the movie industry<\/em>) parfaitement int\u00e9gr\u00e9e au syst\u00e8me g\u00e9n\u00e9ral.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tVoici cet extrait du texte d\u00e9j\u00e0 signal\u00e9, qui expose quelques r\u00e9alit\u00e9s significatives du cin\u00e9ma consid\u00e9r\u00e9 du point de vue de son poids politique, c’est-\u00e0-dire, son poids financier et son poids de groupe de pression pour obtenir des avantages, et nullement un pr\u00e9tendu poids id\u00e9ologique selon l’image romantique qu’on entretient.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00abThe stakes are high for the Democratic candidates. According to Eric Alterman in the September 2004 edition of the Atlantic Monthly, During the 2000 election cycle, zip-code areas on average yielded slightly more than $35,000 in political contributions, while residents of Beverly Hills, 90210, ponied up slightly more than $6.2 million. In the same year Pacific Palisades, Bel Air, and Brentwood were each good for $1.7 million to $3.3 million.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbIn 2002 entertainment ranked first among all industries funding Democratic Party committees, and roughly 80 percent of the industry’s party contributions went to Democratic candidates and committees; just 20 percent went to the Republican Party. From 1989 up to the start of the current election cycle Hollywood had given the party nearly $100 million for federal elections alone close to the $114 million Republicans received from their friends in the oil and gas industries. Together with organized labor and the trial bar, Hollywood is now one of the three pillars of the Democrats’ financial structure.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbFigures released by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) suggest that the television, film and music industry contributed some $56 million to the two major parties during the 2004 and 2006 election cycles, two-thirds of which (some $37 million) went to the Democrats. The entertainment industry ranked 11th in donations in 2004 and 2006 among the 80 industries analyzed by the CRP, down from 7th in 2002.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe Hollywood elite is not a monolith. Film studio and entertainment industry executives, leaders of the handful of enormous conglomerates that largely determine what Americans and much of the world see on cinema and television screens and listen to on CD and radio, belong to the same financial-corporate oligarchy that has a stranglehold over every aspect of American life. These are multi-millionaires and billionaires who have a very large say in determining who should hold political office and protect their interests.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe Center for Responsive Politics notes that the film industry has specific issues which it pursues with the politicians it helps bankroll, including trade, copyright protection and free speech concerns. The CRP continues, While many of the big-name stars give mainly for ideological reasons, the corporate executives who run the industry take a more pragmatic view in dispensing their campaign dollars. Foreign tradeincluding trade with controversial countries such as Chinais crucial to the industry’s long-term success, as entertainment has become one of the nation’s biggest exports.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb A perennial concern of the industry is copyright protection, particularly as it concerns the practice of sharing music and video files via the Internet. The Motion Picture Association of America, whose members are fed up with the illegal distribution of movies via the Internet, has been a key player in the push to toughen anti-piracy laws.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe film industry executives lean toward the Democrats for cultural and political reasons. The success of their business in this day and age depends on a certain permissiveness in the social atmosphere. The dominance of the Christian Right, for example, would not be helpful to those often attempting to market violence and sexual suggestiveness, nor would it accord with the temperaments and lifestyles of writers, directors, actors and musicians by and large.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe issues of foreign trade and anti-piracy are not small ones. The Democratic Party, which includes the trade union bureaucracy as one of its constituent elements, tends to be more sympathetic to protectionist and economic nationalist policies.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbIn early February, a delegation from the film industry, including Clint Eastwood and Will Smith, appeared in Washington to lobby the new Democratic-controlled Congress, according to the New York Times, on behalf of its agenda of fighting piracy, obtaining new tax advantages and reining in movie and television production from going abroad.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 24 f\u00e9vrier 2007 \u00e0 11H30<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
La campagne pr\u00e9sidentielle de 2008 aux USA sera exceptionnellement longue et exceptionnellement co\u00fbteuse, pr\u00e9voient les sp\u00e9cialistes. On estime que la facture atteindra, \u00e9videmment pour la premi\u00e8re fois, le milliard de dollars. Tout le monde est, par cons\u00e9quent, \u00e0 la chasse aux dollars. Pour les d\u00e9mocrates, Hollywood est un tr\u00e8s important soutien. Depuis quelques semaines, Obama… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[6120,934,2631,3009,4971,3371,6208,4607,5579],"class_list":["post-68563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-campagne","tag-clinton","tag-de","tag-democrates","tag-groupe","tag-hollywood","tag-obama","tag-politique","tag-pression"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68563","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68563"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68563\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}