All too often, the phrase "corporate free press" is something of an oxymoron. Whether to maximise sales, to attract advertisers, or simply to promote the interests of their wealthy owners, the mass media open strange, self-serving and grossly distorted windows onto the world.
This website is another window. Here you'll find documentaries, lectures and interviews following a different editorial line.
Wonderful! many of us know that the reptilian human need to control everything in every way may be our death – Fascism, in all it’s forms – state, religious, corporate – has been with us since we left the hunting/gathering thing in the rearview so many eons ago.
As this docu so poignantly shows, we are now in a race to find the solutions to tame our darker angels – that’s a step up as it is only with the advent of Apollo, CNN, and the Internet & web that we have finally gained perspective enough to be able to connect enough of the damned dots to clearly see the nearness of our existential peril – we dare not leave this mess behind for the nextgen to clean up in our wake.
I live on $1,000 a month, but I’ll send you a few bucks anyway for sharing this very well done expose – you are doing good work here – I’ll also pass it on to my better-off friends.
I note one omission that might affect your general message here – it has to do with the corporate march to “personhood,” post Civil War – in Thom Hartmann’s “Unequal Protection” he notes that the fix was in after the Supreme’s ruled on the Southern Pacific’s First Amendment Rights vis-a-vis the City of Santa Clara’s (Calif.) municipal right to control business entities – Thom (whose research habits appear to mirror my own) maintains that the decision went against the railroad as regards its “personhood,” along with any and all attendent “human” rights – the clerk who drafted the headnotes for that decision penned his own, well-compensated, interpretation of the Court’s ruling stating, in effect, the precise opposite, that even though the court ruled in the city’s favor, it RECOGNIZED Southern Pacific’s rights as a person (free campaign speech, in this instance).
This bogus 1886 “decision” was also the foundation for two opinions in 1976 & 1978 which pretty much handed over the keys to the jail; the latter placing corporate campaign funding on the steroid track – does your research contradict Thom’s?
Here’s hoping we find our way home to a far more altruistic, shared future before Orwell’s or Prince’s (oops, party over, outta time) prophecies come to pass, eh?
Thanks very much for your informative comment, Nigel, I will look out for Thom Hartman’s book. According to the wikipedia article (which is based on Hartman’s research), the court did not actually make that ruling, but that it was nevertheless taken as a precedent for future cases.
Another interesting case in the development of corporate law (which, if I recall correctly, wasn’t in the film) was the Dodge vs. Ford case. Henry Ford was a believer in “welfare capitalism”, and felt that high wages and low prices were the best path to longterm profitability. So his shareholders sued him – maximising their immediate profits was henceforth a corporation’s legally-enforced duty, overriding any other consideration.
It’s heartening to know I’ve raised a bit of money for the film, although I should point out that this blog is unconnected with the makers of the film, try TheCorporation.com to give them feedback and funding directly. Of course, if you want to give me money too, you’re most welcome 🙂