Media and 'Conservative' Media

Before focusing on the rise of the Angertainment segment of the American media industry, it will be useful to step back and look at the evolution of the industry as a whole and the foundation that underlies Angertainment, Inc.

Media Technology

Everything we have come to think of as media has a technological base. Prehistoric cave painters needed to prepare a surface, select natural dyes and minerals to use for their artistic media, and develop application tools. Clay tablets required the development of a different sort of medium—the clay itself—and tools to mark them. Early manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls depended on the development of papyrus writing material; natural fibers processed to form a relatively smooth, flexible writing surface that would last for centuries.

These earliest forms of communication provided proof of concept. Handmade paper, more sophisticated inks, pens, and brushes in the hands of scribes and copyists produced the prototypes. The development of two critical technologies—papermaking and printing with movable type—fueled the first era of mass communication.

From 1436, when Johannes Gutenberg developed movable type, until the 19th century, communication media as we conceive of it today meant printing. Ink on paper.

Books took pride of place. It was not an accident that Gutenberg’s first publication was a bible, the most important text in the cultural milieu of his time. The great ideas of the Enlightenment were spread via printed books. From Isaac Newton’s Principia to Darwin’s *Origin of the Species* to the literary works of Defoe, Bunyan, Scott, and Austen—the printed word in book form shaped Western civilization.

But there was more—much more—going on in the print media universe. Books held a place of honor and status in the libraries and drawing rooms of the wealthy. But broadsides, newspapers, pamphlets, and magazines outnumbered them in circulation and reached a far broader audience.

As important as books may have been in documenting science and spreading ideas, the less auspicious forms of media played an equally significant role. Walter Scott, publishing in the traditional multi-volume book format, became the best-selling, most financially successful author in the English language. Yet Scott was easily surpassed by Charles Dickens, who published his “first editions” in inexpensive serials—a format we can compare to comic books or manga today. Politics and politicians fueled printing businesses. In America, a rabble-rousing patriot, Tom Paine, published a pamphlet titled *Common Sense* that contributed significantly to fomenting a revolution.

Print media and partisanship grew hand in hand. Printers needed markets for their services. Advocates on one side of a partisan divide or the other provided ready-made audiences. In the early days of the newspaper industry in America, newspapers were often clearly aligned with one political faction or another. Reporting was similarly aligned. Newspapers frequently borrowed stories from other newspapers without attribution or fact checking. The concept of journalism as a profession was something on a distant horizon.

In the US, printing technology grew freely. The First Amendment to the US Constitution promised that printing businesses would be generally unfettered by censorship or regulation, nor controlled by taxation. All an entrepreneur needed to do was to amass sufficient capital to acquire a printing press. At the dawn of the 19th Century, the cost of entering the media business was fairly low—just the cost of the printing press and related technology. By the end of the century, with the introduction of industrial scale rotary presses, the cost for operating a mass media business had grown exponentially. At the dawn of the 20th century, mass circulation newspapers and magazines needed dedicated printing facilities, truck or rail access for paper supplies, and large staffs of highly skilled employees. If you were going to create a media company, you would need a lot of capital.

The owners of media companies assumed a new power. They became gatekeepers, deciding what might and might not be considered news. They had access to the political elite and the power to sway public opinion. It was the great era of the media barons, but it would not last forever.

The First Digital Medium

Electrical engineers will dispute the idea that Samuel F. B. Morse invented digital media, but there is a reasonable case for giving him a large share of the credit. Telegraph systems were the product of several decades of development in the late 1700s and early 1800s. The physics of electricity were just being discovered. The idea of communicating over long distances over wires was being explored in England and many places in Europe, so it is incorrect to say that Morse invented the telegraph.

His great innovation, however, was the idea of using sequences of long and short signals—dots and dashes—to code and later decode text messages. Morses dots and dashes equate to the zeros and ones of binary code—the basis of digital communication.

Morse conducted his first major public demonstration of telegraphy in 1844 with a message sent from Washington, D.C. to Baltimore. “What hath god wrought?” it said. Within two decades, the telegraph had become an essential tool throughout the nation. While it was first used by railroads to control train traffic, the telegraph was quickly commercialized. The early adopters included the newspaper industry. Print, combined with speedy communication, fueled cooperation among publishers such as the creation of the Western Associated Press service in 1862. It also fueled competition, the desire to be first with stories—to get the scoop—in the newspaper business.

