I really do not see what is fair about "forcing" a company to give equal time to an advisary....
as in...?
An example?
by constricting or regulating the media market, to force stations that carry shows like Rush or Hannity to have opposing views on the air.
Some people would rather whine than turn the channel.
I would love to watch the spin doctors on both sides earn a gazillion dollars arguing this one.
We will spend billions on this.
Is there a better use of that money?
Has anybody been following this,....this is a real, attempt by the democrats to force the FCC to reinstate a policy that is deceptively named the "Fairness Doctrine" after it was repealed more than 25-years ago.......they cannot stand the limbaughs and the hannitys...they cannot make shows like 'air america' work....so, they want start "gov censorship" to stifle conservative voices from being heard on free enterprise radio...
Ribbet...............
I'm sure you have a link to a news story or something that has inspired your spin on this issue?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 29, 2007, 09:55:28 AM
Has anybody been following this,....this is a real, attempt by the democrats to force the FCC to reinstate a policy that is deceptively named the "Fairness Doctrine" after it was repealed more than 25-years ago.......they cannot stand the limbaughs and the hannitys...they cannot make shows like 'air america' work....so, they want start "gov censorship" to stifle conservative voices from being heard on free enterprise radio...
Yeah, because if Hannity is off the air, you won't be able to parrot his talking points.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13853
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285933,00.html
Well, I asked what articles he read that gave him his spin and
Quote from: me on July 01, 2007, 09:43:19 PM
http://newsbusters.org/node/13853
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285933,00.html
Well, I asked which news articles he read that gave him his spin and either of these could be a candidate to do just that.
IIRC I saw something a few years ago where the conservatives were complaining because the media was keeping their views from being expressed and were demanding equal time. Now that the Dems want it too they want to roll their eyes and claim that it isn't necessary.
Personally, I feel that people need both sides of any story to form an informed opinion.
I think the reason Hannity and Combes and other spin doctors are cryin' is because if the Fairness Doctrine would be reinstated, they might be required to put some truth into their broadcasting.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulation/EM368.cfm
Personally, I think the Fairness Doctrine as it was out-grew it's original purpose. I think the by and large, the media does a fairly good job of policing itself regarding issues. They want controversy, 'coz that's what sells. So, I don't see a problem there. Rush, O'Reilly, Franken, Rhodes, they're ALL small potatoes in the big picture and not what this issue is about at all.
My point is that the conservatives whined for it until the Dems thought it might be useful and now they want to feign ignorance and insult.
The bottom line IS....Rush, and Hannity are successfull because THEY put out a product that people want....period....
Advertisers pay BIG money to buy time slots during thier broadcast....people LIKE hearing the truth for a change....
The democrats have TRIED to do the same, and they went Bankrupt ..ie 'Air America'....
and it just frosts the democrats that they don't have a voice to compete, so they want a law established to either 'censor' what radio is doing now, or they WANT to force 'free enterprise' to mandate equal time on the radio....
....and show me where hannity and company are NOT telling the truth....but, be sure to ALSO not forget about ABC, CBS, NBC MSNBC, CNN and the left leaning networks that have been dominating the media for YEARS now.....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 08:30:21 AM
The bottom line IS....Rush, and Hannity are successfull because THEY put out a product that people want....period....
Advertisers pay BIG money to buy time slots during thier broadcast....people LIKE hearing the truth for a change....
The democrats have TRIED to do the same, and they went Bankrupt ..ie 'Air America'....
and it just frosts the democrats that they don't have a voice to compete, so they want a law established to either 'censor' what radio is doing now, or they WANT to force 'free enterprise' to mandate equal time on the radio....
....and show me where hannity and company are NOT telling the truth....but, be sure to ALSO not forget about ABC, CBS, NBC MSNBC, CNN and the left leaning networks that have been dominating the media for YEARS now.....
Well said Henry. Might I also add that Hannity also has the documentation to back up what ever he's talking about. No spin just fact.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 08:30:21 AM
The bottom line IS....Rush, and Hannity are successfull because THEY put out a product that people want....period....
Advertisers pay BIG money to buy time slots during thier broadcast....people LIKE hearing the truth for a change....
