It's a simple device, which looks sort of like a car's keyless entry remote, with a single button that causes it to emit the infrared "Power off" codes for every brand and model of TV it knows about, which is to say about 95%+ of TVs in existence.
Yeah, it's time to get aggressive when it comes to people playing FOX News in businesses, doctor's offices and other public places.
24. if so then you are billy mays mana from heaven
its real easy to ignore TV unless you find it hypnotic or something, point being its as someone else said you being the censor, i guess you are okay with the other side using the same tactics to silence anything you like.
I try my hardest to ignore them, but can be extremely difficult. Especially in airports. I sit so the screen is out of my field of view, but the drone of the propaganda is still all-too-audible.
That said, when I'm at a restaurant with a TV, I try to be the one who can see it. That's because I don't care what's on and can almost always resist the temptation to look. Most people are drawn zombie-like to the flickering screen, regardless of what it is showing, and don't even realize it.
Another important myth to shatter about TVs playing Fox et al in public places is that they are the result of popular demand. They aren't. The people didn't ask for them. They are inevitably part of some business deal.
I can respect bottom-up popular culture, even when it's stuff I don't personally like. It's top-down corporate culture masquerading as popular culture that makes steam come out of my ears.
Would use the force of law if they could, and use lies forced on people by their minions who can control TVs in public places. They also use churches to promote their lies and wars and death.
This doesn't quite compare to purchasing a $20 anti-nuisance gadget online. I'm sorry, the gadget won't promote torture, won't promote killing doctors, and can't even begin to get the stain of what Fox and its media "friends" have assisted in putting on our country and our people.
11. No, it simply promotes your flavor of censorhip
That's where all dictatorial thinking starts, controlling what people see, read or hear. That's what you will be imposing with this little gadget of yours, censorship. Excuse me, but who the fuck are you to decide what a private business does with its TV viewing?
If you don't like what's on the tube, fine, you've got three options, to either ignore it, to ask that the channel be changed/TV turned off, or to not patronize the business. You do not have the right to unilaterally decide for everybody that the TV gets turned off. Hmm, who else do we know who was a big fan of unilateral decisions? Oh, yeah, that's right, Bushboy. Again, congratulations on becoming that which you hate.
People are perfectly free to turn the TV back on, this device does not permanently damage anything.
It just temporarily silences a source of great aggravation for a lot of us, I personally don't think that businesses should promote a political world view to their customers, it's bad business to do so.
Watching FOX in particular is bad for your health if you are of the opposite political inclination, I walked out of a doctors office a few years back because they had something on that was enraging me and driving my blood pressure, which is already high enough, even further up the scale.
For a doctors office in particular to put on something they should know is going to be detrimental to a subset of their patients is unconsionable, "first, do no harm", eh?
52. Frankly if you are that touchy that watching Faux enrages you to the point of upping your BP,
Then you've got far bigger problems than Faux news, things like poor anger management, the inability to tune things out, etc. Perhaps you should worry more about those things than what channel your doctor has got on:shrug:
As far as "not permanently damage anything" well that's debatable. Say you turn this off, the owner clicks it back on, you turn it off again, etc. etc., then the switch burns out. Congratulations, you're now guilty of destroying other's property. Aren't you proud.
But really, that's all beside the point. What gives you the right to decide what gets shown on a TV set that isn't your own, especially one that isn't your own? Again, that is censorship, get the picture.
And yes, I'm bipolar, sometimes things don't bother me much at all and sometimes things get under my skin big time. Medication is not entirely effective in controlling my condition and I'm running out of options due to the fact that after a period of time the meds generally lose what effectiveness they have to start with.
Not everyone is as perfect as yourself, sometimes people have things happening in their lives that make them very sensitive to certain subjects, I can easily think of a great many examples where a certain subject presented the wrong way on TV might push someones buttons.
To use an example that is current here on DU, what if a woman had just undergone a medically necessary late term abortion and then went to her doctor or anywhere else for that matter and saw Bill O'Reilly on the TV in the waiting room calling her a murderer? Would that woman be overly sensitive if such speech caused her emotional distress?
And your scenario of a burnt out switch is pretty far fetched, far more so than the scenario I just outlined.
I don't care if it's censorship or not, exposing your customers to bad propaganda is not a good business decision in the first place.
