Ongowwah Member Username: Ongowwah
Post Number: 351 Registered: 03-2008
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 9:23 am: | |
Rush asks Obama about "Fairness" doctrine. http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB123508978035028163.html |
Bigb23 Member Username: Bigb23
Post Number: 3915 Registered: 11-2007
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 9:37 am: | |
Now I know Steelers, (Ongowwah), is back.
|
Ongowwah Member Username: Ongowwah
Post Number: 361 Registered: 03-2008
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 11:53 am: | |
Oh, so you favor the fairness doctrine, you must be a rarity, a lib in favor of censorship and limiting free speech. |
Ferntruth Member Username: Ferntruth
Post Number: 754 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 12:54 pm: | |
Boo! |
Ongowwah Member Username: Ongowwah
Post Number: 366 Registered: 03-2008
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 1:53 pm: | |
So here's the question: How will the libs sell this to their party and not be accused of censorship and trampling freedom of speech? |
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup
Post Number: 5298 Registered: 06-2004
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 2:10 pm: | |
Wall St. Journal = NY Post = Fox News = Rupert Murdoch Where's the trampling of free speech? The old anti-media-conglomeration regulations should be re-imposed. |
Otter Member Username: Otter
Post Number: 616 Registered: 12-2007
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 2:38 pm: | |
Obama says, straight up, "I have no interest in reviviing the fairness doctrine. Not going to happen." and obsessives apparently come up with some new rationalization for worrying about it. Some people there's just no talking to, I suppose - words go out, nothing is allowed in. O. |
Carolcb Member Username: Carolcb
Post Number: 2238 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 3:17 pm: | |
Yeah, God forbid we would have some intelligence instead of all this pandering to the lowest common denominator....Going back to serving the public good would be, well it would be the undoing of Rupert and Rush.....we wouldn't have to hear all of their slop! |
Cheddar_bob Member Username: Cheddar_bob
Post Number: 1791 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 3:33 pm: | |
How's that "ignore" feature coming? |
Islandman Member Username: Islandman
Post Number: 1980 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 3:36 pm: | |
Can't wait for that.
|
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 18914 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 10:31 pm: | |
It would be a symbolic loss for the citizenry more than a practical loss for those seeking the expression of the ideas. As if people would simply switch to the liberal media in the face of this attack. In typical liberal form, this attack on our constitutional rights would result in a crushing blow to the business of broadcast radio/media, and a bitter switch to other avenues for the information to be heard. |
Firstandten Member Username: Firstandten
Post Number: 696 Registered: 05-2006
| Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 12:47 am: | |
The only reason why this is an issue is because Rush knows he couldn't be on 600 stations across the nation if we really saw true market competition among the radio stations. The majority of radio stations being owned by corporate conglomerates makes for a mutually benefical relationship with the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the industry. Its been shown that in many markets folks like Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz and other progressive talkers compete very well with Rush and Sean given comparable time slots and signal strength. So next time you hear Rush screaming like the stuffed pig that he is over the radio remember he has an agenda, as in 25 million reasons in making sure this fairness doctrine goes away. |
Mauser765 Member Username: Mauser765
Post Number: 3013 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 3:18 am: | |
"So here's the question: How will the libs sell this to their party and not be accused of censorship and trampling freedom of speech?" huh ? The right wingers have LITERALLY 500 times more media outlets than left wingers do. Rush Limbaugh is a perfect example of somebody crying about fairness while on 500 times more stations than his "liberal" rivals. This is not due to market demand, it is because of who owns everything and what they decide to put money into. Progressive media has been proven to sell in every market, especially on the heels of helping win the whitehouse. What a bunch of grotesque whiners the fascists have all turned into. "How's that "ignore" feature coming?" Here come those endorphins again ! |
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 18926 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 10:24 am: | |
Only if you narrow the scope of media outlets to terrestrial radio. Even if you were right, why do you suppose conservatives might be more successful in media? Could it be the quality of the content and a willing (free to choose) audience? |
Bigb23 Member Username: Bigb23
Post Number: 3959 Registered: 11-2007
| Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 11:41 am: | |
Our right of "free to choose" was corrupted years ago by WJR. Boycotting advertisers still works. And add word of mouth. |
Classicyesfan Member Username: Classicyesfan
Post Number: 540 Registered: 04-2008
| Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 11:48 am: | |
"Even if you were right, why do you suppose conservatives might be more successful in media? Could it be the quality of the content and a willing (free to choose) audience?" Quality of content? Hardly. Entertainment value, yes. Pandering to ill-educated, yes. Pandering to the intolerant, yes. Pandering to the prejudiced racists, yes. Pandering to base emotions? yes. There's a huge market of illerate, ignorant, uneducated, illogical and extremists in America. They don't ask for quality of content, just content that appeals to their baser instincts. It's a huge ugly audience. I exercise my freedom to turn off the hatred. Of course, many exercise their freedom to take in the mean-spirited ugliness that mirrors their souls. |
1kielsondrive Member Username: 1kielsondrive
Post Number: 944 Registered: 08-2008
| Posted on Monday, March 02, 2009 - 1:39 am: | |
Self-serving drivel. Rush is worried they're gonna try to take his big fat ass, drug induced, lying, career away from him. If he's so mistrusting of President Obama and so intent on President Obama's failure, why would he believe a single word of the President's response anyway? He's seeking attention again. As if his ditto-heads don't give him enough adoration as it is. |