Assholes!

[sonikbliss]

More George Bush big corporation bullshit. I really hope the FCC doesn't allow this to happen.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/11/news/ne ... tm?cnn=yes

[TrumpsHair]

I wonder if Michael Moore will retaliate?

[sonikbliss]

I wonder if Michael Moore will retaliate?

Unfortunately he would never get any network airplay. I saw on him on Bill Maher's show last night and he is releasing a new book of letters from soldiers in Iraq, Fahr. 911 on DVD and trying to put it on pay per view also.

[LTA]

I wonder if Michael Moore will retaliate?

Moore would do anything that would get him and his message in the spotlight.

From a random blogger: "So today I finally registered to vote in NJ. I was registered in PA but never voted. I watched the Debates last week and Saturday finally saw Farenheit 9/11. Bush needs to be kicked out of office with a vengeance....."

And, the FCC can't really do much about this. Not their jurisdiction. and 2 weeks is 4 days sooner than the 10 day cutoff. Moore is probably going to be pushing the limits harder, promoting his movie through any means possible. He already got some folks in michigan mad at him, and it is still the middle of october. If everybody liked him, he wouldn't get free advertising. Moore gets to play the game. Why can't the Sinclair group?

Moore blogs too. Its pretty funny, if you like him or not. Almost sounds like a 16 year old trying to explain to the cop why shoplifting is acceptable sometimes, but he is hip to the internet crowd and has a knack of saying things to piss off his opponents while stirring his followers into hysteria.

[swingdoc]

I really hope the FCC doesn't allow this to happen.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/11/news/ne ... tm?cnn=yes

Yes, we wouldnt want any truths about a presidential candidate to get to the voting public. That could be harmful.

[wayne kerr]

I really hope the FCC doesn't allow this to happen.

Holy shit I hope you're kidding.

SMH

[Electricide]

I really hope the FCC doesn't allow this to happen.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/11/news/ne ... tm?cnn=yes

Yes, we wouldnt want any truths about a presidential candidate to get to the voting public. That could be harmful.

The transcipt of Kerry's testimony is widely available on the interweb, and it's a very eloquent speech about the moral hypocrisy of the US at the time...specifically the leaders who put their soldiers in those positions and then rebuked them when they got home.

Kerry never says he saw any of this by the way. He's relaying stories by others in the VVAW. He wanted to get the poor saps outta there.

Kerry said in one of the last debates "Yeah, the US was involved in terrible things over there, and when I got back, I called them on it." If the actions some soldiers got the Vietnamese pissed off, that's the military's problem. Kep your men under control.


***I can't believe he's called unpatriotic for standing up for ethical behavior.*** I guess looking the other way is the new patriotism.

[sonikbliss]

I really hope the FCC doesn't allow this to happen.

Holy shit I hope you're kidding.

SMH

You know, I don't have a problem with anyone airing anti Kerry ads, but I do think it's bullshit that a major tv network can choose to air ads favoring one candidate and not the other especially when it reaches millions of people.

The letter warned Sinclair that its plan could constitute a violation of broadcast regulations requiring equal time for political candidates, as well as the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, the group said.

If this is true, then yes I think it's up to the FCC to enforce the broadcast regulations in a way that's fair to all parties.

Hey you know who sucks?

The FCC, ha ha ha oh man I'm so funny.

Yes, we wouldnt want any truths about a presidential candidate to get to the voting public. That could be harmful.

I think it's pretty sad that this forum has delved into the depths of childish name calling over political views. I am neither democrat nor republican and I think all of the candidates suck (i just happen to think GW sucks worse). I am just a human being who is sick of all the bullshit of politics and having leaders who think we're all mindless fucking idiots who are incapable of thinking for themselves and excercising freewill. These forum debates have taken the same form as the real debates. Childish name calling further dividing this country instead of coming up with real solutions to solve the problems of mankind and this planet.

[ubertar]

It has nothing to do with the FCC, even though it seems like it would, since it involves the airwaves. The commission overseeing this stuff is the FEC (federal election commission).

This essentially amounts to airing propaganda disguised as news.

[wayne kerr]

You know, I don't have a problem with anyone airing anti Kerry ads, but I do think it's bullshit that a major tv network can choose to air ads favoring one candidate and not the other especially when it reaches millions of people.

Well, should they be allowed to choose to air ads for say kiddie porn? How about ads for Nazi organizations? I'm not convinced that they rejected any Kerry ads- I'd like to know specifically which ads- they're all about money adn they frankly don't care what the message it is as long as it puts money in their bank account- and I know democratic money spends as well as republican money.

SMH

[sonikbliss]

Earlier this year, said a DNC statement, Sinclair-owned stations refused to air DNC ads criticizing President Bush.

The company made news in April when it ordered seven of its ABC-affiliated stations not to air a "Nightline" segment that featured a reading of the names of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq; a Sinclair executive called that broadcast "contrary to the public interest."

Sinclair CEO David Smith contributed the legal limit of $2,000 Bush-Cheney 2004, and vice president Frederick Smith gave $175,000 to the RNC and maxed out his Bush-Cheney contribution.

FEC records show that two other top level Sinclair executives gave the maximum amount they could to Bush-Cheney.

Sinclair executives have given nearly $68,000 in political contributions, 97 percent of it going to Republicans, since the beginning of the year, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Federal campaign finance law states it is illegal for a corporation to contribute anything of value to a federal campaign or a national political committee, including broadcast communications, said Cabrera.

They're clearly not an equal opportunity broadcaster.

And as for Nazi's and child porn get real.

[ubertar]

You know, I don't have a problem with anyone airing anti Kerry ads, but I do think it's bullshit that a major tv network can choose to air ads favoring one candidate and not the other especially when it reaches millions of people.

Well, should they be allowed to choose to air ads for say kiddie porn? How about ads for Nazi organizations? I'm not convinced that they rejected any Kerry ads- I'd like to know specifically which ads- they're all about money adn they frankly don't care what the message it is as long as it puts money in their bank account- and I know democratic money spends as well as republican money.

SMH

This isn't some one minute ad that this group is paying for. This is a 42 minute "documentary" Sinclair is broadcasting for free. Under McCain/Feingold campaign finance laws, corporations can't give money or anything of value. Prime time spots on major network affiliates is definitely something of value. They're going to pre-empt scheduled programming during prime time to show this thing, on over 60 stations.

[sonikbliss]

You know, I don't have a problem with anyone airing anti Kerry ads, but I do think it's bullshit that a major tv network can choose to air ads favoring one candidate and not the other especially when it reaches millions of people.

Well, should they be allowed to choose to air ads for say kiddie porn? How about ads for Nazi organizations? I'm not convinced that they rejected any Kerry ads- I'd like to know specifically which ads- they're all about money adn they frankly don't care what the message it is as long as it puts money in their bank account- and I know democratic money spends as well as republican money.

SMH

This isn't some one minute ad that this group is paying for. This is a 42 minute "documentary" Sinclair is broadcasting for free. Under McCain/Feingold campaign finance laws, corporations can't give money or anything of value after the conventions. Prime time spots on major network affiliates is definitely something of value. They're going to pre-empt scheduled programming during prime time to show this thing, on over 60 stations.

[ubertar]

Here's the NY Times version of the story:

TV Group to Show Anti- Kerry Film on 62 Stations
By JIM RUTENBERG





p to 62 television stations owned or managed by the Sinclair Broadcasting Group - many of them in swing states - will show a documentary highly critical of Senator John Kerry's antiwar activities 30 years ago within the next two weeks, Sinclair officials said yesterday.


Those officials said the documentary would pre-empt regular night programming, including prime time, on its stations, which include affiliates for all six of the major broadcast networks in the swing states of Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada and Pennsylvania.


Called "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," the documentary features Vietnam veterans who say their Vietnamese captors used Mr. Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, in which he recounted stories of American atrocities, prolonging their torture and betraying and demoralizing them. Similar claims were made by prisoners of war in a commercial that ran during the summer from an anti-Kerry veterans group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.


Two of the former prisoners who appeared in the Swift Boat advertisement were interviewed for the movie, including Ken Cordier, who had to resign as a volunteer in the Bush campaign after the advertisement came out.


Sinclair's plan to show the documentary was first made public by The Los Angeles Times on Saturday.


Mark Hyman, Sinclair's vice president for corporate relations, who doubles as a conservative commentator on its news stations, said the film would be shown because Sinclair deemed it newsworthy.


"Clearly John Kerry has made his Vietnam service the foundation of his presidential run; this is an issue that is certainly topical," he said. Asked what defined something as newsworthy, Mr. Hyman said, "In that it hasn't been out in the marketplace, and the news marketplace."


Because Sinclair is defining the documentary - which will run commercial free - as news, it is unclear if it will be required by federal regulations to provide Mr. Kerry's campaign with equal time to respond.


But acknowledging that news standards call for fairness, Mr. Hyman said an invitation has been extended to Mr. Kerry to respond after the documentary is shown. "There are certainly serious allegations that are leveled; we would very much like to get his response," he said.


Asked if Sinclair would consider running a documentary of similar length either lauding Mr. Kerry, responding to the charges in "Stolen Honor" or criticizing Mr. Bush, Mr. Hyman said, "We'd just have to take a look at it."


Aides to Mr. Kerry said he would not accept Sinclair's invitation.


"It's hard to take an offer seriously from a group that is hellbent on doing anything to help elect President Bush even if that means violating basic journalism standards," said Chad Clanton, a Kerry spokesman.


Sinclair's plans put Mr. Kerry's campaign in an awkward position similar to the one in which it found itself in August, when the Swift Boat group first began running commercials against him containing unsubstantiated charges that he lied to get his war medals. Mr. Kerry's aides at first held back from responding, so as not to give the group and its charges more attention - a decision that some Kerry aides now acknowledge cost him in public opinion polls.


Mr. Clanton said Mr. Kerry's campaign would call on supporters to stage advertiser boycotts and demonstrations against Sinclair's stations.


A group of Democratic senators, including Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Dianne Feinstein of California, readied a letter calling for the Federal Communications Commission to investigate the move, arguing that the documentary was not news but a prolonged political advertisement from Mr. Bush and, as such, violated fairness rules.


Andrew Jay Schwartzman, president of the Media Access Project, an advocacy group promoting greater media regulation, said he did not think the film would qualify for a news exemption. And, he said, even if it did fall under equal time provisions, those are based on candidate appearances and in this case, since it is Mr. Kerry who appears, "albeit disparagingly," stations would be required to show Mr. Bush or possibly the independent candidate Ralph Nader, if they requested it.


Sinclair was already a galvanizing force for Democrats. The political donations of its executives have gone overwhelmingly to Republicans, according to a review of donations on Politicalmoneyline.com. In April Sinclair refused to run an episode of "Nightline" on its stations in which the anchor Ted Koppel spent the entire program reading the names of American soldiers killed in Iraq.


"Stolen Honor" was produced by Carlton Sherwood, formerly a reporter with The Washington Times. His Web site says he received no money from any political party or campaign but got initial funding from Pennsylvania veterans.


The documentary has been distributed by mail order and via streaming Internet connections. Mr. Hyman said Sinclair was not paying for the right to broadcast it.

[ubertar]

This means if you don't have cable and you live in any of the swing states (and other places) this shit will be on EVERY FUCKING CHANNEL in PRIME TIME with NO COMMERCIALS.

If they do the same the next night with Fahrenheit 911, that might be fair, but that's not gonna happen.

This is what happens when you let the media consolidate.

This is one of the main guys in the video, what a fuckface (my apologies to fuckface):
:ar15: