Who stands to gain the most from the release of the 'prisoner abuse' photos?

@ladyluna (7004)
United States
April 26, 2009 11:53am CST
Hello All, To understand the motivation of any deliberate action, it becomes necessary to ask the tough, poignant questions. Specifically: 1. What is the possible benefit? 2. Who stands to gain the most by the action? In the case of these 'prisoner abuse' photos, long sought by the ACLU and the American Left, the most notable beneficiary is, I believe, none other than the left dominated main stream media. If a picture is worth a thousand words, how many dollars is that same picture worth??? How many USA print media organizations are now facing bankruptcy, have already filed bankruptcy, or have fallen as a result of financial insolvency? Disappearing ad revenues as well as plummeting circulation nightmares are the pressing, 'life or death' challenges for much of the main stream media, though most especially the print media. "...the circulation numbers do pose a threat to the industry, which has long relied on them to demonstrate the value of print advertising. As those numbers continue to fall -- circulation peaked at about 65 million in the mid-1980s -- and as papers shift more resources to the Web, many are finding the old economics don't always apply. As a result, many newspapers are laying off staff and the industry is seeing a wave of consolidation and ownership change." http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/86nFkz5Ulg0S1U/Newspapers-Suffer-as-Web-Use-Grows.xhtml?wlc=1240760200 Let's look at it from another angle: Political contributions from the newspaper - book - magazine industries: Donations to Democrats Donations to Republicans 2008 $17,603,637 (81%) $4,045,074 (19%) 2006 $6,062,970 (70%) $2,394,040 (28%) 2004 $11,732,120 (75%) $3,768,695 (24%) 2002 $10,505,022 (80%) $2,469,592 (19%) 2000 $6,426,125 (58%) $4,529,689 (41%) http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=C1100 The Communication Workers of America (the media union) is ranked #12 on the "Top All-time Donors Summary List for 1989 - 2008", having given 99% of its $26,239,906 to Democrat politicos, and less than 1% to Republican politicos. http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A Of course, the picture wouldn't be complete without a glimpse into the lobbying efforts of the newspaper-book-magazine industry, would it? Below is a list of lobbying groups, and the numbers of lobbying incidences filed by them in just the year 2008. Notice any pattern in the frequency of adjunct supporters of the newspaper-book-magazine industries lobbying our Congressional Representatives for favors and/or funding??? Rank: Lobbying Organization #of lobbying incident reports filed for 2008 #1 American Assn of Advertising Agencies - 15 #2 Magazine Publishers of America - 12 #3 National Assn of Broadcasters - 12 #4 American Advertising Federation - 11 #7 Alliance for American Advertising - 8 #9 Assn of National Advertisers - 8 #13 Newspaper Assn of America - 8 http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/issuesum.php?year=2008&lname=Advertising&id= Finally, we have all seen or heard rumblings of the Democratic proposal to 'bail out' the dying newspaper industry, right? Below is the final column from the Obama appointee Rosa Brooks, formerly an LA Times columnist. [i]"Influential Los Angeles Times columnist Rosa Brooks has hung up her journalistic hat and joined the Obama administration, but not before penning a public proposal calling for some radical ideas to help bail out the failing news industry.... Years of foolish policies have left us with a choice: We can bail out journalism, using tax dollars and granting licenses in ways that encourage robust and independent reporting and commentary, or we can watch, wringing our hands, as more and more top journalists are laid off," she wrote in her parting column on April 9."[/i] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/16/obama-appointee-suggests-radical-plan-newspaper-bailout/ Thursday, April 16, 2009 ___________________________________________________________________________________ [b]My questions to you: 1. Should these photos be released? Why or why not? 2. Should the dying print media industry be 'bailed out' with taxpayer money? 3. Can you think of any industry or group of industries that stands to gain more from the release of these photos than the print media?[/b] ©Ladyluna21042 2009
3 people like this
6 responses
• United States
26 Apr 09
Personally it does not matter to me if the photos are released or not as I am at the stage where I do not believe even my own eyes when it comes to newspaper articles or photos. I am very sure that "print media industry" will have no problem getting a bailout from Obama. He owes them! They IMO were the one that put him in office and are still continuing with their smarmy news reports on everything he does.
