for the. tonight on our t.v. the twenty four hour news cycle there's time for news sports and weather and just a few minutes left over for media bashing all mainstream news outlets attempt to blow holes in our team's credibility will turn the tables and tell you who's paying their bills and a new made for t.v. drama shines a spotlight on all the behind the scenes chaos of the typical newsroom or rather the type of newsroom viewers wish existed we'll tell you why this depiction of american journalism at its finest is a far cry from reality in the fairy tale world of heroes steal from the rich and get to the fore in the real world taxes on the middle class are up and that cash is steadily flowing to the pockets of those who don't need it i'm sure would force to the concrete jungle of wall street is it time for americans to take

a page out of robin hood playbook. it's one day june twenty seventh eight pm in washington d.c. i'm at a martin and you're watching our t.v. here our t.v. our motto is question more and what that means is to think critically about what we're told from the mainstream our t. offers a different perspective than the m.s.m. intends to host more adversarial journalism dare i say tapping into the roots of what journalism should be people all over the world are tuning in because they want to see real reporting done about america's domestic and foreign policy according to a recent study r.t.e. leaves all their channels in the level of people watching daily and canada but the channels growing popularity hasn't come without controversy. r t the state run english speaking russian channel it's kind of like al-jazeera but the kremlin

already controls domestic television now it's going after the international audience to repair a national event tarnished by war corruption and assaults on democracy does not demand putin freedom of the press to stifle it has tremendous preved only got sports media outlets one after another and none of these china we see. is about to bite the hand that feeds them now a lot of people say yeah our two does have spin because it's funded by the government of russia but let's examine the premise that work here glenn greenwald were an excellent article that sums it up pretty nicely shining a light on the people and the money behind the scenes yeah asks is there rule that says it's perfectly ok for a journalist to work for a media outlet own and controlled by a weapons contractor and b c n m s n b c is owned by g.e. or owned by the us and british governments like the b.b.c. stars and stripes as well as the voice of america or how about owned by rupert murdoch and a saudi prince aka the benefactors of the wall street journal and the so-called

fair and balanced and journalistic stylings of fox news or what about the banking corporation with longstanding ties to right wing governments that fun politico how about for profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the us government or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties in the u s. but it's apparently a violation of journalistic integrity to run a media outlet own by the russian government where did that rule come from remember it's not our t.v. that sat on the bush wiretapping story for a year or disseminated government propaganda aiding this country into an illegal and immoral war that was the new york times now i work at the station not because i'm trying to advance the interests of russia but because i genuinely care about the future of this country and where we're headed i want to inform citizenry and i'm not censored by the top and we can only have an informed citizenry to govern

ourselves properly and vote with our best interests and i've seen the corporate media fail time and time again by catering to the establishment and i'm honored to be given a platform where i can speak my mind and say and do whatever i please it's my passion and i live by the motto of our team to question more and i hope that you do too apparently some in the entertainment industry see what journalism used to be and how it's drastically changed h.b.o.'s new show newsroom cuts through the world of manufactured journalism featuring character reporters that have the desire to tell it like it really is or he's an associate sure going to. have the scoop. good evening void this is newsnight slap in the face of mainstream american journalism i'm a leader in an industry that terrorists cares and failed to report on tectonic shifts in our country speaking truth to power when you ask what makes the greatest country in the world i don't know what you're talking about the fourth branch of power is finally back hitting america's screens in a t.v.

