Oops, sorry forgot to mention the post also contains a link to the master:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/smoke/interviews/bagdikian1.html
I studied Ben Bagdikian "The Media Monopoly" in undergrad and his points are still salient today and they will remain so for the next foreseeable future.
This is not any kind of Good.
And it has its roots back with none other than U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who slammed affirmative action programs designed to maintain and to promote diversity.
http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/12/kingcast-provides-clarence-thomas.html
He intentionally delayed a vote back in '91 that would have expanded protections for women in media. He delayed the vote because he thought it would have a negative impact on his Supreme Court Judicial appointment, and not only that, he really applied strict scrutiny instead of the mid-level scrutiny used in sex cases.
"He said in the decision that the Federal Communications Commission's policy of giving preference to women was unconstitutional because it denied equal protection of the laws to white men."
The decision flew in the face of recent case law established by the Brennan Decision in Metromedia v. FCC as noted in these NYTimes links one and two (at my blawg entry above).
Slashdot Mirror
Oops, sorry forgot to mention the post also contains a link to the master: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/smoke/interviews/bagdikian1.html I studied Ben Bagdikian "The Media Monopoly" in undergrad and his points are still salient today and they will remain so for the next foreseeable future.
This is not any kind of Good. And it has its roots back with none other than U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who slammed affirmative action programs designed to maintain and to promote diversity. http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/12/kingcast-provides-clarence-thomas.html He intentionally delayed a vote back in '91 that would have expanded protections for women in media. He delayed the vote because he thought it would have a negative impact on his Supreme Court Judicial appointment, and not only that, he really applied strict scrutiny instead of the mid-level scrutiny used in sex cases. "He said in the decision that the Federal Communications Commission's policy of giving preference to women was unconstitutional because it denied equal protection of the laws to white men." The decision flew in the face of recent case law established by the Brennan Decision in Metromedia v. FCC as noted in these NYTimes links one and two (at my blawg entry above).