Stopping Sinclair Quietly?

[Bleacher Creature]

Just a thought. Is there any danger that we might be giving Sinclair and this crappy "movie" more attention than it would have gotten otherwise? I remember that the Swift Boat Liars originally made only a modest media buy. It wasn't until it was all over the news that the story reached a majority of the electorate.

I know that we have to stop this crap -- I just worry that the whole thing was intended to get us riled up.

[Eric J in MN]

1. Bingo. (nt)

nt

[blackmoonlillith]

2. It should get us and anyone who believes in the

democratic process riled up. This is a form of fascism.

[BUSHOUT]

3. You might be right, but it's out of our hands now....

It's gone grassroots. No way to stop the backlash.

At least the message gets out that a large number of people view it as propaganda and lies.

And at least we can make thier advertisers suffer.

[Bleacher Creature]

8. Will the advertisers suffer?

I just keep coming back to the adage "there's no such thing as bad publicity."

[BUSHOUT]

11. I'm swearing off KFC and Pepsi. If Bush gets in, it's a lifetime ban.

So yes, they will suffer.

And nobody in my family will be eating that shit as long as they live under my house either! Call me a fascist, but at some point you gotta take a stand.

check the list

If Bush gets elected, people will pay. I will make it my lifes mission to teach PepsiCo, YUM, and Sinclair that you don't fuck with the elections by using your power to pump lies and propaganda.

[wanpete]

4. YEP!

Kick it! I think Sinclair is definitely playing us. This is a diversionary tactic and we'd better not get to tied up in this. Besides, too much press will give this piece of crap more publicity than it would ever get on it's on. That's the reason for the major press release. They knew it would drive us batty! Be on the look out, more dirty tricks to come. Stay ON MESSAGE!:mad:

[Ducks In A Row]

5. my thought has been not to say anything

the people who'll believe it already believe the other lies, and other people who know better won't believe this piece of crap.

what will happen is people will be throughly pissed at having their programs pre-empted for a piece of crap, and bush will not gain from it.

the rest of this just gives it more notice, and let's the whore media show long clips of it under the guise of news.

[high density]

6. I guess CNN is already showing clips of "Stolen Honor?"

That's so nice of them. Liberal media bias strikes again!

[ewagner]

16. And that's the point

Even if we stayed quiet about it the media will pick it up the same way the swift boat ads were picked up.

That close to the election, we can't afford to take any chances.

Maybe the best tactic is to discredit this piece of trash heavily before it reaches the screen.

[lancdem]

7. It should piss us off

Check out Josh Marshall's post on it:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com

[Bleacher Creature]

10. No question he's right.

That's been the main reason why we need to do something. And I think it's clear that we need to frame this around fundamental democratic principles and NOT as a defense against any of the allegations made in this film.

I just wonder if there is any way to do it in a way that doesn't gin up all of this attention. When I saw CNN running clips today I wanted to throw up.

[KharmaTrain]

9. Whose Really Going To Watch This, Really?

Just imagine Joe Sixpack tuning in for the Simpsons and finding this on in it's place...what do you think he's gonna do? If he's not interested in politics, he's gonna get pissed there's no Simpsons. If he sticks around and sees what this crap is, think he's gonna impressed that his Simpsons was pre-empted because of this?

Sinclair thought they could sneak this on the air and no one would be the wiser and now is playing "martyr". They're neither. They need to be exposed loudly for what they are doing...using publicly licensed broadcast frequencies...granted by the people...for partisan purposes and denying access to that public.

In essence, these morans just gave us an early Christmas present...aside from the election itself...it opens the door to go after these companies who have poisoned the broadcasting landscape for a long time.

[Bleacher Creature]

12. Who is this "Joe Sixpack" person?

I would really like to meet him one day.

Hopefully I can track him down after I've located the elusive Mr. Goodwrench.

[KharmaTrain]

14. We'll Ask Stephen Colbert

Andy Rooney nailed it last night. If you're undecided by now, you're either not telling or just real stupid.

It's that black & white, stereotype world that's about to come cascading down on the right wing and their corporate partners.

[indyjones1938]

13. I agree with you

We should've learned our lesson with the Swiftees, but of course we didn't.

If you walked out of your house in the morning and saw a crowd of people on the street corner all staring at something further down the street, what would you do? You'd go join them to see what the fuss was all about. When your neighbor saw you walking up to the corner to join them, what would he do? He'd go up there too. It's called human nature. Psychology 101. Commotion breeds curiosity.

Had we just ignored this and let it pass, it would've been a drop in the bucket. I'd estimate 2% or less of the American public, at most, would've ever seen or heard of this film. Sure, Sinclair's stations might reach 25% of American households, but most Americans have a lot more than one channel! Most have dozens, many have many hundreds, even antenna TV subscribers have four or five basic channels. Sinclair only owns one or two stations in each market, and a lot of them are second-tier WB and FOX affiliates. With no commotion or promotion, the number of people who would've seen this would've been infitetismally small.

But now that a flurry of attention has been focused on the situation, we've got people reading about the film in the newspapers and CNN and FOX showing clips from the film. Soon the filmmaker will be flooded with donations and they will make the film free to watch on their website. It's just like the Swift Boat Veterans all over again.

When will the Dem party learn not to take the bait?

[wishlist]

15. It is important to call it lies and propaganda right away- not ignore it

The lack of quick debunking and denial of the original Swiftboat attacks seemed to give them credibility. General consensus was that they gained traction because Kerry and Dems didn't fight back soon enough or hard enough to dispute the accuracy and make it clear that the ads were Bushco RW political smear and not from an impartial grass roots veterans group.

Sinclair thinks they can get by with this with no negative repercussions, which makes it very important to protest this loudly through many boycott threats, phone calls and emails, petitions and letters to the editor in order to expose Sinclair's right wing agenda and try to block the airing plus harm Sinclair in obtaining FCC license renewals (some of their stations come up for renewal in December)

[urbshermit]

17. Probably a better plan than breaking out the megaphones.

My nonexistent knowledge of ad buys and the laws governing them might make this seem a bit paranoid, but I just wanted to bounce it off the gallery in any case.

The main thing that makes this seem as blatantly biased as it is, lies in the fact that this is nothing more than an outright giveaway to the smear-vets. It's easy to see, and easy to see through. Though the media has a traditional responsibility to be sober and impartial which this obviously doesn't square with, there are no real watchdogs anymore and that obviously won't drive the story.

But the same thing that makes it as disgusting as it is, makes it newsworthy, so it will get coverage. Critical mass, as is said. Anyway, I wonder if there isn't a bit of chess going on behind the scenes.

What about this theory...

Sinclair pretends to cave to the public outrage at the very last minute, at which point the money men behind the Swift/POW camp place an ad buy in that very same spot, making everything 'above board.' We end up just advertising their advertisement.

So what is the proper response to that sort of tactic? You would think just ignoring it would minimize the damage. Practically though, without the outrage they can run it as they are planning to already - as 'news.'

If I were as evil as they certainly are, that's how I would have gamed this out. Having the leak happen as early as it did hints at something more than a publicity ploy, and this gives them enough time for something to fully play out. Hope it's all just seeing shadows that aren't really there.

[newyawker99]

18. Hi urbshermit!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast: