Anti-Kerry movie to air in primetime

Wow, look at all of this liberal media bias!
-----
Nation's largest TV chain orders all 62 stations to show movie without commercials next week.
October 11, 2004: 1:24 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner of the largest chain of television stations in the nation, plans to air a documentary that accuses Sen. John Kerry of betraying American prisoners during the Vietnam War, a newspaper reported Monday.

The network has ORDERED all 62 of its stations to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" without commercials in prime-time next week, the Washington Post said, just two weeks before the Nov. 2 election.

Sinclair's television group, which includes affiliates of all the major networks, reaches nearly a quarter of all U.S. television households, according to the company's Web site. But the affiliates owned by the major television networks reach a larger percentage of U.S. homes because they are in the largest markets...
-----
Also:
-----
"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.""
-----
http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/11/news...erry/index.htm
-----

That's a really smart move by the republican machine. Since metropolitan areas are traditionally democratic ground, the film could have the chance to change a few votes. It only seems fair what with all the press Farenheit 911 is getting.

Time to organize a boycott.
That'll get their attention.

So what's it up against? My Big Fat Obnoxious Fascist Scumbag Talkshow Radio Host? You're Fired, Stupid? Take My Big Fat Wife, Please? My Big Fat Stupid Friends? Friends? Reruns of Simpsons? Baseball playoffs are big right now. A lot of trash is immersed in the Star Wars DVD, I'm sure. And then there's always that porn thing on the web......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FNG

It only seems fair what with all the press Farenheit 911 is getting.

---

Just like the "Swift boat vets" campaign versus MoveOn.org, this makes a ton of sense.

It is desperation. Poor showings in the debates, dropping in the polls. Bush will pull even more crap in the next few weeks. He obviously can not win on his record.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FNG

That's a really smart move by the republican machine. Since metropolitan areas are traditionally democratic ground, the film could have the chance to change a few votes. It only seems fair what with all the press Farenheit 911 is getting.

---

Yeah, I hope you can see the difference between new outlets reporting on a popular movie and a private company using the public’s airwaves to promote their political agenda.

I assume this broadcast will violate or bend some sort of federal election law—congress did write some rules about equal air time—but the FEC moves at a glacial pace and will find time to investigate in 2007.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greydon Clark

—but the FEC moves at a glacial pace and will find time to investigate in 2007.

---

How unpatriotic of you to think the FEC is controled by those appointed by the current administration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greydon Clark

Yeah, I hope you can see the difference between new outlets reporting on a popular movie and a private company using the public’s airwaves to promote their political agenda.

---

yeah, what i meant was that it'd be fair for each side to have an over-dramatized movie out. i didn't mean to bring the media attention paid to F911 into it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fesser

How unpatriotic of you to think the FEC is controled by those appointed by the current administration.

---

Really not fair to say that. The FEC decided to delay ruling on 527 groups, even when they were hurting Bush badly about 6 months ago. They're consistently incompetent and slow-moving, but not extremely partisan...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shamrockpow

Really not fair to say that. The FEC decided to delay ruling on 527 groups, even when they were hurting Bush badly about 6 months ago. They're consistently incompetent and slow-moving, but not extremely partisan...

---

I stand corrected; they were REALLY slow with the whole H. Stern situation.

Its really important and hard work to be morel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FNG

yeah, what i meant was that it'd be fair for each side to have an over-dramatized movie out. i didn't mean to bring the media attention paid to F911 into it.

---

Yeah, but one you pay to see in a movie theater and one is broadcast for free on the public’s airwaves. In my mind, the difference is fairly substantial. Do you honestly feel that broadcasting a 2nd rate propaganda film this close to a highly contested election is "fair" or in anyway benefits voters?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fesser

I stand corrected; they were REALLY slow with the whole H. Stern situation.

Its really important and hard work to be morel.

---

Who loves acronyms? I love acronyms.
FEC = Federal Election Commission
FCC = Federal Communications Commission
Michael Powel is a moralist of the worst kind and his support of media consolidation makes the type of shenanigans we’re now witnessing possible.

The F-E-C is nonpartisan and useless for one reason, because the democrats and the republicans have equal power on the commission so therefore they just sit there and veto anything that the other side wants to do. As for the "liberal media bias" or whatever people are calling it here's my take on it, the MEDIA itself is VERY liberal. Ask yourself, who are the talking heads and column writers voting for in this election? Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Brian Williams, Jim Leahr, Tim Russert John Stewart(not a REAL newstype person but people DO watch him), Mauren Dowd, etc etc. I would say its a pretty safe bet to assume that most of them are Kerry voters. Now as for the conservative side of the fence most of the Network Execs and Owners are going to be fairly conservative as they have lots of $$$ and see any Democrat as someone who's going to regulate and tax what they're doing. Thus the media and its outlets are BOTH liberal and conservative which means if you REALLY want the truth you'd better be watching C-SPAN's live feed where you can see EVERYTHING that actually happened. Other then that we're back to where we've ALWAYS been you have to take every source and evaluate its biais and then draw your own conclusions as to what YOU want to belive about what actually is going on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supercow

John Stewart(not a REAL newstype person but people DO watch him

---

I really wanted to read the rest of what you said after this, but I started laughing so hard that I shot beer out my nose and onto my monitor and keyboard, and made myself go to bed so I could ski in a couple hours. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BakerBoy

I really wanted to read the rest of what you said after this, but I started laughing so hard that I shot beer out my nose and onto my monitor and keyboard, and made myself go to bed so I could ski in a couple hours. Thanks!

