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.
Geech, I'd really like to hear hard evidence behind this GD "coroporate conspiracy theory" I hear so often from liberals, my brother included. Is it dope-induced paranoia or a real belief that public records are really all lies? Because if you look at public records to decipher who owns what, the reality is that it's spread pretty wide as far as ownership. Do some have more than their share? Yup--it's called capitalism. Get it, keep it, use it. Whether for good or for evil; that's up to us consumers to decide. Apparently most of us sheeple out there like what's being served. So--it ain't really the fault of the evil corporations at all. It's more like *gasp* the fault of the masses!
Oh chit, I said it! I love Americans, but man we is dumb sometimes!
Ys, we are dumb. We rely on free market capitalists- the same guys who brought us the Gilded Age and the Great Depression- in the 1980's and on till today, and then we are startled to be back in another depression.
This from Zwoof at the Daily Kos is remarkable in what it says about Faux News...
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOXNews that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
Lawyers paid by Bill O'Reilly's bosses argued in court that Fox can lie with impunity.
It's their right under the 1st Ammendment
FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.
December 1996, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, were hired by FOX as a part of the Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay, Florida.to investigat bovine growth hormone (BGH), a controversial substance manufactured by Monsanto Corporation.
Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story.
Akre and Wilson refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.
August 18, 2000, a unanimous Florida jury found that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” The jury awarded her $425,000 in damages.
FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals overturned the settlement awarded to Akre.
In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
Fox then filed a series of motions seeking more than $1.7 million in trial fees and costs from both Akre and Wilson.
Since we have NEVER been a "true democracy", as our Constitution made clear right from the start, I'm not sure what to make of that statement! :-)
We are (or were) a democratic Republic, not a democracy.Can't argue with the "plutocracy" description.
But typically "special interest groups" can also be people on welfare, or who get a road or a bridge... Anything someone wants to complain about where money is spent and the problem is that they didn't get some of it!
Now you're splitting hairs:
A Representitive democracy (e.g., a Republic) and a direct democracy (like in Athens) are both: Democracies.
Well I don't and all the ones I know don't, and there is a lot of them.
Except of course when you are bored and just want to mess with them....
Where was this "Ruse" found to be "not valid"?
If you read "What Went Wrong In Ohio", there is a summation by the Stats Prof's from U Penn vs the valid (something like 100,000:1 probability that the vote totals in Ohio, 2004 were deliberately altered so Dubya could "win".
Here is something a friend sent me. It will make you laugh or angry. Thats up to you.
History 101
For those that don't know about history ... Here is a condensed version: Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
Liberals, and Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.
Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing. Here ends today's lesson in world history:
It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it.
A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to tick them off. And there you have it. Let your next action reveal your true self
Last edited by aurorawatcher; 10-30-2008 at 11:22 AM..
Ys, we are dumb. We rely on free market capitalists- the same guys who brought us the Gilded Age and the Great Depression- in the 1980's and on till today, and then we are startled to be back in another depression.
This from Zwoof at the Daily Kos is remarkable in what it says about Faux News...
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOXNews that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
Lawyers paid by Bill O'Reilly's bosses argued in court that Fox can lie with impunity.
It's their right under the 1st Ammendment
FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.
December 1996, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, were hired by FOX as a part of the Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay, Florida.to investigat bovine growth hormone (BGH), a controversial substance manufactured by Monsanto Corporation.
Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story.
Akre and Wilson refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.
August 18, 2000, a unanimous Florida jury found that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” The jury awarded her $425,000 in damages.
FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals overturned the settlement awarded to Akre.
In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
Fox then filed a series of motions seeking more than $1.7 million in trial fees and costs from both Akre and Wilson.
Yeah, hang them bad capitalists--they also brought us an incredible age of prosperity, and made our nation the most powerful national force in history. But let's do away with that, comrade, because obviously it's not working! (that is sarcasm, btw; we may be in a low point now but overall, we are still so many fathoms ahead of most of the rest of the world that it's astounding).
Our economy may be in the toilet, so to speak, at the moment, but one period of mis-management does not a depression make; that will depend on what kind of management occurs now.
