jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (6 posts)

Why doesn't the news media cover the election money?

  1. rhamson profile image77
    rhamsonposted 2 years ago

    "Political advertising is expected to reach a record $11.4 billion next year – that's up 20% from the previous presidential election year, according to a new report from Borrell Associates, the advertising research firm. Adding in this year’s spending, Borrell figures the total will be $16.5 billion. About half of the total is expected to be spent on broadcast TV, with $5.5 billion coming from national races and $3.1 billion spent on state and local contests. Cable TV will see $1.5 billion in spending, with $737.8 million coming from national contest and $729.2 million going for local races. Online and digital spending will total. $1.1 billion, with $664.8 million going for national races and $423.8 million spent on local contests." Robert Reich

    Could it be they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them? People we just have to take the money out of the process. It corrupts, directs and misdirects everything that goes on in our political process.

    Term Limits, Publicly Financed Campaigns and Lobby Reform is the only way to get it right.

    1. promisem profile image95
      promisemposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Not at all. They can't report it because much of it is anonymous thanks to the current Supreme Court.

      1. rhamson profile image77
        rhamsonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I would agree with you on the Pac money but other than that there is sufficient information of the donors and their amounts.

        1. promisem profile image95
          promisemposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Where? I have tried numerous times to go to Web sites associated with the TV and online attack ads from various "organizations."

          They don't display the names of any people. When I look up the administrative contacts for those Web sites on the Internet Whois sites, the contact information is hidden there as well.

          Finding out donors who contribute directly to candidates is easy. Finding out who is donating to the phantom organizations is not.

          1. rhamson profile image77
            rhamsonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I am sorry I was not clear. I meant that those outside the PAC money were easy to find and report on. The print and web media make it fairly easy but the television media simply ignore it.

  2. rhamson profile image77
    rhamsonposted 2 years ago

    Here's a story I think relates to this. Jeb Bush has gotten half of his campaign money from the same people who put George H. and George W. in good money. I am sure Hillary will have the same legacy donors as well.

    http://news.yahoo.com/legacy-bush-donor … 30535.html

 
working