John Kerry: Equal time from Sinclair Broadcasting

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:14 pm

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... kerry_film

I think they should get it.

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 12:22 am

Indeed, what the Sinclair broadcasting corporation is doing is despicable beyond belief. They argue that the democrats used Farenheit 9/11 and other anti-Bush films or books but you have to actively go out and GET those items. In this case you have no CONTROL over whether the broadcast is put into your house.

Its blatent media influence on the election and something IMHO that should cease immediatly.

geezer · Post by **geezer** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 6:03 pm

hmm. You know, I have a real issue (or two) with this.

1) Nobody HAS to watch it, and I thinks it's a bit diseingenuous to claim that it is being forced into people's homes. Technically, it's being put on the air and if you have a receicer and choose to receive it, you can see it.

2) Sinclair management has as much a right to free speech as anyone else does. If they want to speak about the election, I have a VERY hard time saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do so.

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 6:17 pm

I have to agree with Geezer on this one more. While it should be somewhat even, I think that to say it is being forced is not fair. Although I do agree it should be looked into.

Papageno · Post by **Papageno** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 6:32 pm

Yes, but their stations have a license to use the public airwaves, with carries with it a certain public interest obligation. None other than Herbert Hoover said as much when the FCC was just getting started. Equal Time is definitely in order here.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 7:22 pm

It wouldn't be such a problem if Sinclair broadcasting didn't control 62 stations. The concentration of the news should be a significant concern in a free society. When programming is decided based on the direct self-interest of the news conglomerates, a foul stench is transmitted over the public airwaves even if you turn off the TV.

Faldarian · Post by **Faldarian** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:18 pm

geezer wrote:hmm. You know, I have a real issue (or two) with this.

1) Nobody HAS to watch it, and I thinks it's a bit diseingenuous to claim that it is being forced into people's homes. Technically, it's being put on the air and if you have a receicer and choose to receive it, you can see it.

2) Sinclair management has as much a right to free speech as anyone else does. If they want to speak about the election, I have a VERY hard time saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do so.

1.) The problem is that it's being broadcast on public airwaves, where there is an explicit restriction on not providing equal time campaigning put into place by federal campaign law. Sinclair DOES have the right to campaign for their candidate as they see fit, but they do not have the right to use public airwaves for that explicit purpose without violating federal election law.

That said, the FCC doesn't have any real ability to stop them from airing the program (which they shouldn't). The FEC should be stepping in to make sure they are well informed on what price they will pay should they choose to do so, however... the problem I have with it is that it will be too little too late if it actually does do damage. It's a cheapshot, and one that they can easily get away with.

2.) Like I said, they do have the right to voice their opinion. Whether or not this is attributed as an illegal campaign contribution or as an illlegal advertisement is up to the FEC, though, and is really questionable behavior for a media company as big as Sinclair. Do we really want our media influencing votes by interjecting their own opinions into what we get? The majority of the media outlets in the U.S. are owned by a handful of corporations... if we let them just do as they please by throwing their opinions out there, then where do we get our real and trustworthy information?

They have a right to free speech. If they want to shout to the heavens that John Kerry is the devil, that's their right. But you HAVE to be worried when a major media corporation is using public airwaves to pre-empt other programming at election time with something that is blatantly anti whatever candidate.

If Disney decided that ABC should broadcast Farenheit 9/11 commercial-free at 7pm, requiring any ABC affiliate to pre-empt their regular broadcasting to do so, you can guarantee that there'd be a major justifiable public outrage. Why is this different?

It's an extremely irresponsible move by a company that should find a different avenue for voicing their opinion. The problem is that it is illegal, but they'll be able to broadcast it anyway and just swallow the fines to deal with it after the damage has been done. That's not the kind of thing I want influencing votes anywhere, whether pro-Kerry or pro-Bush... it's just not right.

(yay, I'm glad I found this forum... I missed this stuff

)

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 9:35 pm

geezer wrote:hmm. You know, I have a real issue (or two) with this.

2) Sinclair management has as much a right to free speech as anyone else does. If they want to speak about the election, I have a VERY hard time saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do so.

Actually, they don't. They are licensed by the federal govt to use the airwaves, which are considered to belong to the public, and they have to use them responsibly. That is why stations have go through license renewal every so often. Sinclair doesn't have a blanket right to put whatever they want on the public's airwaves.

Grifman

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:07 am

Corporations should not be treated as though they are people. They should have no "freedom of speech."

Unbreakable · Post by **Unbreakable** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:33 am

likewise, if the broadcasters want to get up on a streetcorner and preach, nobody is stopping them. Putting a show on the air is not equivalent to standing on a corner talking, however.

Look at the "equal time" issue this way- if a movie of Ronald Reagan or Arnold Schwarzenegger is factored into it legally, why wouldnt a program created specifically to smear a candidate also be labeled as such?