The democrats have TRIED to do the same, and they went Bankrupt ..ie 'Air America'....
and it just frosts the democrats that they don't have a voice to compete, so they want a law established to either 'censor' what radio is doing now, or they WANT to force 'free enterprise' to mandate equal time on the radio....
....and show me where hannity and company are NOT telling the truth....but, be sure to ALSO not forget about ABC, CBS, NBC MSNBC, CNN and the left leaning networks that have been dominating the media for YEARS now.....
That's not the bottom line and liberal media is a farce. Anything that doesn't have the spin in the direction of Faux news is considered liberal by the right wingers. In other words, any news source that doesn't cater to the tender sensibilities of the conservatives, sources that perhaps tell the truth, even when it isn't what you want to hear, is considered liberal.
You don't think Hannity spins? :rotfl:
Quote from: PIYA on July 02, 2007, 08:51:10 AM
That's not the bottom line and liberal media is a farce. Anything that doesn't have the spin in the direction of Faux news is considered liberal by the right wingers. In other words, any news source that doesn't cater to the tender sensibilities of the conservatives, sources that perhaps tell the truth, even when it isn't what you want to hear, is considered liberal.
You don't think Hannity spins? :rotfl:
you honestly think that the media, by and large is NOT liberal?
another thing, Hannity is NOT the nightly news...he is an entertainer NOT a Journalist...he give his opinion, and PEOPLE like to hear it, THAT is why HIS show is High in the ratings....then you have CBS and Katie Couric
Quote from: me on July 02, 2007, 08:41:34 AM
Well said Henry. Might I also add that Hannity also has the documentation to back up what ever he's talking about. No spin just fact.
Right on Sister!... ;D ;)
He backs it up and opens it up for anybody to debate him....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 08:30:21 AM
The bottom line IS....Rush, and Hannity are successfull because THEY put out a product that people want....period....
Advertisers pay BIG money to buy time slots during thier broadcast....people LIKE hearing the truth for a change....
The democrats have TRIED to do the same, and they went Bankrupt ..ie 'Air America'....
money and popularity do not equal truth. never have, never will. for a time, howard stern had the most listened to broadcast in america. was it because of his "integrity"?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 08:58:20 AM
you honestly think that the media, by and large is NOT liberal?
another thing, Hannity is NOT the nightly news...he is an entertainer NOT a Journalist...he give his opinion, and PEOPLE like to hear it, THAT is why HIS show is High in the ratings....then you have CBS and Katie Couric
No it isn't. That's an excuse that the Conservatives use to cover their own failures. Broad coverage that includes ALL the facts is considered "liberal media", because Conservatives don't want the entire truth. So, they make the claim, "oh, that's just liberal media" as if that's supposed to make it any less factual or relevent. If anything you should be concerned not about "liberal media", but the profit motive. That's what your news coverage is based on.
There are people who read the opinion columns of newspapers and take them for fact, rather than the opinion of the writer. So, obviously there will be those people out there naive enough to believe the Hannitys because they think it's "fact" and not "spin". I believe those "entertainers" have a responsibility to provide a disclaimer that their views are just that, for that reason.
As for debating Hannity? I'd take him on any day.
Just a thought....when did you guys stop calling it the "mainstream" media?
Did you sudddenly realize that "mainstream" equates with the opinion of the majority?
Mainstream, like NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, LA Times....
PIYA, your words can easily reflect those on the right about the media....everyword....you are just so far left, you don't know any better..and, I'll admit, I'm pretty far right...
Bo, by your rules, the Majority likes the truth...that is why Foxnews leads other news channels...and why Rush, leads all of talk radio...bill oreilly lead cable news shows and Hannity and Combs is up there...
and one last word...
liberals are poopie heads...and NO CHANGEBACKS!.... ;) ;D
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 10:33:51 AM
Foxnews leads other news channels...
Ohh....really? Take the talking heads out of the picture and what do you get?
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2005 (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2005)
"The Ratings Mirage
Why Fox has higher ratings--when CNN has more viewers
After exposure to countless similar stories published since January 2002, when Fox was reported to have surpassed CNN in the Nielsen ratings, one might naturally conclude that Fox has more viewers than CNN .