And you conclude with a diatribe against Fox News...you know, I've seen more Democrats interviewed/invited/guest speaking on Fox by about tenfold than I have on NBC/CNN. Even the libs nemesis O'Reilly extends his hand to many of those who espouse hatred for him and all he stands for...usually, though, they're too cowardly to actually appear. Might not seem "fair" but it certainly seems more "balanced" than the competition.
If you read "What Went Wrong In Ohio", there is a summation by the Stats Prof's from U Penn vs the valid (something like 100,000:1 probability that the vote totals in Ohio, 2004 were deliberately altered so Dubya could "win".
Yeah, with Acorn doing their "deeds", that could never happen for real now....
Yeah, hang them bad capitalists--they also brought us an incredible age of prosperity, and made our nation the most powerful national force in history. But let's do away with that, comrade, because obviously it's not working! (that is sarcasm, btw; we may be in a low point now but overall, we are still so many fathoms ahead of most of the rest of the world that it's astounding).
Our economy may be in the toilet, so to speak, at the moment, but one period of mis-management does not a depression make; that will depend on what kind of management occurs now.
And you conclude with a diatribe against Fox News...you know, I've seen more Democrats interviewed/invited/guest speaking on Fox by about tenfold than I have on NBC/CNN. Even the libs nemesis O'Reilly extends his hand to many of those who espouse hatred for him and all he stands for...usually, though, they're too cowardly to actually appear. Might not seem "fair" but it certainly seems more "balanced" than the competition.
.
It's not a diatribe, it's a court case. And it's not "mine". It belongs to the Fla Circuit Court.
As for the rest, let's see. Even the corporate types see no recovery for 2-3 years.
It's not a diatribe, it's a court case. And it's not "mine". It belongs to the Fla Circuit Court.
As for the rest, let's see. Even the corporate types see no recovery for 2-3 years.
Anyone can sue anyone and it can be called a "Court Case", the results are what is established. And in the case of many of the "Cases" there is a bunch of them over and over that go both ways over time and they tend to cancle themselves out.
If not, then CBS, NBC, ABC, BBC, PBS, CNN and the like should be afraid, very afraid.....
Anyone can sue anyone and it can be called a "Court Case", the results are what is established. And in the case of many of the "Cases" there is a bunch of them over and over that go both ways over time and they tend to cancle themselves out.
If not, then CBS, NBC, ABC, BBC, PBS, CNN and the like should be afraid, very afraid.....
.
Your problem seems to be with the Anglo-American legal system. You cannot sue anybody, anywhere, for anything and expect to win, muchless run the risk of monetary damages resulting from a frivolous action.
But there are bad decisions, like the one pointed out in the article, which sometimes put our democracy at risk.
And FYI, those big, bad "liberal" (biggest joke) "news" sources which you cite, well they all gave Amicus Curiae briefs in support of Fox in this case.
See, all are run for the corporations, and all slant the news for their owners.
Anyone can sue anyone and it can be called a "Court Case", the results are what is established. And in the case of many of the "Cases" there is a bunch of them over and over that go both ways over time and they tend to cancle themselves out.
If not, then CBS, NBC, ABC, BBC, PBS, CNN and the like should be afraid, very afraid.....
You have a truely fascinating version of logic. How you arrive at conclusions such as the above are simply beyond what anyone else would think of as "logical".
First, yes anyone can sue anyone for anything. That is not, however, a "case". It does include briefs and motions filed with the court, but those have virtually no significance to anything other than the particular court where they are filed.
However, what was referenced was a decision by a Court of Appeals. That is a "case", and it is one which has absolute authority in the District Courts which operate under that Circuit. It also can have (and often does have) great influence in other Circuits. Of course if it is appealed to the US Supreme Court then it becomes absolute in all other courts (even if the US Supreme Court desides not to hear the appeal).
Your claim that it goes both ways over and over is not true of Appellate Courts. You seem to have missed the precise meaning of what was indeed ruled upon, which is that while anyone can sue anyone for anything, if you sue a news publishing company for lying, you will lose.
That certainly is NOT going to cause "CBS, NBC, ABC, BBC, PBS, CNN and the like" a single moment of fright. (More like they threw a party to celebrate...)
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.
