General discussion
-
CreatorTopic
-
October 18, 2004 at 8:56 am #2277163
Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
Lockedby aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
After the Sinclair Broadcasting Group (NASDAQ ? SBGI) broadcasted “Stolen Honor”, an attack film on John Kerry based on slanted and inaccurate information, in would seem that the SBC is now being affected in ways that they didn?t experience before. In some cities such as Portland, Madison, Springfield, and Minneapolis, local advertisers, including car dealers, furniture makers, supermarkets and restaurants, have taken their commercials off the company’s stations.
“I’ve decided I don’t want to advertise on them,” said Adam Lee, the president of Lee Auto Malls, which owns 10 auto dealerships in Portland Me., and has ordered its advertising off the CBS affiliate, WGME. “It’s a public trust. It seems they’re abusing it. If it were a news show and they were really trying to do a fair and balanced story on both sides, that would be a different matter. I don’t think they are. That’s not their intention.”
Groups, including Common Cause, the Alliance for Better Campaigns, Media Access Project, Media for Democracy and the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ, are putting together a database listing all Sinclair advertisers and will try to persuade others to withdraw their commercials. Among those on the list are chains like Applebee’s International, Best Buy, Chili’s, Circuit City, Domino’s Pizza, Lowe’s, Papa John’s, Subway, Taco Bell and Wal-Mart Stores.
The controversy of the last week comes at a time when Sinclair’s stock, like that of other local broadcasting companies, has already been hammered by a sluggish advertising environment and the dashing of deregulation hopes. The Sinclair stock has already fallen 53 percent this year. On Friday, it dropped 7 cents, or 1 percent to close at $7.04, near its 52-week low of $6.87. Before The Los Angeles Times first reported Sinclair’s plans to show the s-called documentary more than a week ago, the stock was at $7.50.
Now this is not the first time we see the SBG do something like this. In April 2004, Sinclair ordered seven of its stations not to air Ted Koppel’s Nightline broadcast featuring a roll call of the 700 U.S. troops who had died in Iraq. Republican Senator John McCain, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, was among the many who criticized Sinclair?s action: “It is, in short, sir, unpatriotic. I hope it meets with the public opprobrium it most certainly deserves.” [CNN, 4/30/04] Also, it is known for a fact that the SBG is a big supporter of the Bush Administration. It has given nearly $67,784 in political contributions, 97% to Republicans (http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib.asp?Ind=C2100&Cycle=2004).
What do you think the outcome of all of this will be, and what kind of effect do think it will bring to the election?
Topic is locked -
CreatorTopic
All Comments
-
AuthorReplies
-
-
October 18, 2004 at 10:01 am #3308252
The outcome will be Bush will win and I will then say STFU
by garion11 · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
with a new thread.
-
October 18, 2004 at 11:50 am #3308211
Not exactly underhanded in comparisson
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
This whole election has been a farce from BOTH sides and the supporters. There is SO little attention paid to motives and ALL the attention is on what the other guy did or didn’t say, reducing credibility etc. Really sad for a couple of guys who deem themselves to encourage and lead people with while claiming to be worthy of presidential status.
Then we have the righty nutbags running around saying Bush will win and the STFU, great DEMOCRACY mindset that GWB has fuelled with all the mistakes and hidden agendas of such a dodgy administration.
When your own kind start running to the other side with all the horrors they have faced or been told to lie about, you KNOW you have some pretty sketchy information being presented as fact.
What BLOWS my mind stil, nobody is willing to even question Bush, not even QUESTION him, yet alone see him for what he is. People won’t even BAT AN EYE, at any negative information, it is INSTANTLY dismissed as Lety BS, what a great job the Republican administration has done at convincing people that everyone lies except them.
If I was a Republican OR Democrat, I would take such accusations VERY seriously and seek to find the truth from mulitple sources, OUTSIDE the country even, instead people don’t even LOOK, they just follow.
As another poster (lupehoo) said quite bluntly, they are like “Idiot Sheep”.
Now that one speaks volumes!
-
October 19, 2004 at 9:50 am #3310313
Republican perspective
by johnsmith · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Not exactly underhanded in comparisson
I’m a republican who is forced to choose the lesser of two evils. I do not blindly follow or believe Bush as I know there is quite a bit that is questionable about the man. However I am forced to conclude that Kerry would be a disaster for this nation if he were to become president. At the heart of the issue is the democratic philosophy of the appearance of compassion. He will destroy our economy if he implements his ideas (he won’t though; it’s all a lot of feel-good warm-fuzzy BS that can’t possibly work).
For example: Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that the Kyoto Protocol is designed to hobble the US and make it less competitive in the global market. For Kerry to even entertain the idea shows that he is only interested in rhetoric. All that’s missing is for him to say “it’s for the children.”
Kerry blames the flu vaccine shortage on the Bush administration. I’m interested to know how he thinks the Bush administration could have foreseen or prevented a vaccine manufacturing plant in Europe from shutting down.
And in contrast to Kerry, who is one of the best spin doctors and bandwagon jumpers we’ve seen in a campaign in quite a while (exhibit a; the above mentioned vaccine “crisis”), I don’t think GW intentionally lies; he is simply uninformed and somewhat clueless. To me, that is the lesser of two evils. I just wish my state allowed write-ins and third-party candidates on the ballot…
-
October 19, 2004 at 10:08 am #3310302
“disaster?” – At least you used the lower-case ‘d’
by b.d.g. · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Republican perspective
I intend to vote Democrat as the lesser of two evils – and especially this year as the Republicans own the House and will probably retain control of the Senate. The worst that happens in this country comes when there is one-party control of all the works. It will be plenty difficult for a Kerry presidency to do anything other than veto misbegotten legislation. Four more years of full Republican control is a very frightening thought.