With the widespread introduction of the telephone in the 1880s, the foundation was laid for the mass media of the 20th century. Print remained the primary medium but new electronic communication tools facilitated the gathering and distribution of information.

Critically, these innovative new technologies required large investments for their implementation. In the United States, they remained in the hands of for-profit enterprises. The price of entry into the media business remained steep.

Taking to the Air

World War I generated major advances in a wide range of technologies. The destructive power of munitions was improved, aircraft and tanks were created to deliver weapons more efficiently, and chemists devised horrific weapons. The challenges of battlefield communications led to development of wireless communications—the first iteration of radio. This earliest form of radio was a wireless version of the telegraph that transmitted messages in code. It offered logistical advantages—no wires required—and disadvantages—anyone could listen in. The research conducted in the WWI era blossomed immediately after the war. Amplitude modulation (AM) radio technology was improved. The new version of radio allowed words and music to be heard. The commercial radio industry was born.

The first American radio station, KDKA, went on the air in November of 1920 in Pittsburgh, PA. A majority of American homes had a radio receiver by 1931. The AM signal carried long distances, especially at night. But the signal tended to be “scratchy.” Static electricity from human and natural sources tended to degrade the quality of the transmission.

The quality of the sound transmissions mattered. A new radio technology, frequency modulation (FM) provided a much better, static-free signal; although its broadcast range was more limited. FM radio began to appear in the 1930s. In 1978 listenership to FM radio exceeded AM listenership. The superior signal quality of FM was better for music—until then the most important program content for all radio stations. FM radio won the day.

Development of television was well under way in the 1940s. By 1952 there were 100 television stations in the United States. Half of all U.S. households had television sets by 1955. Television relied on broadcast technology similar to FM radio. While the sound was good, the images could be affected by static, and overall, the range for television broadcasts was fairly limited. This led to the growth of another business: the television antenna industry.

In their efforts to get access to more television channels, people installed elaborate outdoor antennas on their homes. Homeowners might even add motorized equipment that could rotate the antenna to point it precisely in the right direction to get the best reception.

Meanwhile, rural communities, shielded by mountains or simply too far from broadcast towers, had trouble receiving television broadcasts. So a new service evolved—community antenna television (CATV). These small technology companies found ways to capture weak broadcast channels, amplify them, and send them over a wire—specifically a coaxial cable—to people who subscribed to their service. CATV was limited to a community or to adjacent communities. The receiving antenna would be bigger, taller, and more expensive than any individual household could afford. In hilly or mountainous terrain it would be placed at a high elevation. The media industry was learning; people were willing to pay for good television reception.

CATV technology evolved and got better, especially the little “cable box” that allowed customers to choose channels. People found that television reception on these “cable” systems was better than over-the-air reception. And before long, CATV morphed into a new, thriving business: cable television. Communities granted cable companies franchises, wires were strung on existing utility poles, and before long, most of America would have access to dozens and dozens of channels—some created exclusively for cable television. In 1968, only 6.4 percent of Americans had cable television. In 1978, the number increased to 17.5 percent. Ten years later, in 1988, more than fifty percent of American homes had cable. According to a report from Forbes, 90 percent of the households in the US that watched television subscribed to a cable service—105 million households—in 2010.

Even in its infancy, cable television as a medium helped create a new array of programming through its demand for “content” to provide to its customers. Certain channels with premium content would demand special subscriptions which would bring in more money: HBO and Showtime, for example. Other popular channels demanded and received additional payments from the cable companies for permission to carry them. Sports channels like ESPN led this pack. So the cable companies developed the technology that allowed them to separate groups of channels into “bundles,” passed along the additional fees, and earned more profit.

At the turn of the 21st century, cable television was the dominant force in the American entertainment ecosystem; a hugely profitable business that was continually looking for new and better ways to expand and earn more money.

And Then, Everything Changed

The cable television industry was in for a rude awakening, however. In about the same time that it took for CATV to turn into the cable television we know and love, a new medium was being incubated.