You will never know what goes on in the mind of another.
I have a chemical imbalance in my brain, it's not my fault and not something that is under my control, there are a lot of us out here in the general population who aren't wrapped entirely tight.
Fox and conservatives in general spend a great deal of time and effort deliberately trying to anger liberals, perhaps we should be better than to let it get to us but we are only human.
I should have to learn and practice "calming techniques" in order to visit the doctor? Do you have any idea how ludicrous that sounds?
And to get back to my example, should a woman who has just lost a child to a highly traumatic medical procedure be forced to listen to being called a murderer? I predict that you will not answer this question.
Hell, I grew up with an abusive, unmedicated, untreated bipolar father. Which directly led to my own clinical depression and anger management problems that I had to learn how to deal with. So don't assume that people can't or don't know.
But again, the question comes down to why should the world cater exclusively to you, rather than you learning how to cope?
have you considered finding a new doctor? or is this the only one in the world that can treat you? have you mentioned to the staff that having news talk shows on may aggravate and annoy their patrons? most people are really quite willing to change the channel.
89. Oh, probably know more about mental illness, inside and out, than you do
And frankly, if somebody is demanding that the world cater to their needs exclusively, if they're allowing a simple goddamn TV show to up their blood pressure, then yes, they need to learn some calming techniques, something that both physicians and psychiatrists both recommend for the health of body and soul.
Any other snappy answers for stupid questions that you want, or are you done jumping into a conversation where you weren't invited?
85. Actually if I crush your twenty dollar little censorship toy,
That's simply misdemeanor property destruction. Big whoop, small sacrifice to prevent censorship. If you respond to that with violence, you could very well be the one going to jail. Funny how things work.
Edited on Tue Jun-02-09 02:42 PM by backscatter712
You pointed out you were 6'5" and would use your biiig bulk to crush my property.
That's intimidation, and if you actually touched me in your attempt to take my property from me, that's assault and battery. I don't have to respond with violence to see you thrown in jail for making threats of violence. I don't have to exert a microgram of force.
112. Wow S to S, are you normally this supportive of voiding the First Amendment
And scrapping free speech?
You want to quarantine Faux News, great, don't watch them. Keep them off the TV sets that you own. Ignore them in public, or better yet, politely ask for the channel to be turned, and if that doesn't work, don't patronize that business. But you don't have the right to unilaterally decide what an entire group of people get to watch or don't watch, especially when the establishment and TV aren't yours.
If you take such actions, you're no better than those you hate, you've become an authoritarian who wants to trample all over free speech in order that only your viewpoint is heard. Sorry, but that doesn't fly, the First Amendment applies to all speech, not just that which you agree with.
On in our break room. I would have loved to have had one of those. And that was my job, so I couldn't just leave at times. And to even hear it is like getting profanities thrown at you. I'm so fucking sensitive. :sarcasm:
57. Who are you to tell someone not to purchase it
It is a completely legal item so WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU to tell people they cannot purchase it. If you want this gadget to be illegal, call your congressman. Censorship isn't some individual who finds a clever way to voice their opinion, censorship comes from the government or the media, it isn't a guy with a gadget tired of noise in public places.
Call your congressman if you have a problem with someone purchasing this and using it, get a law passed that makes them illegal to use and makes it illegal to touch any TV anywhere anytime in any business, make TV news in public places sacred within the law; but until then it is none of your business if people buy them and use them. You are just the mind police yourself, pushing your opinions out on people, so what, WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU????
Until the Fox News people get arrested and dragged off the set, there is no censorship.
I hope these things sell out, if only to piss off the folks that are so high and mighty that they think they can demand people not use them.
I certainly don't appreciate being blasted by some ugly propaganda channel either when I am forced to sit in a waiting room or other public place, that's more naziesque than shutting it off. Forcing that crap on people is just wrong.
So IMHO you certainly have NOT become what you hate by shutting it down. I say its a great idea, go for it.
If you think that Faux news is "terrorist screeds".
Furthermore, it isn't how long you turn the set off for, it is your intent beyond the action. You want to control what people do or do not see. Sorry, but that's censorship, whether it be for a minute or a day or a year.