An interesting article about the changes in the two-party system appeared in the Washington Post [which I actually read, as opposed to use just for wrapping up fish] – http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64984-2004Jul20?language=printer– from a Knee-Jerk Liberal
-
-
-
October 18, 2004 at 12:06 pm #3308200
Kerry’s side had their stab with Michael Moore’s Movie..
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
…So on this issue I don’t really think either side can complain. The Kerry camp should shut up because of Fahrenheit 9/11, and the Bush camp should shut up because now they have “Stolen Honor”….which I’m sure BOTH features use lies, manipulation of facts and exaggeration out the hoohah.
Finally…is it just me or is anyone else starting to look forward for Nov 2nd, if for no other reason but knowing the election will be OVER!! 🙂
-
October 18, 2004 at 1:03 pm #3308164
A day of peace
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry’s side had their stab with Michael Moore’s Movie..
Whomever wins, GWB or Kerry,it will be nice to see an end to the constant two sided crap slinging both of these candidates have been reduced to.
PERSONALLY, I think that Kerry would be beter off without GWB as an oponent, GWB has a way of bringing out the worst in people as his campaign tactics and devateig skills are so ridiculously focused it’s hardly amusign anymore, I think Kerry is no better but has been reduced to this by his opponent. Certainly isn’t the way a succesful DA would handle these issues.
Ahhh, peace and quiet. I don’t think so though.
Bush suporters will be all over this forum if he wins, trying to downplay people as being wrong for supporting Kerry. They will think it adds validation to all the unrealistic claims and lies of GWB, whereas all it shows is that he managed to fool them better than Kerry did.
If Kerry wins, every single word uttered or move made for th next four years will be scrutinized and questiond by the Republicans. It’s a FINE MESS that GWB has placed his party and supporters in, a divided nation…well done, a divided world…well done.
-
October 18, 2004 at 2:28 pm #3308127
Ha Ha Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
by ippirate · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to A day of peace
What a load of piss Oz. You are actually going to try to pass the fact that Kerry is a horses behind off as being Bush’s fault now? He has been known for years as a ultraleftist, elistic, egotistic, arrogant arse and because that comes out at the national level it’s Bush’s fault?
This isn’t the first time he has engaged in a smear campaign and shown how dirty he is. He did it post-Vietnam, he did it in his grab at state leadership in Mass and he did it in his Senatorial races. Are you going to blame those little outbursts on Bush as well? Sounds like a steady run at the “blame game” to me, which, incidentally is something you stated earlier you hated about Bush supporters, that you feel like they will run to an excuse for whatever is said he did wrong. -
October 18, 2004 at 2:57 pm #3308118
NO that wasn’t my take nor implication at all
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Ha Ha Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
but seeig as you would never in 100 years see otherwise, why waste the keystrokes and continue to fade the white imprints in them?
You obviously don’t see my point, others will I’m sure but thank for your well though out response.
I wouldn’t expect you or other republicans to understand what I am referring to anyway, oyu guys can’t even see through Bush, so it is a waste for you to object at all.
-
October 19, 2004 at 7:42 am #3310361
By others you mean “Other likeminded individuals”
by ippirate · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to NO that wasn’t my take nor implication at all
Which doesn’t necessarily correlate to “higher intelligence” or “better” as you imply. Gotta give you credit, at least you don’t stoop to the point of G. Brown and try to call those who are in opposition to your point of view sheep.
I will say this though. Saying that I wouldn’t understand implies that either
a. I am unwilling, which we both know would be a lie
b. I am unable to due to lack of intellect. Is this what you are saying?
c. I am unable to understand because I am not willing to disregard the blatant mistakes that dear Mr. Kerry has made all on his own.What you are preaching is nothing new. Right now the problems of the world are Mr. Bush’s. After the election the problems will become those of the Republican party. It is a game that has been going on for many, many years. The Democrats have never “owned” a mistake. It is always someone else’s fault or they are mis-understood. Nope, the BS stops right here. I don’t agree and just because I don’t agree I am being referenced ignorant, incapable or a sheep? If that means that I won’t embrace the garbage that the Democrats call truth then I guess I am.
As for Brown? It is so enlightening to see that the field has been reduced to accepting IQs that are incapable of nothing more than name calling right of the bat. It would have been nice had you at least made a meaningful or thoughtful comment once or twice first.
-
October 19, 2004 at 10:00 am #3310304
Muhahahaha
by g.brown · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to By others you mean “Other likeminded individuals”
“As for Brown? It is so enlightening to see that the field has been reduced to accepting IQs that are incapable of nothing more than name calling right of the bat. It would have been nice had you at least made a meaningful or thoughtful comment once or twice first.”
Yep, I agree … it’s very annoying isn’t it … and that is what I am trying to say!!!
It’s OK for the Bush and crew to keep on spouting their own “slogans” like “flip-flop” and “four more years”
My aim was to provoke you and show you how annoying it is 🙂
Roflmao 🙂
-
October 19, 2004 at 1:59 pm #3310221
???/
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Muhahahaha
You sure you weren’t mrafrohead at one time?
your expressions are identical
-
October 19, 2004 at 4:12 pm #3310188
Hehe .. Who?
by g.brown · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Muhahahaha
Lol, mrafrohead … no .. never heard of him.