In 1969 computer-to-computer network communication was initiated on the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET). The project, begun in 1966, linked four university research departments together. ARPANET delivered a proof of concept for the computer scientists working on it and was the first implementation of a digital communication network protocol known by the acronym TCP/IP. That acronym may be unfamiliar, but today, everything on the Internet from e-mail to Netflix to Amazon, operates using TCP/IP. It became THE digital technology standard for sending digital information from one place to another.

In 1982, another revolution in communication began with the introduction of the compact disc (CD). Sony and Philips worked together on a project to store and play back music that was recorded and stored digitally. With this development, the ability to share music was radically changed. Instead of working with a physical object such as a vinyl record or an audio-cassette, music could now be shared as a digital file. The recording industry was soon to experience a major upheaval as a result of its success in introducing the CD. Similarly, in 1996, the video industry began its migration from analog to digital technology with the introduction of the digital video disk (DVD).

Today, aficionados argue about the warmth and special qualities of vinyl for music and emulsion based film for movies and television. Analog technology has its advocates because of its creative qualities and potential. When you get down to business—making money—faster, cheaper digital technology is king.

Meanwhile, in 1979, a company named CompuServe Incorporated began offering computer network access over telephone lines. It used a mixture of proprietary and standardized protocols to give customers e-mail and file sharing capabilities. Another company, Quantum Computer Services founded in 1985, changed its name to America Online (AOL) in 1989. In that same year, an English computer scientist working at the Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN), Tim Berners-Lee, proposed something he called the World Wide Web. In 1990 a working system was built using the TCP/IP protocol and declared a success. In 1991 the technology was released to the public. By 1993, at least 50 websites had been created. In 2022, there were about 2 billion websites.

Netflix, founded in 1997, offered an alternative to people who rented videotape cassettes and DVDs from video rental stores. Netflix supplied DVDs by mail. More people were switching from VHS tapes to DVDs and for the first decade of its existence, Netflix battled with Blockbuster in the DVD rental market. But, in January 2007, Netflix again changed the media industry. Netflix began offering a streaming video service.

A few other key dates to consider: In 1998 Google was founded. The first camera phone was introduced in 1999. The iPhone came to life in 2007. The Android alternative to the iPhone came out in 2008.

In a time span of about 30 years, a vast communications ecosystem based on the foundation of TCP/IP was created. It provided standardized interoperability. It features an unlimited number of “channels.” And because of the availability and low cost of the technology, anyone could get into the media business at some level.

Monetizing Media in America

Broadcast media took distinctly different paths as the technology developed around the world. In England and Europe in general, state-sponsored networks were created. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) provided the foremost example of this kind of development. Through its World Service, the BBC covered the world. It is supported by television licensing fees. Other nations operated national broadcast media through their postal services or through independent government agencies. In the United States, free enterprise capitalism prevailed. The burgeoning world of broadcast media was turned over to American businesses to own and operate. One government agency, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was involved in the industry. The FCC granted broadcast licenses and determined what portions of the broadcast spectrum stations could use. The US government served as a kind of referee; leaving business interests generally on their own to maximize the profitability of their licenses.

Print media had a well-established business model. They sold physical products to readers—newspapers and magazines. They sold advertisements to businesses that wanted to get the attention of the publications readers. Over time, advertising generated more revenue than circulation for most publications. Newspapers, in particular, feasted on advertising revenue. Display advertising from department stores, auto dealers, supermarkets—every sector of retail business—was essential for 20th century businesses. This was augmented by classified advertising—especially advertising for employers—the help wanted ads. And yet, there was so much more: real estate, automotive ads, lost and found, the “personals,” a vast array of categories that advertisers paid for one line at a time.

Many of the early broadcast stations were owned and operated by newspapers. They understood the advertising business and had existing business contacts. Since American broadcasts were provided free, over the air, advertising was the easy answer to the challenge of making broadcasting profitable.

The broadcasting industry evolved symbiotically with the advertising industry. Together, they helped drive the creation of the great American consumer economy. They created the vision of the American dream and then sold it relentlessly. In the two decades following World War II, when peoples spending power was growing, the effect on the American economy was astonishing. The Depression-era dream of a chicken in every pot evolved into a vision of a country with a station wagon in every driveway. People who were left behind in this rush to consumerism—and there were many—were ignored.