show called the newsroom not in reality a lot of countries do things better than the united states but we can't even have that discussion because you're shouted down as unpatriotic brutal truths on what journalism should really be about in the old days i did as well you know. we just decided the passion to question the status quo and the fear mongering of real broadcasts not all muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are muslim we were attacked by muslims we were attacked by sociopaths examples of absurdity taken to an extreme on t.v. news but it is what is in danger of falling under sharia law as viewership on real mainstream media plummets the show adds insult to injury by portraying common news show behavior threatening the fabric of society coming out in a major garrett. amid critical reviews a t.v. show about the news more honest than real news show business is doing a better job than the news this and presenting news it's a complete flip around

a lot of reporters and producers news anchors who look at this show should be blushing and should be thinking they got us here are they if you try and do it in the purest sense what your character does in this show it doesn't rate when a fictional anchor fights for substance on the news to him or not her story obviously breast cancer all the women that the baby was raised that he's resisted by the system. in real american mainstream newsrooms this street forwardness is a myth nobody really likes to bite the hand. feeds that i feel like making us right here on the nominees instead infotainment is keen there's a deliberate effort here you know basically to say truth be damned we have to do all we have to do to get audience it seems to take years before a truth catches up with news until then there's no room for a real news in us newsrooms you've got way too much crap focused on just as valid

stuff like reality television and what happened on jersey shore one taking away from good news in three d. the mainstream media today focuses on pitch and speed and not angering corporate owners or challenging the system uncomfortable issues opinions deemed politically incorrect or the questioning of long held beliefs about america it seems are best left to the drama and face it you're going to. new york. and as the consolidated corporate media model fails in its coverage alternative media and citizen journalism is on the rise but as more voices perspectives and biases enter the global reporting spectrum online it becomes harder to find the facts so where does this leave the for the state and what's to be for the future of journalism in our last hour christopher chambers journalism professor at georgetown university joining i asked what his opinion was on the biggest obstacles facing journalism

today take a lesson well you know they boil it down an allegorical form in the in the newsroom i mean it's gets it's corporate control five companies owning about ninety six percent let's just say of the mainstream media in this country but there's also. there was a problem before that and that was not being able to really focus on what their role was in society yes expose truth and justice but everybody's got a different definition of what that is us fifty different people who get fifteen different answers so you have that moving as technology starts to move in the twentieth century early twentieth century and the corporate model gets a hold in the eighty's and that blows everything to hell i mean i've just given it to you in a nutshell right there like will mcavoy. is a good net show i have you seen journalism change from when you were younger till now well there is the fragmentation because of the technology and you know they

don't really deal with that as much on the show it's really about cable news but it but let me just focus on that you have the rise with ted turner of the twenty four hour news cycle you have to fill it with something and when you mix it with the corporate culture of dumbing things down to get you know a lowest marginal cost the biggest bang for the buck and that big bang usually is through candy brain candy of some sort anything that's going to make people crazy either through affecting their reptilian br. in their medulla or given them something sweet to crave for and that's what news especially twenty four hour cable news has boiled into but then you have this other universe out there alternative news sources many different platforms but even there you have a problem where things are fragmented you can be in your own tribe you can wall yourself off and the craziness starts to echo you know t.v. news down here and in the ditch and then you have this other universe that's about

fifty percent crap and lunacy oh i think that's where people get really and they shut themselves off from news entirely bright either have this old dinosaur media model that totally is detached from what they were about or they have they're inundated with information just everywhere and i don't know where to find the facts i mean where do you suggest that people get their news or really search for things online and well i mean it would have to be various sources and you have to be you know it starts really starts young it starts before i get kids at georgetown i mean empathy critical thinking things like that starts start when you're a kid and you have to carry that through because by the time you're an adult with the fragmentation the corporate ownership the agendas either government or corporate it's going to pull you in about a dozen different different directions and that's what they have on the show they don't really go into multimedia stuff too much but i mean it's hard for the media itself to look at itself even even in a fictionalized account t.v.