But it's not true. On any given day, more people typically tune to CNN than to Fox .
CNN viewers tune in briefly to catch up on news and headlines, while
Fox viewers watch longer for the opinion and personality-driven programming. Because the smaller total number of Fox viewers are watching more hours, they show up in the ratings as a higher average number of viewers."
Quote from: Bo D on July 02, 2007, 10:45:49 AM
Ohh....really? Take the talking heads out of the picture and what do you get?
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2005 (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2005)
"The Ratings Mirage
Why Fox has higher ratings--when CNN has more viewers
After exposure to countless similar stories published since January 2002, when Fox was reported to have surpassed CNN in the Nielsen ratings, one might naturally conclude that Fox has more viewers than CNN .
But it's not true. On any given day, more people typically tune to CNN than to Fox .
CNN viewers tune in briefly to catch up on news and headlines, while Fox viewers watch longer for the opinion and personality-driven programming. Because the smaller total number of Fox viewers are watching more hours, they show up in the ratings as a higher average number of viewers."
written by a liberal, Steven Rendall....duh!....
Got a more up to date link than this one?
QuoteExtra! March/April 2004
The Ratings Mirage
Why Fox has higher ratings--when CNN has more viewers
I do believe that one has a little age on it there.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 10:57:26 AM
written by a liberal, Steven Rendall....duh!....
And you reject it because?
Quote from: me on July 02, 2007, 10:57:43 AM
Got a more up to date link than this one? I do believe that one has a little age on it there.
Truth has no expiration date.
Quote from: Bo D on July 02, 2007, 11:12:12 AM
Truth has no expiration date.
That was then this is now and that particular truth could have changed. People change, facts change, and data changes so what was truth then is not necessarily truth now. For instance have your viewing habits changed in any particular area in the last few years?
People! Show some originality, please! "Written by a liberal" ...... "Those are old stats"
Is that the best you can do? Show me some hard facts, not some drivel from one of your talking heads.
Whats the point. If we showed you something you would say, "oh, that was written by a conservative", or "well, maybe it's up to date but it's wrong".
Quote from: me on July 02, 2007, 01:28:22 PM
Whats the point. If we showed you something you would say, "oh, that was written by a conservative", or "well, maybe it's up to date but it's wrong".
Try me! Or don't you have anything to show?
Quote from: Bo D on July 02, 2007, 10:45:49 AM
Ohh....really? Take the talking heads out of the picture and what do you get?
But it's not true. On any given day, more people typically tune to CNN than to Fox .
We is his proof?.....Just because he says this does not mean it is so.....the Nielson ratings clearly show Fox ahead.....and there is a reason for this....people watch it because they get the facts there....no spin....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 02:19:52 PM
.....the Nielson ratings clearly show Fox ahead.....
Didn't bother to read the report did you Henry?
Typical
"But there is another important number collected by Nielsen (though only made available to the firm's clients) that tells another story. This is the "cume," the cumulative total number of viewers who watch a channel for at least six minutes during a given day. Unlike the average ratings number the media usually report, this number gives the same weight to the light viewer, who tunes in for a brief time, as it does to the heavy viewer. "
it's TIT for TAT....the point is still valid, despite your spin
what's with the "typical" slam?
the bottom line is....democrats want gov censorship to stop people like Rush and Hannity from speaking on "free" airwaves....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 04:46:00 PM
it's TIT for TAT....the point is still valid, despite your spin
what's with the "typical" slam?
the bottom line is....democrats want gov censorship to stop people like Rush and Hannity from speaking on "free" airwaves....
Don't change the subject, Henry. I did not spin the numbers and if you would bother to read you would see that.
As for the "typical" comment, it is simply an observation that you refuse to read anything you disagree with or have been told to disagree with by Rush Almighy.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 02, 2007, 04:46:00 PM
it's TIT for TAT....the point is still valid, despite your spin
Give me some numbers, Henry. To refute what I posted! Show me your ratings for
hard news programs, minus the talking head segments.
Quote from: Bo D on July 02, 2007, 05:06:03 PM
As for the "typical" comment, it is simply an observation that you refuse to read anything you disagree with or have been told to disagree with by Rush Almighy.