Broadcast journalism—news delivered over the air—was a secondary consideration for most broadcasters. It was a part of the content—but not the most important part.

News and Profitability

News has always had a place in broadcasting. The famous report of the fiery crash of the Hindenburg, although not aired live, is an early example of the power of broadcast reporting. The recorded voice of the WLS reporter captured the dramatic moment in a way newspapers could not. But broadcast journalism was still in its infancy.

World War II changed broadcasting. As the stakes were raised, audiences were more engaged, and the power of live broadcast events increased.

President Franklin D. Roosevelts personal addresses to the American public—his fireside chats—attracted a little under 20 percent of the radio audience in the pre-war years. He was generally popular, and the economic issues of the great depression were important, but the audiences for his talks were relatively small, even in comparison to the most popular radio programs of the era. His address to the nation in December of 1940, at the time of the German bombing of London, was heard by nearly 60 percent of radio listeners. His address of May 27, 1941, was heard by 70 percent of radio listeners. His address following the bombing of Pearl Harbor was heard by 79 percent of radio listeners. Broadcasting provided a force that united a nation.

When the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) hired Edward R. Murrow in 1935 it did not have a news department; only an announcer, Robert Trout, who read news reports. In the years leading up to World War II, Murrow assembled a team of reporters and, as the war began in Europe, organized the coverage of news that reshaped the world. Most famously, Murrow himself provided live reports from London describing the German blitz. Radio listeners in America heard the sound of bombs, anti-aircraft guns, police whistles, and sirens as Murrow described the attacks.

The radio broadcasts of news during the war riveted the nation. The impact of the reports was huge, coalescing support for the war effort, creating a sense of national purpose.

Murrow became a celebrity, and that, combined with the role that broadcast journalism played in the war effort, gave the news operations at CBS a special status. In the immediate aftermath of the war and with the beginning of television broadcasting, news divisions were viewed as a public service. In television, the nightly news programs expanded to half-hour shows. CBS, anchored by Walter Cronkite, did battle with NBC led by Chet Huntley and David Brinkley. The American Broadcasting Network (ABC) typically trailed the leaders in the evening news, but innovated in primetime and late-night programming. When Peter Jennings, in his second stint as an anchor started in 1983, ABC became a leader in the evening news slot as well.

Well into the 1980s, news was viewed by network executives as a way to build bigger audiences, gain credibility and status. Whether it was election coverage, prime-time specials, or developing programming for mornings or late night, news was viewed as something that was important and that required an investment of resources.

Murrow, with his reporting, set a tone and later, as president of the CBS news division, he established credible journalistic standards. Through the four decades following the war, television news supplanted newspapers as the source for most people’s news. On national television, a man (it was almost always a man) sat behind a desk and told the audience what was going on in the world. His solemn presence was augmented by images and reports from places near and far. Everything that an informed citizen really needed to know was compressed into an easy-to-consume package in a 30-minute broadcast. Local news broadcasts, following a similar format with the addition of weather and sports reports, followed a similar format.

Journalism had become more important. The nation was growing. Our interactions with the rest of the world were more important. Journalism was turning into a profession with ethical standards.

Americas first school of journalism was established in 1908 at the University of Missouri. Up until that time, journalism was learned through on-the-job training. By the 1920s, a dozen universities offered journalism education. By the time television journalism was well established in 1985, journalism and other forms of “media studies” were part of the curricula at most colleges and universities.

Journalism, in print or over the air, had evolved into a large, thriving industry. The business, supported primarily by advertising, was continuing to expand. American colleges and universities provided a continuous flow of new, well-trained recruits to staff the growing industry.

Life was good. But everything was about to change.

The Fairness Doctrine Era

In the early days of radio and television, broadcast media operated under a significant restraint: The Fairness Doctrine.

Under this policy, introduced in 1949 by the Federal Communications Commission, the organizations that held broadcast licenses were required to present all sides of controversial issues. The FCC doctrine enforced a kind of civility on broadcasters.

It was challenged and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. In a 1969 case, the plaintiffs, the Red Lion Broadcasting Co., said that the Fairness Doctrine was an infringement on their first amendment rights of free speech. The court denied their appeal and upheld the Fairness Doctrine, essentially saying that the airwaves belonged to the people and nothing in the first amendment prevented the government from requiring broadcasters to share the airwaves.