cable news looks at itself way too seriously given its importance in society and then you have these other platforms online multimedia where you see a lot of self-importance and snark you know like well these are dinosaurs well yeah but that doesn't necessarily mean your more of evolved in your views and how you approach things than they are you just have better technology as a relation as the citizen as i mean at this growing because i mean we have the new alternative media the rise of citizen journalism live streaming right on the ground reporting. then you have you know what some people call the dinosaur meetings all the corporate top down and but do you say that they're going to integrate at all or get in there we're going to see a growing divide you think that this corporate media model will start adapting the technologies of citizen journalism into their will they already are i mean. curation crowdsourcing are now taglines of these big media companies are trying to really push everything into a single commercial model you're always going to have the cable giants out there

which you know and that's the magnifying glass to that the newsroom has. but you know maybe we need you know aaron sorkin wrote the newsroom and also wrote the social network about facebook maybe we need a t.v. show about this multimedia new alternative platforms because that when you see these magazines online magazines like politico or the daily caller they're really not quote digging for truth either they're really curating rehashing maybe making people comfortable with the prejudices and passions that they might already have so that's we have to address that before we address the business model but the business model is starting to mesh but again it's for commercials for to make money to make bucks not to enlighten people very true i know bottom line is that accent is asian and not to necessarily where you know that they can make a living and why. but when you're teaching your class to students are you worried

that the model i mean a chance changing so rapidly and things are advancing very quickly are you worried that it's kind of an outdated model or that or that things are going to change that no i mean. people are going to need reporters people who who find a story develop story sources dig for the truth people are always going to need that people want that really and that's what they want in cable giant news they really do want that most people at least maybe fox but most people at least they want to hear they also want another ploy. forums like you know multimedia journalism it's just that the outlets are going to change how we're going to get the news how we're going to get our information is going is changing you know from the from you know gutenberg bible or a stone tablet or a wall painting to an i phone now i mean that's what's that's what doesn't change is change technological change that people always want the information the problem is is that the other thing people want is to hear stuff that makes them feel good

or to feed their passions and fears to go cuckoo that doesn't change either so it's going to be an eternal battle between delivery systems and technology and our passions and stupidity so you know what are we going to what master are we going to serve now unfortunately we have a situation where the worst of both worlds is put together it doesn't matter whether it's online or on you know will mcavoy fictional network or on fox or the daily caller or politico and this and d.c. we've got the worst of both worlds now what we try to do is get people to pull that apart and pick you know really report things with authority and dignity and ethics and empathy among does seem like it's driven on a lot of fear and it's important to get your perspective from a lot of different sources and pick out where cash and sex are a marketable motive thank you so much the customer chambers journalism professor at georgetown university. well we all know where the g.o.p. stands in today's political world they love guns and god and america but they're

not so fond of gay people tonight i want to take you on a little trip down to texas where the lone star g.o.p. has just released their platform for two thousand and twelve let me say this platforms a special one even for texas i mean after all this is a state full of cowboy hats and pickup trucks and you can forget their governor is a laughable attempt at a run for presidency. is it mitt romney that was on the side of against the second amendment before he was for the second amendment was it was before he was before the social programs from the standpoint of he was for standing up for roe versus wade before he was against verse roe versus wade but he was for race to the top he's. for obama care and now he's against it. that was painful to watch rick perry falling flat on his face and we can play

about twenty minutes highlighting the best rick perry moments but we'll save that for another time but back to the g.o.p. platform some interesting things the party wants to replace the national income tax with a progressive sales tax instead something that my head low and middle income americans the hardest well least we know they're looking out for the rich they're mo shockingly they also pose multicultural education and critical thinking in the classroom yep you heard me right they oppose thinking critically in school because they're worried someone might learn the american way ain't always the right way and the g.o.p. in texas wants to bring back corporal punishment in schools they believe school districts need more power to punish students yes because beating children is always a good thing and that's just a few of the items in this g.o.p. platform for texas they're also against all gay people and think that porn is tearing the fan. only a part and oh yeah that old voting rights act should be done away with to and makes

you wonder what year are these people living and this is not the one nine hundred fifty s. i'm surprised that also their own internal also want to take away a woman's right to vote or even drive their pickups. still from the rich and give to the poor hey i work for robin hood because i work for the people of this country well it's not quite the same as to what robin hood it's actually a proposed tax on wall street transactions an idea that's growing in popularity since the inception of the occupy wall street movement the best way to symbolize this is a feeling we're going to watch something because you know. what we want to do with . george washington symbolizing robin we put a man because i'm going to he's robbing other people this particular point well it's not all about drawing little hats and dollar bills how does this tax actually work into something like this really have the potential to pass with the bipartisanship squabbling on the hill to discuss more about the robin hood tax and