Funny name tho
-
October 20, 2004 at 12:31 am #3310093
Pretty funny guy too
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Muhahahaha
He was always good for a lighthearted chuckle.
Think he’s been tied up with school and career lately though.
Same expressions though. 😀 MUAHAHAHAHAHA!
-
October 18, 2004 at 3:00 pm #3308117
Just NOT Bush! Baaaaaaaaaa
by g.brown · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Ha Ha Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
I just think that Bush is an arrogant idiot … the problem is he is in charge of the world’s largest superpower.
He started this war.
For those people who just follow Bush … say baaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaa (oh no … they got “four more years” after all that’s got a better ring to it … and it annoys those liberals more).
Although I would prefer to keep my eyes open and believe the TRUTH … oh yeah … it’s out there … somewhere.
-
October 19, 2004 at 8:44 am #3310344
I’m tired of this election…is it over yet? ;)
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Just NOT Bush! Baaaaaaaaaa
Bush ?
Kerry ?
Kerry ?
Bush?Nope…..I’m doing a write it vote…
Homer J. Simpson.😉
-
October 19, 2004 at 3:29 pm #3310201
Hang in there
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to I’m tired of this election…is it over yet? ;)
We’re almost through with all of this, so hang in there. In the mean time, be on the look out and get ready to make one of your best informed decisions in your life. 🙂
-
-
October 18, 2004 at 3:24 pm #3308107
However, there is is a difference
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry’s side had their stab with Michael Moore’s Movie..
“Fahrenheit 9/11” was presented on film. You didn’t need to go see it if you didn’t want to, and if you did then you would pay for it. The SBG however, broadcasts “Stolen Honor” for free mostly on key battleground states. That’s okay. They have their right to freedom of speech, but what they are looking for is an unfair advantage, and they do it because they are aware that the Bush administration is at risk of loosing re-election.
Michael Moore by the way is trying to show his film on television but he his being faced by strong opposition from Republican organizations. In fact, he is not even allowed to show his film on pay-per-view. Last time he attempted that, his contract was cancelled at only one step away from approval. For that, he decided to challenge the SBG by publicly announcing that he offers them to broadcast his film for free and prove that they are not biased. Now it left to see if they will accept the challenge.
-
October 19, 2004 at 8:36 am #3310348
Point taken..but it really doesn’t matter…
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to However, there is is a difference
I fully understand your point, but it really doesn’t matter. And I’m nothing even thinking about the politics in this one…if it was for Kerry against Bush, For Bush Against Kerry…doesn’t matter in this issue. The point is as a broadcasting company Sinclair is allowed to air what they wish on their networks. When they want to. Its no different than the stuff on TV I personally don’t care to see, and I’m talking on the basic channels that you don’t need to buy cable or satellite to get (esentially its free beyond what I pay for the tv set and the electricity).
And btw…I understand that the Bush camp is coming out with their “rebuttal” film to Fahrenheit 9/11…41.11 or some such nonsense.
If ANYONE on God’s green earth truly, with every ounce of their being really believes that a film put out DURING ELECTION TIME by a person or persons who are historically or for other reasons so obviously for one camp over the other AND *you* think that said film is the truth and nothing but….please email me…
I have lots of stuff to sell you for very high…er I mean low prices.
“tom’s home-based shopping network…where gullible folks are our best customer.” 😉
-
-
October 19, 2004 at 1:38 pm #3310237
Kerry’s side had their stab
by go_browns_01 · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry’s side had their stab with Michael Moore’s Movie..
Fahrenheit 911 was not shown on THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES. Do you know what “public air waves” means. It means they belong to you. Oh, and me. Get it, the public. Theaters are owned privately. Anyway, if you would take a quick glance at history you will see that this nation, and most other civilized countries, constantly swing ideologically, like a pendulum. Sometimes those swings can be disastrous, as the uber-conservative move of Nazi Germany. This country has for the most part avoided those disasters largely due to the stubborn refusal to tamper with the U.S. Constitution. Now however, it is very likely that when the pendulum swings back to the left there will still be a Patriot Act and a Patriot II, many reasons to review the licensing of the public airwaves, experience in modifying the constitution, and a wealth of knowledge on the ways to fix a national election.
Wouldn’t it be wiser to protect the country now than to play around with one “stab” after another cause the pendulum is over there, for now?
-
October 20, 2004 at 11:23 am #3309931
Um….thanks….I guess….lol
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry’s side had their stab
Um thanks for that lesson about what is public airwaves…..um….
(How do you make it sound like you care when you REALLY REALLY couldn’t care less about an issue? LOL)…um….oh yeah…..anyways…They were going to show Stolen honor here at a Theater(sp?) in Jenkintown, PA….but it was nixed..Apparently two days before the screen a professor who is in the movie filed a lawsuit against Sinclair for defamation of character I believe. So anyway all these folks show up to see the film (hundreds of people, perhaps even the low thousands) and a huge fight breaks out…
Am I bad for thinking this is funny due to the absurdity of it? Yeah I’m gonna punch you in the face over another political move that is no doubt EXTREMELY slanted to one side only.
So damn dumb…some people I tell ya.
