Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Re: Freedom of speech and how to dismantle Faux News

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:32 PM
Original message
Re: Freedom of speech and how to dismantle Faux News
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 02:03 PM by Turborama
This was in answer to cal04's thread about Freedom of Speech but I made a mistake and posted it as a thread instead of a reply when the cookies screwed it up.

Should we find a way to shut them up?

Yes, absolutely!

If they should be silenced how should it be done?

1st of all they should be forced to stop using their "Fair & Balanced" bullshit slogan. It's about time Faux were taken to court for false advertising regarding their repeated use of this bullshit mantra. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of clips on YouTube now proving how unfair and unbalanced Faux is. I know that MoveOn filed a complaint with the FTC several years ago but it obviously went unheard. MoveOn's complaint form is still live, though, and there's more evidence than ever (O'Lielly, Hannity, Huckabee & Glenn BecKKK's hate/fearmongering seditious behaviour for example) that this far right propaganda channel is overstepping the boundaries it has set itself.

Faux's BULLSHIT "Fair and Balanced" slogan fits well within FTC's Guides Against Bait Advertising, too.

When that happens it'll create such a shitstorm against Faux that people might finally wake up to how much of a brainwashing Goebbels-esque propaganda machine it really is.

BTW I just found a very interesting post in Demopedia dating back to 2003 that has evidence proving that they have been doing this for years: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Another thing. If it's been amended in the past, why can't it be amended again? Adding that seditious propaganda and disinformation should not be allowed, for example?

I have been having exactly the same thoughts recently, as I posted in the Jon Voight thread last week: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. I must agree, FAUX needs to be challenged for false advertising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BanzaiBonnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. There have been several posts on this very subject this morning
This is what I had to say and the questions I asked.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


I don't know the legal angle and was asking for input from anyone who might know something about truth in advertising. Is FOX News a business?

It seems this subject should be of utmost importance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberaltrucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Hate to burst your bubble, but...
Faux is a cable channel, not over-the-air.
Not subject to FCC regs, unfortunately.

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. What abot the FTC? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Not entirely true. If they broadcast obcenity or tobacco advertising you would see enforcement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. FCC does not apply broadcast stds to pay tv/radio (cable/sat). Hence
swearing, nudity, etc is allowed on pay tv/radio whereas FCC broadcast license holders (TV/radio) operating on what are considered public airwaves would be subject to fines for such content.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. They broadcast to about 60 countries around the world, including Pakistan
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 02:47 PM by Turborama
In fact, they are so heavily involved in Pakistan that they are linked to roughly 100 providers there. No wonder we're having so much difficulty winning hearts and minds: foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184837,00.html

If they are broadcasting 'over the air' from America to the rest of the world, does that count?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Satellite TV (pay tv) is not "broadcasting" under FCC & FCC's jurisdiction is limited to US. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. All The News That's Fit To Print. NYT masthead logo.
ALL the news? FIT to print? Says who?

If you want to confront Fair And Balanced head on, you need to holler loudly for the Fairness Doctrine.

It does mean responsible opposing points of view will gain admittance to Air America and MSNBC however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Ok, I think losing the NYT logo is a fair price to pay for Faux's bullshit meme
This is a false advertising thing and if someone takes NYT's logo to court, so be it.

I'm also into "responsible opposing points of view", that's how healthy debates emerge, as opposed to the one sided disinformation being spewed by Faux.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. Maybe they can't be legally forced to change their fair and balanced slogan but...
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 04:25 PM by ihavenobias
it reminds me of something that *can* be done legally. Check this out:

"...So enough is enough. If Fox wont label themselves honestly, its time for progressives to start doing it for them. Below is a poll asking whether you think institutions like Yearly Kos, the Democratic National Convention, and Democratic presidential campaigns should fire a shot across the bow by making Fox walk around with "opinion media" credentials instead of the standard "media" credentials given to other media outlets..."


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/24/221124/993

Olbermann loved the idea and he invited Cenk on Countdown to talk about it. It was later tried at the Netroots convention:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/17/netroots-...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-07-09 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. But what if the statistics were put together to prove how unbalanced they are?
For example, whenever they have a group of pundits, if they have any 'liberals' there at all they are outnumbered 2 to 1 or sometimes 3 to one, like I saw on Cavuto's show earlier. There are other stats that can be brought in. For example, it would only take spending some time compiling how many stories on a randomly picked day were anti-Obama versus anything positive said about him to prove how unbalanced they are. This would then fall into the definition of false advertising. I'm not talking about taking Faux off the air but it would be a serious blow to their reputation as far as the general public are concerned.

I'm putting something together about how dangerous they are to our relationship with the muslim world, too. Seeing that they are using roughly 100 cable providers in Pakistan to pump out Murdoch's anti-Obama agenda & Islamaphobia really shocked me. That's really going to help win hearts and minds over there, isn't it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chrisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-07-09 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
13. Seditious propaganda...
"Another thing. If it's been amended in the past, why can't it be amended again? Adding that seditious propaganda and disinformation should not be allowed, for example?"

No way. If another Bush gets in, for example, they would just use it to shut down any station critical of them.

Fox News can be ignored. The government has no place in taking people's voices away, even if they may be idiots and misinformed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-07-09 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
14. The people who watch FOX want to be brainwashed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 01st 2014, 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC