WebProNews

His prime examples are when a priest's radio show had enough power to influence national politics.  He raises alarm that not as many of us buy newspapers or watch network news.  He neglects online newspaper readership, online magazine readership, and non-traditional news shows like "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report", because if he included those figures, it might damage his argument.

Everyone argues against the regular media mergers and consolidations because they limit choice and give a few megacorporations too much control over this nation's media, but it seems that this is exactly what he proposes.

He talks about these sources that reach massive audiences as if they are crucial to democracy.  But prior to the commercialization of radio less than 100 years ago, there was no mass media aside from a few national magazines.

He acts as if the internet is a threat to democracy, but for the first half of this nation's history, there was no mass media.  We adapted to it and dealt with the fears it raised in his counterparts of the early 20th century.  Now there's another communications shift and that's working its way out.

To quote Tip O'Neill, "all politics is local."  Grass roots movements do not begin with a radio show with 40 million listeners or because one story dominates the front page of newspapers nationwide.  They start with small groups of people looking to right an inequity or injustice.  The internet actually makes it possible for them to find each other, share ideas, and coalesce into a movement faster.  It allows them to build momentum.

I guess the most telling thing is the e-mail address he puts at the end: dustyhorwitt@yahoo.com.

Yahoo indeed.