Democratic Platform - Fairness in Media?

How can we get Ohio U.S. Senate candidates Brunner/Fisher to talk about getting some Fairness back to the Ohio airwaves? Will the idea of media re-regulation even show up on the respective Senate campaigns' radars? What about U.S. House or Ohio Governor races?

I know the idea of a "Fairness in Media" PAC was floated a few years ago. Maybe it's time to try and float that balloon again, what with all the unregulated Rush Limbaugh (and others') racist and anti-American jibber-jabber.

I think a vast majority in America are standing around saying, "Hey, these Right-Wing talkers on TV and radio are hurting the country. Who is going to put their foot down and start putting a stop to the lies-as-truth rabble-rousing?" We already have Color of Change, which is doing a great job of asking advertisers if they REALLY want to advertise on Glenn Beck's shows. We had Spocko's success in getting Melanie Morgan off the air in San Francisco. Now there needs to be a mass-exodus of advertisers from all right-wing radio/TV, because it is all lie-/innuendo-based.

After that, there's a need to turn all TV/radio news into fact-based reporting, as opposed to "he said / she said" yellow journalism, with the goal to make as much profit as possible, and hence kiss up to Corporate ad-buyers as much as possible.

At that point, once the corporations are out of the Media, ALL the media can - without restraint - expose the truth behind the Corporate-run Washington politicians.

There is a long struggle ahead. The Obama Administration and Senators are not going to give up that Corporate money without a fight.

One final tidbit for thought. If FOX/Hannity/Beck are going after people in the Obama administration, why pick on the low-hanging fruit like Van Johnson? Why not go after Tim Geithner or Rahm Emmanuel, for example? It's because they are doing what the Republicans and the Corporations want. Like the U.S. Attorney firing scandal, it may be more interesting to look at the ones who are un-accosted in their duties, rather than the ones who are being attacked. Maybe the ones *not* being attacked are the ones who should be under the tightest scrutiny.