But to close I don’t really want to hear the public verse not public thing, that’s just a cop out if you ask me… BOTH films are pathetic, but if you watch it its your own control, your own doing….if its free..change the channel….this world — too many excuses for everything.
-
-
-
October 18, 2004 at 12:40 pm #3308178
Now this is irony
by ippirate · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
Two incidents that have been heralded as “heroic” and more than acceptable this political season.
The CBS fiasco of the falsefied documents. Everyone jumped up and down and called it great that the documents were aired in a clear attack on President Bush.
The second, Procotor and Gamble have made a clear concerted push to support the homosexual marriage lobby. This two is okay for them to make public.
In both of these cases, companies have established their political views and stance. It was fine. Furthermore, several US newspapers have made political stances blatantly public and engaged in media politics.
In all of these examples it was fine. The one common thread? They all support the liberal/democrat agenda.Sinclair broadcasting airs an editorial that is contraversial and now everyone is up in arms. Biased and a betrayal of the public trust? Yeah, so now your telling me that your upset because your television station gave you an opinion other than what you are comfortable with? You really need to say yes here because if you don’t then you are witnessing to the fact that you no longer find it necessary to think for yourself but in fact, you are more than happy for the media outlets to tell you your opinions and positions and therefore wouldn’t be protesting now if it weren’t for the heavy contradiction to the rest of the right think you have been spoon fed. Central issue to the argument at this point? Sinclair is guilty of broadcasting something contrary to the democratic campaign.
As to the validity of the content, it is deemed invalid as it is not in lockstep with the Kerry campaign and a**holes like aldanatech think it fine to make irresponsible and incompetent accusations with no regard to the ignorance of their actions in attack of it. Isn’t that the exact same thing that he is accusing Sinclair of in the above comments?
-
October 18, 2004 at 1:00 pm #3308167
The only point of contention
by jamesrl · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Now this is irony
That I can see, from a non-American perspective, is the need to provide balance.
Broadcasters have a mandate as part of their licensing to provide certain public services. During elections, they are required to make available time for political advertising. And when they offer opinions, they are required to provide time for opposing views.
If Sinclair provides time for a rebuttal, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
James
-
October 18, 2004 at 1:02 pm #3308166
They Did
by shauncharles · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to The only point of contention
Sinclair actually asked John Kerry to do a spot after the showing to rebuff the accusations made against him in the documentary
-
October 18, 2004 at 2:22 pm #3308129
Ooops, you weren’t suppose to point that out. Again, more liberal bias
by ippirate · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to They Did
and more democratic hate tactics.
Thanks for bringing out that point but unfortunately, since it didn’t come from the DNC then most everyone else reading this thread will promptly ignore it. You have to remember, the show spoke contrary to right think and is therefore abhorrent.
As far as the DNC is concerned, if you oppose them, you are to be scuttled. Funny thing in all of this is that it was all laughable while the republicans weren’t shooting back at the smear campaigns and rhetoric of Kerry. Now it is abhorrent and terribly wrong. Something comes to mind about dishing it out but not being able to take it.
-
October 18, 2004 at 2:52 pm #3308120
-
October 19, 2004 at 3:34 pm #3310198
and Kerry is too
by go_browns_01 · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to They Did
stupid to know that the first question would be something like, “Yes or no Senator Kerry, have you stopped beating your wife?”
Kerry wouldn’t dignify this boatload of lies.
Good for him.By the way, “Yes or no, has President Bush stopped drinking goats blood and molesting little boys?”
-
-
-
October 18, 2004 at 2:32 pm #3308126
Hopefully ….
by g.brown · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
People will see the way that Politicians … especially those in power … and especially the Republicans will put their propoganda machine into full flow.
But if the Republicans want to show a film that they would like to say is “freedom of speech” aren’t they just being hypocrites by giving Michael Moore’s a hard time to try and get his film Farenheight 911 aired … rather than explaining say “exactly” what ties Bush has with the Bin Ladens etc.
I just hope there are more free thinking Americans than there are ones who will blindy follow the others like sheep. But for that people need to read an unbiased view in the media …. which sadly is hard to find.
“Independent Media In A Time Of War” is a hard-hitting new documentary by the Hudson Mohawk Independent Media Center (www.hm.indymedia.org). This film is composed of a speech given by Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now! illustrated by clips of mainstream media juxtaposed with rare footage from independent reporters in Iraq.
128k Stream:
http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/media_war_128.rm&proto=rtsp256k Stream:
http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/media_war_256.rm&proto=rtspLinks are from this article:
http://www.democracynow.org/static/IMIATOW.shtmlI don’t know why anyone would have wanted Vietnam to continue!
-
October 19, 2004 at 7:54 am #3310358
Gasoline
by ippirate · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Hopefully ….
Insighting hostility doesn’t make something true or what someone is digging at “the truth”.
Thank you so much for driving home my previous point. It is always nice when someone spouts an opinion and follows that up with the equivalent of “if you don’t say what I say then you are a sheep”. The word oxymoron comes to mind. Lovely to have you invalidate yourself as you have.
Anyway, have a nice day.-
October 19, 2004 at 9:52 am #3310311
Strike Match!!
by g.brown · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Gasoline
Thanks for your reply …. brilliant how you didn’t manage to answer *ANY* point I made … just give a knee jerk reaction about the point I make about what news people are being bombarded with.
But I do like your “hostility doesn’t make something right” comment … as that is what I am trying to explain about Iraq !!!