At a time when some people were complaining about the power of big media companies to control messaging and act as gatekeepers, the Fairness Doctrine was restraining the ability of broadcasters to act as gatekeepers.

News as a Business

As the decades of the 1970s and 80s rolled by, the business side of the television industry got more interested in news. CBS had launched *60 Minutes* and it proved profitable. The other networks followed up with primetime news programs of their own. Moving into different time slots, shows like *Good Night America*, a short-lived late night news weekly, launched the career of Geraldo Rivera.

Ratings wars broke out in the morning. ABCs *Good Morning America* show challenged NBCs long-running *Today* show. And while the morning shows featured banter, celebrities and lots of additional “entertainment” content—news was a vital part of the programming.

The growth of cable television brought a new player into the television news marketplace—the all-news channel. Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network (C-SPAN) is an American cable and satellite television network, created in 1979 by the cable television industry as a nonprofit public service. In the United States, the first nationwide cable TV news channel to launch was CNN in 1980, followed by Financial News Network (FNN) in 1981 and CNN2 (now HLN) in 1982. CNBC was created in 1989, taking control of FNN in 1991. Through the 1990s and beyond, the cable news industry continued to grow, with the establishment of several other networks, including Fox News Channel and MSNBC (both in 1996), and specialty channels such as Bloomberg Television, Fox Business Network, and ESPN News.

Business executives in the television world learned that “news” was simply another form of “content.” Journalism wasn’t a public service. It was simply another line on a balance sheet. Providing great journalism was no longer a matter of pride. The news divisions became “bottom line” driven.

The Seeds of Conservative Media

During the early 20th century people with strong, right-wing ideological beliefs felt shut out by the gatekeepers of the mainstream media. They worked to get their views out, publishing books and magazines and creating radio programs that could be broadcast by existing radio stations. The excellent book Messengers of the Right provides a detailed view of this era of conservative media activism. The greatest impact of this generation of ideological activism came through its modest messaging impact and its larger, repeated complaints that the mainstream media outlets were unfair and biased. Since they could not get their messaging past the gatekeepers, they asserted that it must be due to something they labeled as “liberal media bias.”

The reality was more complicated. The mainstream media became more professionalized as it was staffed by journalism school graduates. The primary media outlets—especially the newspapers—made a concerted effort to provide balance in their reporting and most significantly, in expressing opinions.

Modern professional journalism required reporters and editors to 1) provide balanced reporting of controversial topics, seeking comments from sources representing varying points of view and 2) distinguish between fact and opinion in writing and to label opinion as such and generally put it in a context that was recognized as “opinion.”

Historically, newspapers provided an editorial page where the editors, publishers and owners of the newspaper expressed their personal opinions on matters ranging from foreign affairs to recommendations for who readers should vote for in an election. The post WWII era of journalism marked the introduction of the “op-ed” page, where articles representing diverse points of view appeared. Modern journalism recognized a need to share a diversity of political views. The mainstream media of the era were, in fact, making a conscious effort to present diverse viewpoints—including those of conservative politicians and commentators.

That kind of representation was insufficient for true believers. The small, energetic group of right-wing publishers and broadcasters provided a platform for conservative views. They also started the drumbeat of accusations: liberal bias, liberal bias, liberal bias.

Early Conservative Media Pioneers

In the print arena, magazines such as Human Events and The National Review were launched. Henry Regnery, the founder of Human Events magazine, became the leading publisher of conservative authors in this era. He published William F. Buckleys first book God and Man at Yale, The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirk, volumes by James J. Kilpatrick and Robert Welch (founder of the John Birch Society).

After Buckley founded The National Review, he hired William Allen Rusher in 1957 as publisher. While running the operation, Rusher became a central figure in the conservative politics of the time. Rusher was actively involved in the development of the Young Americans for Freedom. He helped establish the Conservative Party in New York and the American Conservative Union. He served as a key advisor in the conservative effort to draft Barry Goldwater as the presidential candidate in 1964. Rusher was a major figure in the conservative movement throughout his life and a proponent of the creation of a true conservative third party.