---

:D :D

The scary thing is I remember hearing somewhere that 75% of people ages 18-25 said that they get their news from the daily show :eek: :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greydon Clark

Yeah, but one you pay to see in a movie theater and one is broadcast for free on the public’s airwaves. In my mind, the difference is fairly substantial. Do you honestly feel that broadcasting a 2nd rate propaganda film this close to a highly contested election is "fair" or in anyway benefits voters?

---

good point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greydon Clark

Yeah, but one you pay to see in a movie theater and one is broadcast for free on the public’s airwaves. In my mind, the difference is fairly substantial. Do you honestly feel that broadcasting a 2nd rate propaganda film this close to a highly contested election is "fair" or in anyway benefits voters?

---

Nobody's making you turn the tv on or on to a station broadcasting it. It's not the only choice you have. You can still watch "Real World / Road Rules Challenge".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shmerham

Nobody's making you turn the tv on or on to a station broadcasting it. It's not the only choice you have. You can still watch "Real World / Road Rules Challenge".

---

So, you're OK with govt. controlled television as long as Real World is still on?

i don't see how hard it is to understand greydon's point.

big media companies = dick cheney's puppets

you know how much money sinclair stands to gain with another bush victory? especially after pulling a stunt like this.

http://www.sbgi.net/business/television.shtml

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greydon Clark

Yeah, I hope you can see the difference between new outlets reporting on a popular movie and a private company using the public’s airwaves to promote their political agenda.

I assume this broadcast will violate or bend some sort of federal election law—congress did write some rules about equal air time—but the FEC moves at a glacial pace and will find time to investigate in 2007.

---

It's certainly not like Dan Rather using the highest rated news magazine to push blatantly forged documents regarding Bush's National Guard service.

or this:

"Recognition of the obvious. The media “wants Kerry to win” and so “they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic” and “there’s going to be this glow about” them, Evan Thomas, the Assistant Managing Editor of Newsweek, admitted on Inside Washington over the weekend. He should know. His magazine this week sports a smiling Kerry and Edwards on its cover with the yearning headline, “The Sunshine Boys?” Inside, an article carrying Thomas’ byline contrasted how “Dick Cheney projects the bleakness of a Wyoming winter, while John Edwards always appears to be strolling in the Carolina sunshine.” The cover story touted how Kerry and Edwards “became a buddy-buddy act, hugging and whispering like Starsky and Hutch after consuming the evidence.”

That was only the Assistant editor of the second largest news weekly.

Look at the markets where this cracker is broadcasting. I think the effects will be inconsequential at best, but the precedent he is setting is scary.

Example:
- Flint, MI is heavily democratic and is not likely to affect the vote much anyway.

- Madison, WI is also heavily democratic.

- Mobile, AB/Pensacola, FL are both heavily Republican and will probably vote that way anyhow, due to a large military presence.

If I was a franchise manager for this station, I'd tell Sinclair to fuck off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13

If I was a franchise manager for this station, I'd tell Sinclair to fuck off.

---

while packing your stuff.

i used to work next to one of the sales managers for sinclair. he smelled horrible.

1) Isn't this film being made by a former reporter for the Washington Times ?Isn't it being produced by the same hacks who make made-to-order propaganda for the Moonies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_gyptian

...
That was only the Assistant editor of the second largest news weekly.
...

---

2) [dripping sarcasm]And oh yes, the media just hates Bush. They've never ever been nice to him....[/sarc]

http://i.timeinc.net/time/magazine/a...010924_400.jpg

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/12/1...bush.cover.jpg


Also, check out what foxnews had to say about the press' reaction to the first debate,
"While it is not uncommon in press filing centers for reporters to laugh, cheer, groan and audibly react during a presidential debate, there was silence in the press room Thursday night."

In other words, the "liberal media" was stunned into silence by the vicious ass whupping chimpy received. Doesn't sound like they wanted Kerry to win, now does it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_gyptian

It's certainly not like Dan Rather using the highest rated news magazine to push blatantly forged documents regarding Bush's National Guard service.

---

3) As for the Rather crack, Rather at least thought what he had was real, and it lined up with everything else we knew (see the awolproject and the boston globe). He just stupidly thought he had a scoop no one else had noticed.

In contrast the head political correspondent of Fox News, Carl Cameron, wrote a completely made-up story about Kerry (with fake quotes) after the first debate and then posting it as fox's lead debate story. They said it was an "honest mistake", but somehow this obviously false "honest mistake" got past (at the very least) one editor, one factchecker, and one copy editor.

Interestingly enough, the smears Cameron wrote about (mostly to do with Kerry's nails) were also used by fox commentators for the rest of the night. Almost as if they all got their marching orders from a memo.....

Cameron made shit up, got it past the rest of the editorial staff, got it posted, got caught, then claimed it 'was in jest'.

like whoa.