The Media’s double standard when describing political advocacy organizations is as obvious as it is unsurprising.
The Media rarely if ever identify Leftist entities as Leftist - instead assigning them non-ideological descriptives. Often, it is the ridiculous “consumer interest group” - as if the anti-free market side of the equation is pro-consumer, and the defenders of freedom are against the purchasing public.
Never mind that no one is more pro-consumer than a private company - after all, they are the ones trying to please as many consumers as possible. It would then stand to reason that the organizations defending private companies from government overreach are also pro-consumer.
Because these “consumer interest groups” are in fact “government interest groups" - every “solution” they push results in larger, more interfering government. Which is about as anti-consumer as you can get.
How’s ObamaCare treating consumers? The Veterans Administration? The Department of Motor Vehicles? Would you rather head there - or to Amazon.com or your neighborhood deli?
Meanwhile, the Media almost always identify Conservative groups as conservative - that is, when they mention them at all. Often, marketplace political stories only quote Leftist groups - and company representatives.
Which is itself biased. It depicts the debate as a struggle between the plucky little “consumer interest” groups (who actually often have very large [George Soros] money behind them) - and the evil Industry Titans.
There are perhaps dozens of conservative/free market groups out there - yet the Media often can’t seem to find room for any of them in their stories.
The latest bit of wireless phone news is a fabulous case study.
The company on Monday introduced "Sponsored Data," or data that is paid is for by a business that wouldn't count against a subscriber's capped plan. Think a toll free 1-800 number or free shipping for the delivery of data.
Here in Reality, this should be a non-news story - other than the good news for consumers. They will be getting more data for the same money - which will in a great many instances allow them to actually purchase less data, saving them coin.
This model exists…well, everywhere. As stated above, companies via 800 numbers pick up the tab for your call. Many then after you call to place an order pick up the tab to ship it to you. The examples of this free market paradigm are nearly endless.
AT&T and Verizon Wireless in particular have been aggressive in getting their customers to switch to tiered plans that require people to pay more to get more data.
Again, here in Reality when we use more - we pay more. You pay more for ten steaks than you do for two. It costs more to gas up an Escalade than it does an Escort.
So if the companies providing the biggest data-chewing content were to pay for it - it would in fact be a tremendous consumer boon. Imagine car makers paying for your gasoline - oh wait, some do. Isn’t Reality great?
But this is the Media and the Left - they don’t reside in Reality.
Consumer advocate group Free Press has already criticized the plan.
There are those magic Media words - “consumer advocate group.” Never mind that Free Press was co-founded by a self-avowed Marxist - they are “consumer advocates.” This story quotes Free Press and AT&T only - not a conservative group to be found.
Then there’s this:
In which Free Press and their fellow Media Marxist joint Public Knowledge are quoted. As is AT&T. And that’s it.
Like a toddler with a pet dog, AT&T (NYSE:T) has a history of poking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) until it turns around and barks. And that’s just what it’s done now.
That’s an objective opening paragraph. Keep in mind that the last time AT&T “poked” the FCC, it was when they wanted to buy T-Mobile. The Media Marxist chorus screeched their opposition, and the FCC blocked the deal - issuing an error-riddled report in defense of its decision.
But this “news” story ignores all of this. Instead it portrays AT&T as a serial government instigator. And pretends the government’s bark is worse than its bite - when it’s chomping huge chunks out of the private sector.
A few months ago, ESPN was also discussing possibly paying for delivery of its digital content.
Consumers having their cell phone plans “subsidized” - incentivized - by private companies? Awful.
This “news” story appeared (with apparently unintentional irony) at Consumerist.com.
The Media aren’t reporting on these choice-and-wallet-expanding possibilities - they are choosing the anti-free market side against them. And providing cover for the government interest “consumer interest” groups lining up likewise.
The Media and the Left together pretend to look out for the Little Guy - all the while making it ever more excruciating for him.