I HAVE read your links...I always do, that does not mean it is the truth, and for the record I rarely listen to Rush or Hannity...I get the majority of my information off of the internet from various sites...Drudge, USA Today, Foxnews, Pat Dollard.....
Here are some numbers you wanted.....
The Scoreboard: Friday, June 29
25-54 demographic: (LS)
Total day:
FNC: 239 | CNN: 165 | MSNBC: 110 | HLN: 101 | CNBC: 59
Prime:
FNC: 306 | CNN: 258 | MSNBC: 237 | HLN: 167 | CNBC: 59
5p: 6p: 7p: 8p: 9p: 10p: 11p:
FNC Gibson: Hume: Shep: O'Reilly: H&C: Greta: O'Reilly: 175 261 309 305 275 340 246
CNN Blitzer: Dobbs: Blitzer: Zahn: King: Cooper: Cooper:
131 234 189 154 348 272 170
MSNBC Hardball: Tucker: Hardball: Countdo.: Investig.: Investig.: Special:
117 76 134 185 239 285 258
HLN Prime: Prime: Beck: Grace: Beck: Grace: Showbiz:
75 71 75 220 122 160 172
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ (http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/)
I think he said w/out the "talking heads". Real news, Henry.
Quote from: PIYA on July 03, 2007, 09:48:15 AM
I think he said w/out the "talking heads". Real news, Henry.
Yes, I did. Henry's either desperate or ........ well, let's not go there. I like the guy and I don't want to hurt him. ;)
whatever Bo....
big deal, nobody watches the evening news if that is what you want...I can post it also, but there are at best 20 million people max watching the evening news...among the three networks...anyone of the cable news outlets has way more at that time slot.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/evening_news_ratings/default.asp (http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/evening_news_ratings/default.asp)
My point to ALL of this is...and getting back on topic...
What is fair about the fairness Doctrine?
The way it is now, it is free enterprise at its best.......people CHOSE to listen to talk radio.....and many Conservatives enjoy listening to it....so advertisers pay good money for these programs....it is America at it's finest....
and Bo, I like you too.....so I'll try not to hurt you either... ;)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 03, 2007, 10:26:13 AM
whatever Bo....
big deal, nobody watches the evening news if that is what you want...I can post it also, but there are at best 20 million people max watching the evening news...among the three networks...anyone of the cable news outlets has way more at that time slot.
My point to ALL of this is...and getting back on topic...
What is fair about the fairness Doctrine?
The way it is now, it is free enterprise at its best.......people CHOSE to listen to talk radio.....and many Conservatives enjoy listening to it....so advertisers pay good money for these programs....it is America at it's finest....
OK, Henry. One more comment and then you can have your topic back. I still don't think you understood the numbers. CNN's cume rating is not the "evening news" and your Fox shows are not news anyway. You said it yourself when you called them "entertainers"
OK two more comments ... :biggrin: ... You also didn't read the part about advertising dollars either did you? CNN leads there also.
Quote from: Bo D on July 03, 2007, 10:37:38 AM
OK, Henry. One more comment and then you can have your topic back. I still don't think you understood the numbers. CNN's cume rating is not the "evening news" and your Fox shows are not news anyway. You said it yourself when you called them "entertainers"
OK two more comments ... :biggrin: ... You also didn't read the part about advertising dollars either did you? CNN leads there also.
Okay, I get your points and they are good ones...
my point STILL being, there is a large audience that LIKES conservative viewpoints and news...so WHY does there HAVE to be a fairness doctrine....there are plenty of liberal based shows that does NOT compete with the conservative ones...
what is fair about Gov intervention to force a network or a producer to show something that is clearly not what people want to watch?
serious question that really bugs me......this is a real law that is trying to be pushed into play....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 03, 2007, 10:47:40 AM
what is fair about Gov intervention to force a network or a producer to show something that is clearly not what people want to watch?
I could deal with a law that would remove ALL political content from the airwaves. Now THAT would be a Fairness Doctrine! :biggrin:
Quote from: Bo D on July 03, 2007, 10:50:54 AM
I could deal with a law that would remove ALL political content from the airwaves. Now THAT would be a Fairness Doctrine! :biggrin:
:clap:
yes..!! Now we agree on something... ;D