-
October 19, 2004 at 2:00 pm #3310220
-
October 19, 2004 at 2:19 pm #3310215
Best point of the day Oz
by ippirate · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to If that was self invalidation
And in answer, I suppose I really shouldn’t have. I guess I should have just let it prattle on and ignore it.
Thanks for the reality check.
Cheers
-
October 19, 2004 at 4:04 pm #3310192
Just the outside looking in
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Best point of the day Oz
Wasn’t taking a poke at ayone, just sometimes when you see things from an outside perspective it’s pretty amusing!
No offense, just having some fun with it all. 🙂
-
-
-
October 19, 2004 at 9:45 am #3310317
Any “fair-minded” opinions here?
by b.d.g. · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
This whole election debate seems to require that Republican/Bush supporters vilify Democrat/Kerry supporters, and vice-versa. Any chance anyone out there see those who hold differing political views as like, oh, human beings with valid points of view, possibly capable of thoughtful discussion of differences?
Me neither.
-
October 19, 2004 at 1:43 pm #3310236
Well I’d like to think….
by jamesrl · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Any “fair-minded” opinions here?
…..That at various times I have pissed both sides off. I am Canadian.
I am not pro-Bush. I’m not a fan of him personally nor do I think the war on Iraq was well planned, timely or well thought out. I was in favour of the war in Afghanistan – that one had a clear “causus belli” in that the government were harbouring Al Qaeda. The case was never as clear in Iraq. Saddam was, in my humble estimation, contained. He was not a nice guy, but not the most dangerous dictator on the planet(see Kim Il Jung).
I have never been a big fan of John Kerry. Bill Clinton was more of a moderate. He wasn’t protectionist, like Kerry. Never though Kerry was charismatic or persausive. I find the lack of detail disturbing.
So lucky I don’t have to vote….
James
-
October 19, 2004 at 2:08 pm #3310217
Echo
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Well I’d like to think….
I know I sure as hell wouldn’t wat to be part of it. the patr I despise most though is how thier nusiness is now global, yet when you speak out about it, you are told that it’s none of your business unless you are american.
I couldn’t give a toss who the elected with respect to interbal affairs, medical, economy, education etc. But unfortunately, this war was MADE the world’s business when GWB tried to make a good impression and seek his predetermined goal set out long before the terrorist actions of 9/11. If he is SO pissd that Saddam MAY have had WMD, why isn’t he even MORe focused on getting al-Qaeda and stopping them as well? The MAIN focus has been turned from al-Qaeda to some third world country’s terrorists who wre being held at bay quite well by an evil dictator, who has shown america (well the rest of the world anyway) that he actually had a much better grip on it than america has shown.
-
-
October 19, 2004 at 2:03 pm #3310219
not allowed
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Any “fair-minded” opinions here?
I tried offering personal opinion based on a conclusion of what I heard, saw and read.
the response was PRoVE it, followed by a dozen links to Repubilcan “proof”.
No, individual thought process is disallowed in the biggest brainwashing contest of the century.
-
-
October 20, 2004 at 9:35 am #3309956
This whole thing is rediculous
by dwdino · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
Another statement from a media analyst:
“This is hilarious. The media has been preaching selfishness and self gratification above all for years now. … and now that these ideologies have been ingrained, the consquences are being seen with p2p, illegal copy, and pirating of all media. They create the monster, the monster bites their #@$ and now they want the DCMA to protect them … hahahaha …”
Same thing here. Farenheit and Stolen Honor are both editoral productions. These have been produced with a predetermined outcome and presented to prove a point / sway opinion. This is Free Speech in action. If there is slander than go after it. If there are falsities or shortcomings, prove it.
Otherwise, shutup!
Both GWB and JK are looking to assign/retain a position that requires one to be subjected to biased, finite scrutiny. As President you will be critized, lied about, errantly displayed, and miss quoted. It is your job to speak your peace, defend your issues, and provide a living/active example of the morals you believe in and choices you make.
Sinclair should not be detrimented for displaying a view point or airing an opinion. If the DNC has an opposing viewpoint or proof to discredited this production; make it available.
There is far to much whining over this issue.
Man what I wouldn’t give for either candidate to stand up and say “Yes, I did do [fill in the blank] and was wrong. I am sorry and will do my best to never repeat this…”
You don’t have to defend something you have already owned up to, confessed, repented, and attempted to make restitution for.
-
October 20, 2004 at 10:08 am #3309951
The Sinclair Political Bureau Chief decries their attack film broadcast
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
According to the Baltimore Sun in Monday, Sinclair Broadcasting’s lead political reporter Jon Leiberman denounced the management’s decision to preempt regular programming in the last week before the election to air an anti-Kerry broadcast:
“It’s biased political propaganda, with clear intentions to sway this election,” said Jon Leiberman, Sinclair’s lead political reporter for more than a year. “For me, it’s not about right or left ? it’s about what’s right or wrong in news coverage this close to an election.” Leiberman spoke out yesterday after a mandatory staff meeting attended by Sinclair’s corporate news division at company headquarters in Hunt Valley.
“I have nothing to gain here ? and really, I have a lot to lose,” Leiberman said. “At the end of the day, though, all you really have is your credibility.”
-
October 20, 2004 at 10:13 am #3309950
“I have a lot to lose.”
by cactus pete · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to The Sinclair Political Bureau Chief decries their attack film broadcast
And then they fired him.
-
October 21, 2004 at 8:46 am #3307875
Close, but not yet
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to “I have a lot to lose.”