2 people like this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
27 Apr 09
To all honorable members who would otherwise respond to this discussion -- please DON'T. It would seem that the cowardly, punitive raters are at their old game -- yet again! They 'slam' the views of others, yet refuse to publicly defend their dissent. MyLot will not correct this unjust, punitive rating system until community involvement suffers. As such, I urge you to make your opinion known about the ongoing support of this childish, punitive system of irrational judgement. I do not wish to see your personal, public reputations further tarnished because of your participation. Please do not respond herein! Instead, please see my new 'line in the sand' discussion about the negative ratings system. Thank you! "Don't think of retiring from the world until the world will be sorry that you retire. I hate a fellow whom pride or cowardice or laziness drives into a corner, and who does nothing when he is there but sit and growl. Let him come out as I do, and bark." - Samuel Johnson
3 people like this
• United States
27 Apr 09
I am afraid I do not understand your comment! I see no reason why anyone should not respond if they so choose. I do not see anything even suggesting that this discussion is any different from all the other political topics.
2 people like this
@dragon54u (31636)
• United States
27 Apr 09
I think it's a bid to make the current administration look merciful and forgiving when Obama "decides" not to prosecute. It's all an image enhancer for him. It could also serve as print media bail out, I guess.
2 people like this
@peavey (16936)
• United States
26 Apr 09
Bailout = takeover. If the government takes over the newspapers, where will we get the truth? Hmmm... what was the name of that wonderful newspaper in Communist Russia that everyone read because it was the only one? The one that was run by the government? You may not recall, but it printed lies about how Americans were starving and killing each other for food back in the 50s and 60s. It made the suffering masses feel better about their situation and hey, we all want everyone to feel better, don't we? As to the photos, it's a piece of propaganda (lies for the sake of keeping the public "informed") - again, it smells like Communist Russia.
2 people like this
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
29 Apr 09
Instead of speaking of the Industrial-Military Complex maybe we should speak of the Media-Democrat Complex. 17 million give to Democrat compared to 4 million and now we have John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, want to take money from you and give it to the Boston Global. Now we have these pictures, and to answer your question, no those photos should not be released. We have the Democrats in power and their other half want something to publish those pictures, since no one wants to read their garbage. These newspapers do not care who gets their life ruined as long as their newspaper stays afloat. Almost like The Banner from Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead attack on Enright Building. The media is no different than any other company, must succeed or fail on their own.
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
26 Apr 09
You ask if there is a group that would benefit more than the print media. How about the Trial Lawyers. Think of all the potential Lawsuits and Punitive damages awards. Did I mention that they are big Contributors to the Democrat Party. The last set of photos released were out several weeks before the news media (I think it was CBS) showed them. They were held until Sweeps week for the ratings. It was not about news but ratings. It will be interesting to see if the administration is able to drag their feel until the next sweeps weeks / rating week?
2 people like this
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
26 Apr 09
1. Should these photos be released? No...As I recall, there are laws in place about releasing photos of this nature. Something to do with that pesky Geneva Convention I think. Of course, now that illegal enemy combatants have been reclassified in violation of the Constitution... the release of those photos would seem to be even more illegal under GC. 2. Should the dying print media industry be 'bailed out' with taxpayer money? No... Just as I oppose the government bailout of ANY business or industry... including the financial sector, I also oppose the government bailing out the media. What that would give us is government owned and controlled media... just as the Auto Industry is now government owned and controlled as evidence by the government ordered firing of a longtime CEO of GM. We already have a liberal media in the tank for the current administration... and I see no good reason to have them owning the media as well. 3. Can you think of any industry or group of industries that stands to gain more from the release of these photos than the print media? Lawyers. The ACLU and other legal groups who are both greedy and oppose American values would love to be able to sue the government and thus the American people on behalf of our enemies... which these poor mistreated terrorists plainly are. I am sure others would benefit, but I think the lawyers would benefit the most... and America as a whole would lose.
2 people like this