R wrote:
>
>
> No one in the media attacked McCarthy until he attacked Eisenhower and
> began to be a real nuisance to those in power.
>
> Carrol
>
> carrol, McCarthy attacked the US Army. remember?
Yes, I remember. I sneaked out of work at the National Security Agency to watch it on TV in the PX of Arlington Hall Station. (We didn't own a tv ourselves.) And it was pretty clear to everyone involved that the attack was on _Eisenhower_, _through_ the army.
> generally, your facts are correct, carrol, but they have nothing to do with
> media monopolies, or concentration. the changes you believe are for the
> better occured largely due to social movements in the 1960s
Of course. That's also why Nixon was the most progressive president we've had in the last 30+ years.
> and were due,
> among other things, to people who fought concentration of media ownership.
Nonsense. I doubt that the rioters in Watts or West Chicago gave a thought to "media concentration." The point is that the media has always been capitalist, and concentrated or not concentrated, pretty much reflects the current consensus of capitalist politics. You are mistaking a symptom for substance.
Carrol