68. And a fucking goddan dog set off the Son of Sam murders,
Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick, if somebody is that far out there, then anything, literally anything could set them off. That's the problem with unstable personalities, if it isn't Faux News or a neighborhood dog setting them off, then it's the crap they read on the internet, hear on the radio, or get from the voices in their heads. What'cha gonna do, shut up every right wing news and commentary outlet in the country? Sounds like that's the sort of censorship you want. Sorry, but the vast majority of people in this country, myself included, believe in that pesky little thing called the First Amendment.
I compared Fox propaganda to that of terrorists without necessarily equating the two. There's some overlap, however, and Bill O'Reilly and Rupert Murdoch each bear a bit of the responsibility for the recent murder, having contributed materially to a culture of violence.
The threshold of what we could reasonably call censorship does hinge on how long the set is off for. People who want to watch Fox will, and if they don't see it in two of the thirty monitors in an airport, they'll see it in the other twenty-eight. This is no more censorship than is a noisy Code Pink demonstration at an appearance by Condi.
Decrying a token show of distaste as censorship is over the top.
75. There's also the little matter of the *ability* to conrol what other people see and hear.
People who want Fox News will still have plenty of access to it, whether or not a store owner remembers to turn it on, and whether or not someone--accidentally or on purpose--turns off the monitor.
Intent does matter. The intent of someone with an infrared device who temporarily turns off a monitor should be weighed against the intent of the owner of the monitor who wants visitors to pay attention to Fox. I think the latter is far more malicious, and the owner has the ability to turn it right back on.
This little act of protest doesn't even force the owner of the monitor to think about the propagandizing he's doing.
No matter how much code Pink would have liked to silence Condi, they never had that ability, and never really tried. I believe that you should distinguish between trivial acts of protest by the relatively powerless against the supremely powerful, and the terrible abuses heaped on us by certain media outlets.
80. How do you know what the intent of the owner is? Are you now a mindreader?
The owner of the establishment may have Faux on because the regulars like it, thus it's good for business and nobody has complained. Perhaps if you asked him politely to change the channel, he would:shrug:
But instead you would rather unilaterally decide what people do or don't watch, for whatever length of time. Sorry, but that's censorship, and that's what your intention is. That doesn't fly with me.
We aren't mindreaders. This, however, rather undercuts your other point--that intent is what matters.
Whether or not Rupert Murdoch secretly loves us all and thinks he's doing what's best for us, whether or not Code Pink members' nonviolent behavior merely conceals a desire to rule the world, whether or not someone with a laser on his keychain really wants to blow up all television sets, everywhere, intent isn't the only thing that matters, and is insufficient (even if we could read minds) for a diagnosis of censorship.
What is more important is the effect of one's actions. Murdoch's constant demonization of anything that might make us question his rulership is several orders of magnitude beyond a private citizen turning off a television monitor. I recommend worrying about the former, and ignoring the latter until it evolves into some sort of threat.
was exactly that... terrorist screeds. Cheerleading hundreds of thousands slaughtered in oil wars is terrorist screeds. Calling medical doctors baby killers is terrorist screeds.
All they do is catapult propaganda ad nauseum, that is not freedom of speech. Not in public waiting rooms where there is no escape, it is propaganda. Shutting it off is not censorship it is a person's right not to be subjected to filthy noise pollution.
99. Read David Neiwert's book The Eliminationists.
Outlets like FOX News serve a very important role for the radical right - they talk about unacceptable ideas, and work on making them acceptable. They serve as a bridge between the mainstream and the rabidly violent fringe.
Before the days of FOX News, was it acceptable to target an abortion doctor, call him "Tiller the Baby Killer" and demonize him until some lone-wolf psychopath shoots him? Now thanks to FOX News, it's now acceptable to demonize like that.
Outlets like FOX News and the right-wing talk radio stations that seem to dominate the AM band can be very dangerous. Look at what happened in Rwanda to see how bad it can get when the eliminationists decide to go off the leash entirely and hate-propagandists egg them on. I'm not saying that FOX News exclusively was responsible for Tiller's death - the primary responsibility goes to his murderer, Scott Roeder, but FOX News and personalities like Bill O'Reilly should take some responsibility for helping to create the atmosphere where this murder became possible.