From what I know, he is not fired yet but he was that close of getting fired.
-
October 21, 2004 at 8:49 am #3307873
Where I got the idea he had been fired…
by cactus pete · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Close, but not yet
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/20/sinclair.kerry/index.html
“Jon Leiberman, the Sinclair reporter fired for publicly criticizing the company’s handling of the documentary, said Sinclair executives told its news staff Sunday that they planned to run a “significant chunk” of the film, “but they refused to put a time on it.” He said he objected when the company told reporters to develop news stories around the film.”
-
October 21, 2004 at 10:52 am #3307816
Thank you
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Where I got the idea he had been fired…
I’ve been kind of busy lately so I didn’t get a chance to check out that one. Thank you for the update.
-
-
-
October 20, 2004 at 10:14 am #3309949
Some industry analysts have decried Sinclair’s plans
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
According to the American University communications professor, and media critic for Fox News Watch Jane Hall, “People in the news business are supposed to present both sides of the story”, “They are not supposed to have an agenda. They are not supposed to want to affect the outcome of the election with something they label news.”
Jon Leiberman (Sinclair Broadcasting’s lead political reporter) said he was anguished by his decision to speak out. But, he said, the influence of commentator Mark Hyman and Chief Executive David D. Smith has been devastating. “There is going to be a concerted effort on the part of my colleagues to make this as balanced a program as they can,” Leiberman said. “But the selection of the material ? dumping it on the news department, and giving them four days, and running it this close to the election ? it’s indefensible, in my opinion.”
-
October 20, 2004 at 2:41 pm #3309888
Who ever said that people get the government they deserve???
by sleepin’dawg · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
My god what ever did the poor old US of A do to deserve this??? 🙁 The Democrats had their bash with Fahrenheit 911 (Ray Bradbury would probaly have puked seeing or hearing about the perversion of his title) and it is still in the theatres running day in and day out. Nobody exercised any restraint or censorship on Moore.
In all fairness to him he has acknowledged the sole purpose of his movie was to discredit and depose Bush and you have to respect his courage in his willingness to defend his opinion. The man even showed up at the Republican Convention at great risk of physical harm to his person. I admire guts like that but it doesn’t mean I agree in any conceivable way with his point of view. The only censorship exercised on his film is that you didn’t have to watch it or any of the copious number of exerpts that have been run on so many outlets of the ‘LIBERAL MEDIA’.
Now everyone is up in arms because Sinclair has had the audacity to run out a minor documentry to rebut Fahrenheit 911 called Stolen Honor. (I say minor only in regards to its production costs in contrast to those of F911). Is this pretty damning stuff??? Perhaps, but no more so than what was presented by Moore and the real objection of the Democrats is that they may have shot their bolt too soon. 😉 Obviously their strategy did not foresee any response from the Republicans, especially one so close to the election. When you realize the limited number of outlets Sinclair has, the fuss being created by the Democrats becomes even more laughable. Admittedly it is being put out over the public air waves gratis but how many people are prepared to give up their favorite programing to watch it. Once again censorship is only a flick of the dial away. The only people who are likely to watch it are the already convinced Bush supporters. Sinclair has even offered an equivalent amount of time to the Kerry forces in an effort to appear unbiased but the Kerry gang prefers to moan and groan about the perversion of the use of the public air waves. You will notice they don’t mention Dan Rather who was and remains the ultimate perversion and perverter. :p The Democrats are hoping you’ll forget that!!! Who knows??? Maybe they’ll be able to biitch and whine enough to muster public support in their effort to ban the program. While the electorate are being diverted with this minor occurrence Bush can keep hammering away at more substantive issues such as Social Security, the economy and the state of medical care and treatment. As regards Iraq??? Why bother??? Anyone with an ounce of sense wants to finish it off and put an end to it.
How on earth did the USA get itself saddled with these clowns. I think most people have already made up their minds and this year the political winds seem to be blowing from the conservative quarter but next time out they could well shift towards the liberals. There is nothing to really do now but show up and cast your vote. If you fail to do that you shouldn’t complain about the results. Whether Sinclair shows its documentary or not is moot. It has already served its purpose by distracting the Democrats with what would have been a nonevent if nobody had said anything.:p :O
A pox on both their houses. It would be nice to see a return of civility to the political process without the current strain of vile nastiness being in the air. -
October 20, 2004 at 3:57 pm #3309862
Power of the People
by thechas · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
In case you have missed it, the Sinclair Group has shelved their plans to broadcast their anti-Kerry documentary.
Instead, they will use clips in a report on documentaries and the press.
Since announcing the plans for the broadcast, they had a growing number of advertisers pull all of their adds.
This was followed by a 15% drop in their stock price.
Since announcing that they were dropping the broadcast, their stock recovered 12% today.
Who says public opinion has no sway with the media?
Chas
-
October 20, 2004 at 4:24 pm #3309850
Isn’ that the saddest part though Chas?
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Power of the People
The ability of the media to show or hide information (whether true or not) from the public eye based on advertising dollars. This is what a once respected source of public information has been reduced to. BOTH parties have major media outlets in their pockets and use them against each other to fan the flames, it’s sad, REAlLY sad.
I see the same up here from several networks, Canadian AND US, especially when compared to other reports that show BOTH views and offer a balanced opinion without a forced predetermined conclusion or message sent out. Even this is becoming less and less reliable though.
I see it as a result of greed, money makes the networks spin.
