Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why in the world a far left-wing entertainment network that bashes Trump 24/7/365 run an ad to help Trump. SMH, lmao.
They won't run it because it is despicable in general and just coincidentally resembles the Trump family ideals ...which is why Jr had to offer money to anyone to run it.
So what's the flipside? That CNN should be obligated to run a highly biased advert paid for by Trump, regardless of the truthfulness of what it portrays? Some might call that propoganda. I doubt the Founding Fathers would have approved. Be thankful for small mercies. This is not a dictatorship.
Simple, if a station allows political ads for one they allow them for everyone. I'd be saying the exact same thing if a station refused to run Democrat ads but allowed Republican ads.
So? This isn’t state-run media, deal with it ya whiners.
The gloss of media independence is upheld by journalistic ethics for objectivity.
When a media company begins to favor one party to the point that they won't even run ads for the other then, ironic to your claim, they begin to mirror the traits of "state run media" for one party. Or, in other words, a propaganda outlet.
I personally don't mind CNN providing further evidence to this extent. It reinforces the charges that the side of issues that such "journalists" favored over the years were not objective morality nor journalistic plays but instead political plays rooted in predetermined favor for one side's political agenda.
That throws a whole lot of recent history into a new light, and perhaps not so recent history. It allows for a public re-litigation of that history that was prior dictated by corrupt media outlets.
Your personal decision of the moment lies within your red line for institutional corruption (our constitutionally protected media being one of those institutions, and thus beholden to the public trust and good as a result of those protections). We do have a social contract, in case you have forgotten, and it is possible to abuse it to a fatal degree.
One day it will go to far, and if your contingent supported the corruption then it will also be stained when the corruption is inevitably corrected. How long do you think that will be? Public trust in the media has never been lower, and that is a fundamentally untenable position for a society. There will be a correction, eventually.
If civic responsibility to the integrity of our institutions doesn't motivate you, as it seems to fail to do for most dems, then perhaps personal interest will. You merely need to think long-term to see it.
The gloss of media independence is upheld by journalistic ethics for objectivity.
When a media company begins to favor one party to the point that they won't even run ads for the other then, ironic to your claim, they begin to mirror the traits of "state run media" for one party. Or, in other words, a propaganda outlet.
I personally don't mind CNN providing further evidence to this extent. It reinforces the charges that the side of issues that such "journalists" favored over the years were not objective morality nor journalistic plays but instead political plays rooted in predetermined favor for one side's political agenda.
That throws a whole lot of recent history into a new light, and perhaps not so recent history. It allows for a public re-litigation of that history that was prior dictated by corrupt media outlets.
Your personal decision of the moment lies within your red line for institutional corruption (our constitutionally protected media being one of those institutions, and thus beholden to the public trust and good as a result of those protections). We do have a social contract, in case you have forgotten, and it is possible to abuse it to a fatal degree.
One day it will go to far, and if your contingent supported the corruption then it will also be stained when the corruption is inevitably corrected. How long do you think that will be? Public trust in the media has never been lower, and that is a fundamentally untenable position for a society. There will be a correction, eventually.
If civic responsibility to the integrity of our institutions doesn't motivate you, as it seems to fail to do for most dems, then perhaps personal interest will. You merely need to think long-term to see it.
That’s a whole lotta text and hyperbole amounting to zero substance.
Why are you right-wingers *absolutey* incapable of addressing a point head-on?
"The ad had also surfaced on MSNBC; Fox News Channel; and Fox Business Network. In a statement released Monday, Fox indicated the commercial would no longer appear on its networks. “Upon further review, Fox News pulled the ad yesterday and it will not appear on either Fox News Channel or Fox Business Network,” said Marianne Gambelli, president of ad sales for both outlets."
I knew CNN was bad but I didn't realize how bad until I read this article. It's not even presented as an opinion piece, it's presented as hard news. Our media is truly in a sad state.
CNN now refuses to take legitimate campaign advertising for the GOP.
But they have no problem calling White people terrorists and danger to the Democracy.
Because it is a deceptive dishonest ad.
The gangsta star came in under Dubya.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