43. Obviously, you are not aware of the mind control project funded by Fox News!
They fund teles that they give to places like McD's to indoctrinate the poor into being good fascists. They have instructed those recieving the sets to NEVER allow anything Else to be shown. I already will not go there. I am SICK of the hate. NONSTOP HATE. That is unseemly in public. And it is inciteful. If I hear some stupid fuck comment on that bitch Michelle or such, I might lay the fool out. That should not be happening in public. Fox should be kept in the bedroom, with all the other nasty business. Bring it in my face, and I object vociferously.
5. I had one, used it, and then gave it to a guy with four kids. BTW- it doesn't work in Walmart.
It works great in doctors offices and other places where you are being forced to listen to the tube, but not at Walmart. Walmart has some kind of system that turns the TV's back on after a few seconds.
BTW- as a BUYER, ie someone who goes into an electronics store to BUY something, I feel no compunction about turning off obnoxious sources of noise. I am trying to decide what to buy, not shopping recreationally because I am bored. If something is annoying me , I will turn it off or even unplug it. I am sick of being bombarded with noise.
in my doctor's waiting room, which is hardcore Fox News territory. Since my doctor tends to double and triple book, my waiting room times have become quite long. Then after 90 minutes of watching "Fire and Democrats BAD, Republicans GOOD", my doctor will say "huh, your blood pressure is slightly elevated!" :eyes:
I sure hope this thing works... the several reviews I read were quite positive... ;)
Of course the first people to comment were the Harry Reid "roll over and die" liberals who wouldn't want to infringe on free propaganda speech. I suppose the only way Lenin and Mao could get people whipped up for a liberal cause in the first place was because they were starving. It will take a long time for Americans to get that whipped up, considering the amount of excess poundage they are carrying.
27. Just watch it, I saw someone get pummeled for using one.
Of course, we were in a sports bar, and he thought it would be funny to shut off the TV every time the 49ers (home team) threw a pass. The guy was hit three or four times and then was physically thrown out the door.
Doctors offices aren't sports bars full of drunken idiots, but still...those things can piss people off. Just watch yourself.
The guy who invented TV-B-Gone said he wanted to make a Cell-Phone-B-Gone, but concluded that the implementation, while well within the technically possible, would be illegal. It would essentially be a device that mimicked the signals from a cell-phone tower, but the FCC would come down on your ass if you actually used it.
71. I have never seen businesses, doctors' offices, etc...
that have their televisions tuned in to Faux News, but I have seen them tuned in to CNN. I would think businesses wouldn't do this for fear of offending customers, but I guess not. Personally, if a business that I used had Fox News on, I wouldn't use their services anymore.
More civilized areas tune their TVs to sports or other neutral material. Most of the businesses that go out of their way to assault their customers with FAUX Noise are in red areas, maybe in Deep Jesusland.
84. Wouln't it be MORE effective to make a loud point of ASKING that the channel be changed?
And NOT patronizing the place if they don't?
Seems like you'll have to use the 'tv-b-gone' in stealth, which sort of defeats the purpose. I'd want businesses to know, loud and clear, that their (former) patrons think FOX sucks. I suppose it might be useful in places like a hospital waiting room or something.
Sometimes, it works best to complain to the waitress/cashier/manager/owner, and he changes the channel, problem solved.
Sometimes, the proprietor's gonna be an asshole, or the business has a contract for a free TV with FAUX Noise, and they're not allowed to change the channel.
In that case, it might be more productive, not to mention more fun, to use the TV-B-Gone to wage psychological warfare and see how many four-letter words you can get him to utter in a half-hour... :evilgrin:
I often confront businesses and ask them to turn off Faux "News" and many have. I've also left when they haven't and explained why on my way out. But no, I'm not willing to shut them down remotely. I wouldn't want them to do it to me so I won't do it to them.
if you just leave or ask it to be changed like other people have suggested in the last few days? If the TV goes off, someone thinks it's just some fluke and turns it back on. Then what? You sit there all day playing "TV on TV off" with a receptionist?
128. Thanks to a missed flight, I was once stuck in a motel near O'Hare
Edited on Fri Jun-05-09 09:59 AM by Lydia Leftcoast
where the ROOM TVs played only Fox News and sports channels. That's right, they were right outside Chicago and had no broadcast channels.
My new flight wasn't till 4:30PM, but I decided that I'd rather sit around in O'Hare all day than be trapped in a room even till the checkout time of 11AM with that garbage. I checked out immediately after taking advantage of their free coffee and bagels, returned to O'Hare, and bought a thick book to read.
