Discuss Detroit » NON-DETROIT ISSUES » Journal op-ed. « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Ongowwah
Member
Username: Ongowwah

Post Number: 351
Registered: 03-2008
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 9:23 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Rush asks Obama about "Fairness" doctrine.

http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB123508978035028163.html
Top of pageBottom of page

Bigb23
Member
Username: Bigb23

Post Number: 3915
Registered: 11-2007
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 9:37 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Now I know Steelers, (Ongowwah), is back.



Top of pageBottom of page

Ongowwah
Member
Username: Ongowwah

Post Number: 361
Registered: 03-2008
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 11:53 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Oh, so you favor the fairness doctrine, you must be a rarity, a lib in favor of censorship and limiting free speech.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ferntruth
Member
Username: Ferntruth

Post Number: 754
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 12:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Boo!
Top of pageBottom of page

Ongowwah
Member
Username: Ongowwah

Post Number: 366
Registered: 03-2008
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 1:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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?
Top of pageBottom of page

Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup

Post Number: 5298
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 2:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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.
Top of pageBottom of page

Otter
Member
Username: Otter

Post Number: 616
Registered: 12-2007
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 2:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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.
Top of pageBottom of page

Carolcb
Member
Username: Carolcb

Post Number: 2238
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 3:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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!
Top of pageBottom of page

Cheddar_bob
Member
Username: Cheddar_bob

Post Number: 1791
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 3:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

How's that "ignore" feature coming?
Top of pageBottom of page

Islandman
Member
Username: Islandman

Post Number: 1980
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 3:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Can't wait for that.


Top of pageBottom of page

Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson

Post Number: 18914
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 - 10:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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.
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 696
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 12:47 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mauser765
Member
Username: Mauser765

Post Number: 3013
Registered: 01-2004
Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 3:18 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"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 !
Top of pageBottom of page

Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson

Post Number: 18926
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 10:24 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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?
Top of pageBottom of page

Bigb23
Member
Username: Bigb23

Post Number: 3959
Registered: 11-2007
Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 11:41 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Our right of "free to choose" was corrupted years ago by WJR. Boycotting advertisers still works. And add word of mouth.
Top of pageBottom of page

Classicyesfan
Member
Username: Classicyesfan

Post Number: 540
Registered: 04-2008
Posted on Saturday, February 21, 2009 - 11:48 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"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.
Top of pageBottom of page

1kielsondrive
Member
Username: 1kielsondrive

Post Number: 944
Registered: 08-2008
Posted on Monday, March 02, 2009 - 1:39 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

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.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.