the movement in favor of it i was joined earlier by richard wolffe author of occupy the economy challenging capitalism. i think this is a serious movement it is quite a few years old it was basically invented by a nobel prize american economist professor james tobin of yale university who was my teacher when i was getting my ph d. in economics and the idea is simple just like we have a sales tax when you buy a candy bar or a bar of soda or a cigarette tax or a gas tax it's long past due that we have the same kind of tax on the financial transactions made by hedge funds and stock brokerage is and big banks across the world it's gaining traction in europe leaders in europe have already come out in favor of it the united states is behind the curve it would it be oh very good way to tax those who have done best over the last thirty years who had a lot to do with bringing us with the financial crisis who've escaped this tax for

a long time and who now ought to be made to pay what is their fair share anyway richard explain a little bit more in detail about exactly how it would work and the end mounted percentage of you know how much these would be tax it's very small but i think people kind of their eyes glaze over when they hear anything about stocks and bonds and derivatives and trading on wall street and just to explain and shed some light on exactly how it work. it's very simple the percentage is minute point three percent is one popular proposal and the reason it can be so terribly tiny is because there are literally millions and millions of these transactions mostly made by computers on a dozen stock markets around the world every day so all that would happen is a tiny tiny tax on each of those transactions very easy to impose the tax very easy to keep track very easy to collect and it's

a way of making the financial sector the secular that has grown the biggest of the united states' economy over the last forty years begin to pay its fair share for the immense transactions and immense profits it gets simply put it's a convenient easy quick way to make the finance years in this country finally begin to pay at the scale that the rest of us have been paying for decades how we make sure that the government allocates these funds that it collects there is transactions back toward people who need it. that's a whole nother problem that probably exists with every revenue with every tax whether it be a tax on your luxuries or a tax on your income or a tax on your property the one thing though that we know is that the government is using scarcity of revenue to justify cutting social security cutting government jobs covering cutting government programs just as people need them the most in

a crisis so here's a way to go to those who have the most who's done the best and ask them finally to pay the kinds of shares that they were made to pay in the one nine hundred thirty s. and forty's the last time we had this crisis they've gotten away with it to this boy here's a tax that can get it from those most able to pay so they finally do something to help us get out of a crisis they had more than anyone else to do with bringing upon us. richard i think that a lot of people when they hear more taxes they kind of. get startled and they say no that can't be the answer more taxes on the people and i will you know somehow affect the lower tier of the people in this country i mean you'd be hell bent to find a tax that doesn't have loopholes or exemptions of the people at the top i mean will banks be exempt from this are there any exemptions and as as we see this. well

there's no question that the first line of defense of the financial community is to denounce this as a tax precisely to get people who are overtaxed already to turn away from this and not studied enough to realize that it's a tax that initially falls only on the richest institutions and people in the country but you're quite right like with every tax if we get forward in it if we move forward the way the europeans are then their plan b. will be to make loopholes and adjustments and if they can't win that then plan c. would be to shift the burden of the tax on to others but all of those things are things they will try to do and we will even have to see them trying if we don't levy the tax in the first place so it's a sequence you'll struggle to get the tax and then struggle to make sure they don't pass it on to everybody else if we don't do that if we don't do that consider the alternative more deficits for the government more shortages of revenue more cutting

of the benefits for people cutting of the social security cutting of the medicare so that we're not talking about having a tax or not we're talking about having a tax on the rich or having the mass of people suffer even more in these future years than these first five years of crisis have already meant for us in the occupy wall street movement has really helped shine a light on these people at the top and wall street in general do you think that we really have a chance of passing this. yes and let me give you an example not only did occupy wall street put the one percent versus ninety nine percent in the forefront of our national discussion and that's something we told the occupy wall street movement no matter what happens going forward for having contributed to changing the conversation in this country but here's an example the current issue of time magazine one of the largest circulating magazines in the country is all about their