This would be all fine and dandy, if there were more than a handful of companies that provided ALL the media to us in the various forms, radio, print, television.
But they are all owned by larger unbrellas, this is the main reason I am against increasing the ownership proprtions of these massive conglomerates, they have too much control now, lets not give them a bigger piece of the pie.just look what they did to music in North America, I know adults will always bitch about “the music the kids listen to these days!” but I listen to MORE than my share of new music from North America and Europe, what kids are force fed here today is complete garbage in comparisson to the same STYLES of music from Europe. I mean we have had kids listening to Enrique Iglasias (sp?), why should kids be force fed this garbage that my grandmother wouldn’t have even let past her eardrums (god bless her soul).
The REAL talent goes unnoticed here thus I provide the crossover services to get them a fair shake away from the North American industry.
‘Media’, gotta hate it, maybe I should have chosen a more acceptable alias and career choice! :p
-
October 20, 2004 at 4:53 pm #3309846
That is truly a sad commentary on public opinion and intolerance.
by sleepin’dawg · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Power of the People
Right or wrong, whether you are Democrat or Republican, what real harm would have been done showing Stolen Honor.:O The Democrats have just managed to prove that Kerry and his cohorts have no honor. This is the man you want to be President and he lacks the courage to take the same heat he applys to others??? Recall the slimy SOB before the election and send him back to the rock he crawled out from under. If you had any doubt about the Swift Boat Vets veracity that should have been removed by this little piece of work. The Kerry forces don’t dare face the exposure. If the Moore thing was permitted why not the Bush piece??? Is it because F911 was a compilation of lies or is it that Stolen Honor is much too close to the truth for comfort. As I’ve said before Bush may be a beer short of a six-pack but when you consider the sleaze oozing from Kerry and his gang; then you have to vote for Bush, if for no other reason than he is the lesser of the two evils!!!!! ]:)If you own any stocks in the companies mentioned you should contact the investor relations departments of these companies to voice your dissatisfaction about their meddling in the public election process. It wouldn’t do any harm if some of these companies were boycotted for a while. Maybe they might get the point about keeping out of politics but I doubt anybody will follow through on that.
-
October 20, 2004 at 5:12 pm #3309845
Keep in mind
by thechas · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to That is truly a sad commentary on public opinion and intolerance.
Keep in mind that no theater, and no person was “forced” to show / watch Fahrenheit 911.
There is also not a “public trust” issue for movie theaters.
Sinclair was going to require that all of their stations air Stolen Honor at the same time.
You may recall that during the time that Ronald Reagan was running for the Presidency, no TV or cable stations showed any of his movies.
They did not want to deal with any suggestion of the need to give another candidate equal time.The problem with Stolen Honer, is that Sinclair was attempting to represent it as a news story, and not a biased documentary.
If Stolen Honer is so good, and so valuable, then distribute it to the movie theaters.
Chas
-
October 21, 2004 at 12:44 am #3309791
Kerry was offered the equivalent amount of time but an alternative………
by sleepin’dawg · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Keep in mind
Would be to run Fahrenheit 911 back-to-back with Stolen Honor. Stolen Honor is cut for TV to 44 minutes but Fahrenheit 911 is cut for the theatre at 115-120 minutes so that should be more than fair. The Democrat weenies are afraid to let it happen. Moore to his credit offered up F911 for free but was convinced to withdraw his offer. What are the Kerry gang afraid of unless its the truth?????
-
October 21, 2004 at 6:18 am #3307974
Btw, an interesting tidbit on Michael Moore
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry was offered the equivalent amount of time but an alternative………
Even though I find it astounding, I realize many people actually hail Michael Moore as a strange kind of “hero” for his controversial documentaries (I guess people forget the guy is getting rich off of them and that’s what REALLY keeps him going..but anyway).
I’m sure you folks at least heard of Sean Hannity? He’s an conservative ultra pro-Bush political talk show host, for those of you who don’t know.
Anyway, he’s pretty popular among the political talk show crowd in the USA — I think he is second on the air only to Rush Limbaugh, and he’s like the number 1 political talk show host on TV.
I listen to him sometimes on the drive home, about 20 minutes sometimes 30 minutes with traffic.
But to the point…he has been “chasing” Michael Moore down for months to sit down and do an interview with him — Michale Moore constantly shrugs off the offer, makes excuses ..the latest was when asked at a recent event where Moore was the “guest speaker (for $30,000 mind you — paid out of student funds)” at a college…a Hannity listener asked him why he runs from interviewing with Sean Hannity, and Michael said “Who is he?”. Note how I told you Hannity has been after him for months for an interview, note how I told you Hannity has national radio and tv coverage.
Interesting….
Michael Moore is all talk behind his documentaries…but he’s a coward for person to person debates?
Gotta love it!!
PS. Hannity said he’d even do the interview at site of Michael’s choosing AND he’d pay for any expenses.
-
October 22, 2004 at 9:01 am #3309551
Hannity and Al Franken
by jamesrl · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Btw, an interesting tidbit on Michael Moore
I’ve started but not finished Al Franken’s book, Lying Liars, and the lies they tell.
He does a real job on Hannity. Franken had the luxury of 12 researchers who spent a lot of time and effort digging up stuff. He also skewers Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly.
Now you may not enjoy the tone – Al is clearly trying to use humour and pokes fun at the right by being as outrageous as they are.
But some of the facts are very interesting.
