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.
Facts are the bubblehead mentioned both Fox and Limbaugh specifically, I wanted to see if she was open enough to play tit for tat.
What the he** is your problem? Yes, I advocate the Fairness Doctrine, but not as a means of censorship. My comment to the original poster was meant to illustrate how reporting of facts is so intermixed with commentary nowadays that parsing out the facts, whether from MSNBC or Fox, is impossible for people, unless they go out and do their own research which most people do not do. "Fair and Balanced" would be an actual goal for all news outlets, but that doesn't mean there can't be commentary. But most people watching that stuff don't get the difference. It's a matter of the addition of information, not the censorship of it.
Now run back to the playground with your name-calling, little one.
I've never heard anyone (except right wing loonies) say that "Obama is going to shut down right wing radio". The funny thing is that "terrestrial" radio, while still the biggest dog on the block, is being overtaken by XM radio and the internet. On the internet the progressives rule the roost. Right wing talk is about the host talking, progressive radio, blogs and other internet outlets are about BOTH SIDES TALKING.
The fairness doctrine was probably not a good idea when it was in force anyway, I have no problem with leaving things as they are in that regard. However, I do think the "ownership rules" (how many of which type of outlet you can own, in a particular market, and overall) needs to be looked at, and probably changed. It's time to bring "real competition" back to media ownership.
golfgod
In other words, you are for doing away with "free speech" on radio,(and wherever else),if it doesn't give equal time to both liberal, and conservative opinions. Life isn't like that. Sometimes, more people are for one, or the other--like in an election, which we just had. Freedom of speech means expressing how you feel, and think, even though you might be a minority opinion. Heaven help us, if the "fairness doctrine" is instituted. That is the most unAmerican thing I can think of. The most wonderful thing about being an American, is being able to express your opinion--even though no one else agrees with you. Freedom from tyranny, dictatorship, communism, ect--everything our ancestors came to America to escape from. Wonderful, Wonderful, FREEDOM.
What the he** is your problem? Yes, I advocate the Fairness Doctrine, but not as a means of censorship. My comment to the original poster was meant to illustrate how reporting of facts is so intermixed with commentary nowadays that parsing out the facts, whether from MSNBC or Fox, is impossible for people, unless they go out and do their own research which most people do not do. "Fair and Balanced" would be an actual goal for all news outlets, but that doesn't mean there can't be commentary. But most people watching that stuff don't get the difference. It's a matter of the addition of information, not the censorship of it.
Now run back to the playground with your name-calling, little one.
OK Big One, I'll play. Who sorts out the additional information? The media is already slanted left with few EVIL exceptions. You mentioned MSNBC and Fox. where does ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC fit into your lil mold?
I agree with you. But most who voted for change are going to sh**t when they find out what the change is;
1.CHANGE... they will be left with only change in their pockets.(but most of them don't work anyway and is looking for that handout...welfare)
2. Change....Maybe their MTV will be taken off the air because it doesn't give allotted time to counter react to it
3.Change .... maybe they won't have to think anymore (not saying they do much of that now) because they will have someone to do it for them.Because they already want to tell you what not to say.
4. Do you think they will stand up and fight for the freedoms that many people has die to make sure they would have? or do they want others to do it for them?
5. Do you think they care that our military is fighting for their right to abuse it?
6. I wonder if they know enough of what is going on ( all the facts, not just what they think they know) to make an intelligent decision?
7. Most of them are followers not leaders
8. I believe that these people think, that not all people should be able to speak their mind, but Just the ones that think like them. So shallow so liberal.
I guess it will be left up to those of us who want to keep America Free!!
We will have to stick together and make sure our voices are loud.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaCowboy
When I watch left media, read publications, movie stars hating on the right, MTV and so on.........(You all get the idea) I cringe with anger at their spewing of baseless leftist propaganda. However, I recognize their 1st amendment rights and have always supported this right no matter how much I disagree.
Today on CNN, their guest said Obama will absolutely shut down right wing radio in American. How in God's name can he F-ing do this in the United states of America? The guest also said the supreme court would likely throw out such an act when challenged, but that would take 2-years. Obama does not care, he wants the first 2-years of his presidency to go unchecked, unchallenged, without right-wing criticism.
This is the way of numerous communist countries people. Doesn't that scare you in the least bit? Obama supporters, the way I see it, there is no excuse you can really give. I know you will come on here stating how much you hate right-wing radio and so on, but come on, be realistic. This is just not right!
The guest on CNN (missed his name) said it is well know within the Obama camp, this will be one of his very first agendas. Shut them down and shut them up, is basically what he said.
OK Big One, I'll play. Who sorts out the additional information? The media is already slanted left with few EVIL exceptions. You mentioned MSNBC and Fox. where does ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC fit into your lil mold?
At WORST, leave it as is.
I chose the two extremes, but yes there is a continuum for this with other news outlets, whether TV or radio, fitting somewhere on the continuum.
But you honestly don't think that improvements can be made to the way in which news, more often distortions, are presented throughout major media outlets? You don't think it is a problem the way in which these outlets are increasingly consolidated in large-scale corporate conglomerates? Personally, I do. I wish that Obama would take up, at least to some degree, the Fairness Doctrine. But he is against so...
But as this forum illustrates, people often have a hard time even locating the facts of an event, because different media outlets distort those facts by inserting commentary as fact. That's a problem that, in my opinion, needs addressing at some point, but the economy and the Iraq war first please....
Liddy is noted for controversial advice to his radio audience, including on one occasion in 1994, after the federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, Liddy advised his listeners: "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of (*()." [7]
whats the line here? When does it get crossed? When is it hate speech? When is it illegal?
I chose the two extremes, but yes there is a continuum for this with other news outlets, whether TV or radio, fitting somewhere on the continuum.
But you honestly don't think that improvements can be made to the way in which news, more often distortions, are presented throughout major media outlets? You don't think it is a problem the way in which these outlets are increasingly consolidated in large-scale corporate conglomerates? Personally, I do. I wish that Obama would take up, at least to some degree, the Fairness Doctrine. But he is against so...
But as this forum illustrates, people often have a hard time even locating the facts of an event, because different media outlets distort those facts by inserting commentary as fact. That's a problem that, in my opinion, needs addressing at some point, but the economy and the Iraq war first please....
Truth is, I NEVER listen to talk radio...any of it. I get my "Rush Report" from the leftist ranting about what he said. I'll usually watch local small market CBS and Large market Baltimore/Washington NBC via cable from 1700 - 1830. Sure, I'll watch "some" O'Rielley or Hannity but not the full dose.
Will obama want to skew things even more than they are? I wouldn't if I were him, could be a stupid move, even some of the left would have a problem with the 1st amendment being tampered with.
Are things distorted? Sure they are, people bitc* about Fox 24/7 BUT they do at least make an effort to balance it out. Juan Williams, Marc Lamont whatever his name is and Beckle (yes Colmes is a plant) Watch Obermann if you want biased. NO to any Fairness Doctrine, people have a choice to channel surf and then digest and weigh IF they want to. If they don't, well they really don't need the re-education I talked about, they wouldn't grasp anyway. And yes, I do apologize if I came off attacking you, that wasn't my intent.
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.
some one has to stand up