lead story their cover story about the end of the american dream about the conditions which make it impossible for people to work hard and do better and one of the reasons are the unemployment the government cutbacks of services and supports the only way to reverse that is to find revenue for the government that doesn't hit the average people that goes after those most able to pay who will not suffer significantly this transactions tax that is being talked about that you are having a good program about is precisely one way to do that richard i think the robin hood tax though also throws people off i mean how can we get the conservatives and the wealthy in this country to back something that's basically telling in theirs and they're stealing i mean you know that's a bad name for the tax or do you that's going to affect terrible. so i mean how can his main support it. well you know in europe it's called the transaction tax or

also it's called the told in tax after professor told and who initiated it to call it robin hood is to suggest the notion that it stealing but it isn't stealing it's taxation and the only mystery is why we haven't taxed transactions all along by the way in american history if you go back we have had transaction taxes this is not a new tax this is a tax that was taken off the financial sector and all that is really being asked is to put it back on now that we need it more than ever richard i'm i'm i have the time magazine that you spoke of right here in the history of the american dream is it still real sad that we have to ask ourselves is that even still capable of achieving in this country but to somehow prichard talk a little bit about how this is already passed how it's already been supported across the you and it's not really that controversial in the countries that are. in it over there. even the most stalwart austerity focused government that of

angela merkel in germany mrs merkel has had to because of the pressure of the socialist party of the link of party in germany she and the unions she has had to embrace this transactions tax so the old american business communities argument don't do it because then transactions won't be done in new york the way they always have been they'll be sent to europe that's simply not true because the europe the europeans are going to make that tax soon and if the united states did it they'd make it immediately so that nobody would have any incentive to leave none of those scare stories would be true and i think you would see that this would be a very good first step in really organizing that tax structure so it goes after the people who used to have to pay a lot more who got out of it and who we now need because we're in a crisis to come back and perform the way they should have been all along anyway

thank you so much richard for coming on giving your perspective about this as richard wolffe author of occupy the economy challenging capitalism. now with over half of americans income tax is being spent on the military industrial complex one would think that that money is being put to good use and sixteen's tanks helicopters drones and armor well america certainly has the biggest and baddest killing equipment in the world but have you ever wondered what happens to all the military's toys once the troops troops get pulled out of the military zones you want to wonder much longer you'll see it for yourself that's because many of the u.s. military's weapons are heading straight to local police forces it's called the ten thirty three program and it gave half a billion dollars worth of military gear to police forces in two thousand and eleven alone we see it happening already in rural towns across america. and we've all seen these little handheld tasers cops use well a.p.t is seriously

stepping up its taser firepower this is why i used the police chief role gonzales says like surrounding police departments the school district located in the high illegal trafficking area is also acquiring much needed military equipment worth three hundred eighty thousand dollars they are here to train members of the three hundred fifty fourth m.p. company here in st louis on how to drive these rigs and militaries drivers if you will on the highways and on city streets this is just the beginning take a look at this info graphic of the evolution of riot cops during the last couple decades it's obvious that the police are becoming increasingly militarized in this country and now they're being armed with actual military weaponry what's more this week the u.s. department of justice gave seven hundred fifty thousand dollars to the city of chula vista california to help their police force higher military veterans sensualist received six point four million dollars for doing the same and these are certainly not rare instances across the country veterans are increasingly turning

into police officers it's not only are boys in blue armed to the gills they're also trained to be military machines in the end all of this begs the question what exactly is our police force preparing for and who are they trying to control with all this gear. that does it for the news tonight but stick around for the big picture coming up at the top of the hour tonight host tom hartman will take on a tough panel of conservatives in his lone liberal ramble on and on to an array of topics including the texas g.o.p. platform voter id laws but for more on the stories we covered today go to youtube dot com slash r t america or check out our website r.t. dot com slash usa also follow me on twitter at abby martin that's it for now have a great night and we'll see you tomorrow.