James
-
October 21, 2004 at 8:47 am #3307874
Of course they offered Kerry to speak
by cactus pete · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry was offered the equivalent amount of time but an alternative………
Getting Kerry to speak to the “documentary” rather than having equal footage and interviews with his supporters would give the whole thing a sense of credibility. In a sense of equality, Sinclair should have developed and spent their time and money doing research on the other side, themselves.
Public airwaves are not the same as a theater screen. There are rules for such things, and Sinclair wanted to break them.
Of course, my opinion on the whole matter was that Sinclair were never intending to air the whole show. But the publicity they could generate would get them some free advertising and some clout in the arena of their choice.
-
October 21, 2004 at 9:37 am #3307844
You keep bringing the Public Airwaves Defense Up..
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Of course they offered Kerry to speak
What’s the difference when Michael Moore is pushing very hard to have Fahrenheit 9/11 broadcast on TV before the election? Granted I think its gonna be on paid/cable channels but still that’s still pumped into homes of millions of people.
He’s been trying this well before the Sinclair thing became such a news item.
Like I said before you can reverse the political sides…I don’t want to sound like I’m just trying to be totally protecting one side over the other…but the truth is the truth….
Michael Moore has every desire and intent for his “film” to affect the outcome of the election, just as the goal is of Sinclair’s motives. The motives are the SAME.
And because people have CHOICE in both cases — paid to see it at the movies or in your own home…don’t like it change the channel, don’t like it don’t go to the movies to see it.
-
October 21, 2004 at 10:18 am #3307824
C’mon now…
by cactus pete · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to You keep bringing the Public Airwaves Defense Up..
The law is the law. Moore debuted his film in a medium and in enoug hadvance of the election that it broke no laws.
Why do I bring out the public airwaves defense? It’s not a defense at all. In fact, I’d call it an offense. Sinclair, had they been seriously thinking of airing that over the public airwaves, would have been seriously thinking about breaking a law.
The point is moot – they aren’t going to broadcast it in that form, nor do I think they ever really planned to. Publicity stunts are what they are.
-
October 21, 2004 at 10:21 am #3307822
Tom
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to You keep bringing the Public Airwaves Defense Up..
the only MAIN diference betwen the two I see is that Stolen Honour is desiged by Republican supporters to discount Kerry’s past and promote Bush.
Michael Moore’s (or is that SMORE’s) movie is desiged to discount the Bush administrations reaction to 9/11. Not to promote Kerry, in fact they mention very little of Bush’s past and only mention a quick little timeline to get to the present day.
they are focused diferently, and i am sure that Kerry’s party does not endorse all of the messages or the format they are presented in in F911. It is not a Democratic proaganda movie, just a different view of 9/11.
-
October 21, 2004 at 10:16 am #3307825
What are the Kerry gang afraid of unless its the truth?????
by oz_media · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Kerry was offered the equivalent amount of time but an alternative………
I think that Stolen Honour is a direct discount of Kerry and is set to influence voters toward Bush.
With F911, Michael Moore does not suport any SPECIFIC party, it is not made to BOOST support for Kerry, just to discout the Bush administration’s actions following 9/11.
If Kerry’s party had made an quivalent to Stolen Honour and had some say over the content, I am sure he would be happy to let them air together.
As F911, is not a pro-Kerry film, why should he be forced to endorse it behind Stolen Honour?
Just because someone speaks out controversially against Bush, doesn’t mean that Kerry is supported in it. In fact I am sure there are many parts of F911 that Kerry probably disagrees with it as it wasn’t desiged to endorse Kerry at all, he’s not even mentioned. Just because they both oppose BUSH , doesn’t mean they suport one another, they are just being lumped together as Bush’s opponents.
I guess they are lumped together in the same, “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” fashion.
-
-
October 21, 2004 at 7:55 am #3307916
They begin to get it
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Power of the People
Yes, I found out that recently (check above) and I am pleased to know that they are finally starting to get it. The reward is presented almost immediately on their stock. And even thought they now only use clips, at least now it is a little fairer.
-
-
October 21, 2004 at 1:05 pm #3307757
Max thread was reached…
by tomsal · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Consequences of the actions of the Sinclair Broadcasting Group
This was going to be my reply earlier but that stupid max thread reached message came up (I swear were it not for the folks who post here, I’d just go elsewhere for discussions..this forum software is so weak)….
Anyway…I had routers and workstations to fix all day…my brain hurts now….
But I think Oz made a good point that I must be honest I didn’t think about…which was the focus of the documentaries, aside from what party was backing them. From that standpoint NOW I see why folks could get in a tiff over Stolen Honor vs F911.
I still think BOTH documentaries are ridiculous, even in concept — and its sad that folks (at least some) buy into either one as the pinnacle of truth.
Hmm…wonder what we will all post about after the election? LOL
-
October 21, 2004 at 1:43 pm #3307748
Whether ‘Stolen Honor’ ever made it to air was and is unimportant!!!!
by sleepin’dawg · about 19 years, 5 months ago
In reply to Max thread was reached…
What was important was the response of the Kerry camp and the Republicans got the one they were looking for. They can now point at Kerry and claim he wants to play under a set of rules that gives him all the advantages but limits those of his oponents. No matter how it’s sliced the Kerry brand of baloney comes off smelling rancid and Kerry himself appears as the wuss that he is. As far as strategy goes its Bush over Kerry once again.
-
-
-
AuthorReplies