IT Employment

General discussion

Locked

CBS CANCELS 'REAGANS'

By maxwell edison ·
.
From the Drudge Report:

VIACOM CHAIR SUMNER REDSTONE EXPRESSED GRAVE CONCERN FOR NETWORK BROADCAST...

WILL AIR ON SHOWTIME UNCUT [WITH AIDS QUOTE ONLY DELETION]...

CBS will issue press release early in morning; Robert Greenblatt, head of SHOWTIME will announce that SHOWTIME will air the telepic.

Bob Ackerman the Director has said he will re-edit some portions of the film for SHOWTIME.

CBS to write-off $9 million...

----------

Way to go CBS! Kudos to you.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

points both ways

by jkaras In reply to It's become SOoooo obviou ...

Yes, what is reported in all forms of media are skewed, cut into tiny excerpts to intentionally misled it's audience. The point I was making on free speech was on if it is unpopular, suppress it. Many ideas or opinions that were not popular were punished by death or just punished way long ago. Today with "politically correctness" everyone fears if it is offensive shut up. Everyone's entitled to their opinon but stay silent to bullying groups out of fear of retribution, to me that's not "free". We teach our youth to conform and not question, to believe what is told to you or else. How can the world get better/evolve if we insist to conform vs. question? A racist or an anti abortion activist can scream their opinion till their blue in the face to me. They have that right to their opinion and just because I dont like it or agree with it doesnt give me the right to silence them whether or not more people share my views. Change the channel if you dont like it. The more someone spouts their point of view gives the other more perspective to the validity of their claims. Not all people are very smart but most can disern a lie when they see one. Some will jump on the band wagon and stay or jump off after they see the folley of the teaching.

Yes they allowed it to be made but it still was bullied to only be speculated about. Did you see the entire show? How much was heard? We are all assuming that everything was false and made up. Maybe only some parts were made to create contoversy to get people to tune in? The entertainment industry or media never misleads to gain listeners. If there wasnt any pre fed press to it would you have still watched or would anyone voiced their opinion to block it? IT got everyone to talk about CBS, no ones talking about any other network so they just got a s-load of publicity, they still won.

Collapse -

Advertisers

by TheChas In reply to I sent CBS a letter

Max,

Much as you deserve some credit for your efforts, I suspect that the 'real' reason that CBS is not going to air the documentary is a lack of advertisers.

Ratings are important to the networks as they are part of the formula for setting the rate for adds.

I think that the publicity about the mini-series led most if not all potential advertisers to back out.

There was nothing 'noble' in the CBS decision to not air the Reagans. It is a case of the bottom line. The potential revenue dropped too far below the cost of airing the program.

If you want to get the attention of the network executives, you need to get a major advertiser behind your cause.

Chas

Collapse -

I agree

by maxwell edison In reply to Advertisers
Collapse -

Sweeps week

by road-dog In reply to I agree

I think this was slated to air during sweeps week. This week is used to compare ratings which set advertising prices for a few months.

Were CBS to air this unpopular program and alienate a large number of viewers, this effect would spill over onto many other time slots of this crucial week. Were this to undercut viewership for the week, CBS stood to lose hundreds of millions in advertising revenues.

The viewers have a lot of leverage during sweeps week.

The market has spoken. This was a liberal hatchet job on a respected and living Republican. If the story were "drama" as Barbara Streisand describes it, then why make it about the Reagans at all? Let them trash a fictional character like that JFK wannabe in 'The West Wing'. I bet that B.S. would have a cow if a "drama" was made portraying her in a bad light, truthful or not. She's been known to demand being only filmed from her "good side".

They went too far and got called on it. It's about time. It's not censorship, it's a lot of folks saying that if this is what's on this channel, I'm going elsewhere. The network couldn't afford to have such an exodus during this big week.

I'd love it if there were to be a "behind the scenes" video to come out about the filming of this movie.

Collapse -

Did you object as strongly to Showtime's 'DC 9/11'

by smatteson In reply to A Glorious day for Conser ...

Since you have a problem with using lies and half truths to depict a President, I hope you contacted Showtime to protest their portrayal of George W. Bush in "DC 9/11: Time of Crisis." After all, they fictionalized Bush's actions on September 11th, 2001, complete with the action-hero quote ""If some tinhorn terrorist wants me, tell him to come on over and get me. I'll be home!" Nice try, but we all know Bush was skittering from one end of the country to the other that day and his staff made up a phony threat against him to justify this cowardice.