IMO, Bush's bullshit "policy change press conference" after the debate should also fall under "equal time". That was an utter misuse of the President's public access to media outlets; he was supposed to be taking to the nation as the President, not as somebody seeking reelection.

Its also scary that I can spell Schwarzenegger without looking it up.

Morgul · Post by **Morgul** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:55 am

PBS has been showing a anti bush documentery thing every fricken night it seems, at least for the last week. I think thats on public broadcasting. Yet no uproar there. So, I do not see the difference, except for one is against Bush and the other is against Kerry.

LOL, there is alot of biased media trying to influence the election, just watch 60 minutes or any of these other "news shows".

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:33 pm

Morgul wrote:PBS has been showing a anti bush documentery thing every fricken night it seems, at least for the last week. I think thats on public broadcasting. Yet no uproar there. So, I do not see the difference, except for one is against Bush and the other is against Kerry.

LOL, there is alot of biased media trying to influence the election, just watch 60 minutes or any of these other "news shows".

And which documentary is that. All I heard of is a documentary about both Bush and Kerry that looks at their backgrounds and tries to describe how they think and what motivates them. If there another one?

Grifman

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:50 pm

Grifman wrote:
Morgul wrote:PBS has been showing a anti bush documentery thing every fricken night it seems, at least for the last week. I think thats on public broadcasting. Yet no uproar there. So, I do not see the difference, except for one is against Bush and the other is against Kerry.

LOL, there is alot of biased media trying to influence the election, just watch 60 minutes or any of these other "news shows".
And which documentary is that. All I heard of is a documentary about both Bush and Kerry that looks at their backgrounds and tries to describe how they think and what motivates them. If there another one?

Grifman

Yeah, I'd be more than interested to hear about all these anti-Bush documentaries. And 60 minutes got their face justifiably slapped for using unverifiable sources. Sinclair is putting out material that is not even close to news - it's debunked propaganda. The two are not even close to similar.

Unbreakable · Post by **Unbreakable** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:01 pm

If you are trying to pain the evening news as an "anti-Bush" programme, you are going to have a tough sell. While it is true that the news is contrary to Bush's stances, the facts are the facts. As hard as they try to tell us otherwise, things are just different outside Bushworld.

Papageno · Post by **Papageno** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:06 pm

Yeah, Morgul, what anti-Bush documentary are you talking about-- the only thing I saw that dealt directly with the election this year was Frontline's "The Choice," which was a pretty honest look at both of the candidates and their histories.

Of course, viewing something that's objective and doesn't out-and-out toe the GOP line as "liberal" is pretty much in keeping with the idea that "the Rushbo" and Sean Hannity are the font of all truth in political matters.

JayG · Post by **JayG** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:33 pm

It seems simple to me. If the documentary is true, Kerry gets what he deserves. If it's lies, and it can be proven, the nework gets sued for every penny it owns. It's the American way.

noun · Post by **noun** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:20 pm

JayG wrote:It seems simple to me. If the documentary is true, Kerry gets what he deserves. If it's lies, and it can be proven, the nework gets sued for every penny it owns. It's the American way.

And all of that's going to happen before Election Day, only 16 days from now. I don't think so. This is a calculated attempt to change public opinion before people head to the polls.

Samurai · Post by **Samurai** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:40 pm

CSL.. people can change the channel ya know..

Eco-Logic · Post by **Eco-Logic** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:33 pm

geezer wrote:hmm. You know, I have a real issue (or two) with this.

1) Nobody HAS to watch it, and I thinks it's a bit diseingenuous to claim that it is being forced into people's homes. Technically, it's being put on the air and if you have a receicer and choose to receive it, you can see it.

2) Sinclair management has as much a right to free speech as anyone else does. If they want to speak about the election, I have a VERY hard time saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do so.

Bravo geezer

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:55 am

Samurai wrote:CSL.. people can change the channel ya know..

Samurai...you can STFU

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:46 am

Wow, haha. Anyways, you have a good point samurai, but, if the law says otherwise, I guess the law will have its way.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:21 am

CSL wrote:
Samurai wrote:CSL.. people can change the channel ya know..
Samurai...you can STFU

Touchy touchy.

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:17 pm

CSL wrote:
Samurai wrote:CSL.. people can change the channel ya know..
Samurai...you can STFU

Where's the .jpg?

Enough · Post by **Enough** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 6:45 pm

Dirt wrote:
CSL wrote:
Samurai wrote:CSL.. people can change the channel ya know..
Samurai...you can STFU
Where's the .jpg?

Rather then sticking with the typical coffee cup one or the four words one let's try something a bit different.

Or maybe something a little bit Office Space is more your color?

Enough · Post by **Enough** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 6:47 pm

Forgot to mention that if I was a Sinclair shareholder I would be a might be pissed over this whole thing. I'm sure it's not the only reason why but their stock has been tanking, I see it was down almost 8% just today.

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 6:53 pm

If I were a shareholder, I'd be asking that they turn over the reigns of power to a different President of the company.