Clarence Manion, a nominal Democrat, former professor and dean of the law school at Notre Dame, supported Dwight Eisenhower’s presidential campaign in 1952. After winning the election, Manion was appointed to a committee, where he advocated for an amendment that would have reduced the president’s ability to negotiate and sign treaties. Manion favored a plan that would have required a national referendum on any treaty. In 1954, Manion was fired from his administration job and he began producing a weekly radio broadcast: The Manion Forum of Opinion. The program was originally distributed on the Mutual Broadcasting Network and, in its heyday, reached an audience estimated at around 4 million listeners. Manion was a Goldwater supporter, hosted the future Republican nominee on his radio show, and was reportedly influential in convincing Goldwater to publish his best-selling book Conscience of a Conservative (ghost written by L. Brent Bozell Jr.).

These activists and others created a relatively small but very influential media environment in which conservative ideas and causes flourished. The era is extremely well documented in the book *Messengers of the Right* by Nicole Hemmer.

While there were and continue to be intellectual threads, ideas, conservative theories and plans that resonate to this day, all of these early conservative media efforts had one larger, more significant effect. As self-identified outsiders, crusading to convert readers and audiences to their cause, they all attacked “the establishment.” More specifically, no matter what conservative (sometimes contradictory) position they took, they consistently accused the existing major media outlets of having “liberal bias.”

The Myth of Liberal Media Bias

Nobody wants to receive bad news. In the case of angertainers and their political allies, “bad” news encompasses any news that contradicts them. Going back to the early days of the growth of right-wing media, the separation of message and messenger has been important.

If you take the news coverage provided by media organizations such as the New York Times, Washington Post*, Wall Street Journal, and others seriously then you will have to spend most of your time every day rebutting, refuting, and otherwise disagreeing with the news. Additionally if you attempt to rebut, refute, or disagree, you lend your opponents a degree of validity. Is there something to what they are saying? If you address the claim directly, you’re suggesting that there may be some truth to what the opposition is saying. At the very least, in constructing a reply, you are repeating the claim in some way. You may be accidentally informing your audience about things it knew nothing about.

There is a better way.

The early messengers of the right began the process of eroding trust in professional journalism. They began the “media bias” chant. They accused reporters and publications of being “liberal.”

The angertainment industry and its political allies have raised this effort to encourage mistrust of professional journalism to an art form. Using labels such as the “lamestream media,” and “fake news,” the angertainment/politician complex avoids any uncomfortable discussions of reporting by professional journalists. They dismiss professional journalism in its entirety.

This approach works as a way to insulate their content from real reporting. Plus, it provides business benefits. By building a case for mistrust of professional journalism, the angertainment industry is creating its own, profitable alternative. Trust us, it tells its audience. And in doing so, it forges a special bond with viewers and listeners that will, over time, translate into business profits.

The Reality of Journalism Bias

Yes, there is such a thing as serious journalism. Most of the people working in newsgathering profession today are just that: serious journalists.

Journalism is a profession with professional standards. Most serious journalists go to school to learn about the craft of reporting, develop their communication skills, and learn about the ethics and professional standards of journalism. They learn that facts matter. They learn how to report a story fairly when subjects of the story disagree. They learn about how to strive to be objective—to report the facts without inserting your personal opinions. And yes, when they do have opinions they learn that there is a place for that too, at least in newspapers, on the editorial page.

Is this a perfect system? No.

In reality, no human being can be perfectly objective. There is an inherent bias in the practice of serious journalism. But it is not, as some critics and politicians complain, a “liberal” media bias.

The bias in journalism is rooted in the basic humanity of the reporters, editors, and managers of media organizations. The root of the issue—the basic source of bias in journalism—is fundamental humanity.

The people who go into the journalism profession tend to be the kind of people who are curious, want to know more about the world, and who care about other people. In news organizations those same kinds of people become editors, make news assignments, and define the beats of their reporters.

These people don’t change when they become senior managers and even owners. They worry more about the financial aspects of their organizations but they still act based on their basic human instincts. What you see from serious journalism is an overall concern for people in the world we live in. It is not, as the angertainers and politicians want people to believe, a “liberal” bias. It is rather a more fundamental bias toward humanity. It is, at its root, empathy.

Angertainers and their political allies do not want their audience to believe that.