You did contact Showtime to protest their airing of this program, didn't you?

Collapse -

Do you know anything of security

by JimHM In reply to Did you object as strongl ...

First - do you know anything about presidentail security. The President and VP when an event like that occurs are not in the same location or city. The President was in the air flying around the nation as a moving target. The Plane that crashed in PA - was on its way to Washington - for all we know it could of been going at the white house or capital building...

And you would want George sitting in the Oval Office - and if he wasn't call him a coward.

According to the Press that was with GB he did say those exact words... Hum interesting - It was reported on CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN and FOX - 4 of your liberal papers and 1 conservative ...

But for some reason you forgot it...

Collapse -

Please furnish me with a link

by smatteson In reply to Do you know anything of s ...

"According to the Press that was with GB he did say those exact words... Hum interesting - It was reported on CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN and FOX - 4 of your liberal papers and 1 conservative ..."

I'd like to see this for myself, please. Can you provide me with a link to any source of information NOT involving the Showtime drama or a discussion thereof that mentions this quote?

Collapse -

Please refrain from posting lies

by maxwell edison In reply to Did you object as strongl ...

You said, "but we all know Bush was skittering from one end of the country to the other that day and his staff made up a phony threat against him to justify this cowardice."

No, we don't ALL know that. Only a few of you misinformed folks were duped into believing such a ludicrous thing.

If you really believe that, you should consider some self-evaluation to determine why.

Collapse -

What part of my comments were lies?

by smatteson In reply to Please refrain from posti ...

Sorry, Max, but Bush was indeed skittering from one end of the country to another under the pretense of a phony threat. Sorry you don't like that assessment (or are perhaps threatened by it yourself?), but it's a fact.

On September 11th, Bush flew from Florida to Louisiana to Nebraska and then (finally) to Washington. A White House spokesperson claimed "There was real and credible information that the White House and Air Force One were
targets of terrorist attacks and that the plane that hit the Pentagon was headed for the White House.? Ari Fleischer later reiterated this. Furthermore, another White House Official claimed "A threatening message received by the Secret Service was relayed to the agents
with the president that ?Air Force One is next.?" Weeks later the administration admitted this call was never received. Hence, the threat was phony. You can try to spin this otherwise, but those of us "misinformed folks" know better.

Collapse -

Exercising caution

by maxwell edison In reply to What part of my comments ...

.
I think it's commonly known that, on the day of September 11, the extent of the attacks was still unknown. The potential targets were unknown, and speculation was running rampant. It was later discovered that the Capitol building was the target of the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. But at the time it was still in the air headed for Washington D.C., the target was still unknown, and it was speculated to be the Capitol or the White House or....whatever. No one knew for sure.

For a President - any President - to return to a city under attack would be foolish. To think otherwise is foolish. The buildings in Washington D.C were being evacuated. An attempt to enter one of those buildings would be foolish. To think otherwise is foolish.

Air Force One is a flying command center. The best place for the President to be under circumstances such as the ones we faced on September 11th is on Air Force One.

But not knowing the extent of the attacks on Washington D.C., and knowing that the President should be protected from such attacks, and knowing that Air Force One should probably land somewhere, and knowing that the Strategic Air Command headquarters in Nebraska might be the best place to safely land the plane and have an Air Force command and control center at the President's disposal, complete with security, communications, etc., the President did the right thing.

Whether or not a direct threat to Air Force One really happened has, as you suggested, been an item of uncertainty. But the people in Washington D.C. who made the final decision, primarily Vice President Cheney, thought - at the time - that the threat was credible enough to exercise caution. Hind-sight is 20-20, but at the time, nothing but caution was being exercised.

For you, or anyone else, to call the President a "coward" (your words), and to suggest that the threats were "phony" (your words) just to "cover up his cowardice" (your words) is being very naive at best. Considering all the uncertainty of that morning, and considering the speed at which things were happening, it's much more likely that the President was being cautious, not cowardly.

If you disagree, it is you who are very misinformed and very naive. Or, which is probably also the case, very biased against the President, and you're grasping at straws in a lame attempt to discredit him. (Probably ALL of the above.)

Related Discussions

Related Forums