

This technique can comfortably be used by less mature people, people who believe the end justifies the means. However, more mature people accurately see the process as the end. They cannot do this or fail if they try because their lack of inner integrity is visible, i.e. Al Gore and John Kerry pandering to the political middle rather than successfully selling the truth.

To perpetuate our more mature values, like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, etc., we must live them well instead of joining in this manipulative game. SRI had a far more modest goal than ending greed. It was to prove that we could make as much profit investing in publicly traded companies moving in the direction of reducing, rather than increasing greed: the only two options available there. It has also nurtured investment in private companies and non-profits that aggressively give priority to the common good over greed. While Paul advocates this approach, he does not mention the fact that it is being led by the progressive SRI community today.

If George Soros and his new Phoenix Group try to regain power using the-end-justifies-the-means methods, they will fail just as Paul is failing using it to critique our community. We have no choice but to go deeper, not cheaper, to regain respect and leadership. Our values will not allow us to be successful any other way — thank God!

Terry Mollner

Terry Mollner is Chair of Trusteeship Institute, Inc., a think tank and consulting firm in spiritually responsible business and co-founder of Spirit in Business, Inc. He is currently writing a book entitled, What I Didn’t Learn Growing Up In Mollner’s Meat Market: The 7 Layers of Maturity of Thinking.

For the full text of Mollner’s response and more of the ongoing SRI debate, click here .

Recommend this page to a friend

Top Ten pages recommended to friends: