labor/media

[J Cullen]

>  > From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com>
>>
>>
>>  Nathan Newman wrote:
>>  >The UAW monthly
>>  >magazine is actually not too bad
>>
>>  - -Really? You mean Solidarity? Aside from the financial statements,
>>  - -with their mysterious $1 billion in assets, I find it mainly a
>>  - -snooze. Maybe I'm spoiled by Vanity Fair.
>>
>>  And neither LBO nor Vanity Fair is particularly aimed at the average UAW
>>  member.
>>
>
>Why even discuss print media? Virtually no one gets their news from them
>anymore.
>
>What's needed is a labor presence on electronic media, TV preferably but
>also radio, which is why I mentioned Hightower.  If the AFL played its
>cards right they could have made him the pro-labor Limbaugh.  I'm curious
>why they dumped him, as they have seemed to
>
>Organized labor also should have strongly opposed the telecommunications
>bill which guaranteed corporations stranglehold on the media, which
>they use to screw labor-now more than ever.
>
>Did Sweeney et. al. even make a peep about it?
>
>John

The UAW was a sponsor of Jim Hightower and part owner of the radio 
network his show was on, which generally was unsuccessful in getting 
into major market radio stations. I suspect there also may have been 
some backlash against Hightower's promotion of Ralph Nader's 
presidential campaign.