Where's Wall Street?: Corporate influence and this week's lack of protest coverage

There's a huge protest happening on Wall Street right now. The movement, called OccupyWallStreet, has been happening for days, with thousands upon thousands of protestors snuggling into their sleeping bags and crashing on Wall Street to let the usual occupants of America's financial district know they're not happy with the financial giants' unfair practices.

They are protesting that economic inequality that Wall Street viciously creates. They have a good case: the top 1 percent pay no taxes while the middle class struggles to get by. The government provides billions of stimulus dollars to CEOs of banks while cutting basic education and infrastructure budgets, and the Supreme Court thinks that corporations are people.

While pictures and videos online show an impressive use of the freedom to peacefully assemble, you're unlikely to have heard about this impressive turnout if you're silly enough to turn to the news for your news.

Since it began, this mega-story has been overshadowed as the news has decided to cover far more important issues, like Tim Gunn's accusation that Kirstie Alley is not a size 4, as she claims, or whether or not Mike Tyson went too far at the Charlie Sheen roast.

When new media (tweet tweet) called out old media for their lack of coverage, the mainstream media underplayed the story.

CNN quickly told its viewers that Wall Street is currently occupied by "hundreds" of protesters. Which is true. There are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of protestors on Wall Street. It seems like "thousands" would have been a smarter word choice; "hundreds" of people attended the Tea Party rallies that CNN covered day in and out every day in 2009 and 2010.

So why is the mainstream media ignoring this colossal cry against corporate abuse? Such a controversial event could surely drive ratings up to Palin-story levels. Hell, if they yell loud enough, they could match the ratings they earned while reporting on BP oil spill (up to day 5).

Answer's simple: CNN doesn't just need ratings to drive their profits. They need sponsors to interrupt their constant stream of cat-videos and political talking points to turn those ratings into cash. And guess who their advertisers are?

The heads of media conglomerations love sucking the revenue from JP Morgan's rock-hard advertising budget. They suck and they suck and they don't stop until Exxon Mobil wants a turn, because everybody knows that Exxon has the biggest, hottest budget of all.

Don't feel left out just because you aren't in on the foreplay. You're getting screwed.

Jonny Moran can be reached by email at moran.record@live.com.