My solution to businesses that play Fox News all the time: Don't patronize them more than once and tell them why.
131. Riiiiight. I can just imagine the reaction if some right winger did this with MSNBC.
This kind of crap is exactly what we don't need. Olbermann's suggestion is that we calmly ask that the channel be changed and then leave if it's not. He was NOT advocating that we hijack control of the remote.
139. Wouldn't it be better just to ask the person responsible to change the channel or turn it off?
For many people, it is just white noise.
I have asked dozens of times that the channel be changed on public televisions and have never been denied.
I always suggest an alternative depending on the setting. Waiting rooms are good places to suggest CNBC ("What's the market doing today?") or The Weather Channel. ESPN is another welcomed alternative ("Isn't there a big game on today?")
Maybe they change it back when I leave, but that's okay.
This device would be helpful, I imagine, in public places where no one is apparently responsible for the television such as the airport or something.
If enough people had this device, no news show would ever be seen on a public TV set, because somebody would consider it biased against them and shut it off. For every one of you who hates Fox, there's a right-winger who thinks ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN are leftist propaganda. (Well, maybe for every two of you.) "Liberal media bias" was a cliche before Fox was a gleam in Rupert Murdoch's eye.
Personally, I've never noticed bias in any news show on Fox or elsewhere. Probably means I'm not paying attention.
I thought going to Barnes and Nobels and rearranging/hiding/moving/flipping over the books of unpopular pundits/commentators/authors was lame,pathetic and immature, but this is a new low in crying out for help.
148. Do you "Not See" anything but Fox in the areas OP mentioned?
I for one am tired of it. I do not need more brainwash therapy and this device far from bringing about another brown shirt revolution should point out that those places are not considerate of their audience and cram Fox down everyone's throats. Who knows maybe they will let the viewers decide! More power to the people.
If a business ran Fox News all the time and refused to change the channel, I'd take my business elsewhere. Otherwise, I have never been in such a captive situation that I couldn't walk away from it (or just turn on my Ipod).
I suppose you know that your argument that I'm somehow a Fox supporter because I don't approve of people using devices to illicitly change channels is a straw man, but you run with that, if that's what you want to do. Go ahead and find the posts where I've suggested I support Fox news.
Part of living in a free society, you may be, from time to time, put in situations where you disagree with someone or something. While you have every right to walk away, make a counter point or do any number of things, you don't have the right to assault free speech. When you do that, there's no difference between you and the world the Neocons are trying to bring about, because instead of doing any number of things to protest, you're taking a tactic that says "if I don't like it, you're not allowed to like it either." That's what neocons attempt to do when they ban books or attempt to censor free speech.
Bottom line is this...you, me and most of the rest of DU would be howling mad if Free Republic were using a device like this to turn off Keith or Rachel. Why is okay for us to do it?
157. A reason turn off TV's, fox is a criminal operation!
Charles Krauthammer: Fox News "Created An Alternate Reality"
Charles Krauthammer was honored Tuesday with the Eric Breindel Award for Excellence in Opinion Journalism, given annually by News Corp in honor of former New York Post editorial writer Eric Breindel.
In his acceptance speech, Krauthammer praised Fox News for creating an "alternate reality" on TV: "Charles Krauthammer: Fox News "Created An Alternate Reality"
I said some years ago that the genius of Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes was to have discovered a niche market in American broadcasting -- half the American people. The reason Fox News has thrived and grown is because it offers a vibrant and honest alternative to those who could not abide yet another day of the news delivered to them beneath layer after layer of often undisguised liberalism.
What Fox did is not just create a venue for alternative opinion. It created an alternate reality.
Murdoch and Ailes, along with former Vice President Dick Cheney, toasted Krauthammer at a private lunch at Washington DC's St. Regis hotel Tuesday afternoon.
"We think he's the outstanding conservative journalist in the country at the moment," Murdoch said to Fox News' Shannon Bream.
"Charles is a genius," Ailes said. "No matter how complicated the issue is, he is able to crystallize it in a way that nobody in America can."
"He has been, over the years I've known him, I would say the outstanding columnist in Washington," Cheney said. "The one I always read because I enjoy what he's got to say."
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.