I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Yup.
and will this begin to change with a Kerry election?
Dunno. But NPR was reporting this morning that the House is considering an independent (sorry, "outside") counsel to investigate DeLay. First I'd heard, but if that's accurate, the tide may be turning faster than we expected.
It may be a "Perfect Storm" is about to break over the GOP. Which may change a lot of things. And Sinclair may fear that, which is why they are running this film.
Now, who do we get to scream "biasbiasbiasbias"?
Yes BUT... if a competitor affilliate were to run F-911 NOW... OPPOSITE the Swift Boat Liars' smear on the Sinclair station... what plausible-sounding objection could any attack poodle possibly have over simple "counterprogramming"?
What can be done to stop this?
Further reinforcing the reality - "liberal bias" means allowing any non-right-wing viewpoint in the public sphere. Frist.
Well, we all know the answer: IOKIYAR.
Honestly, in addition to the Supreme Court, I hope Kerry has a good pick in mind for Chair of the FCC.
And what, pray tell, is the DNC going to do about Sinclair? Can they please buy time to run Going Upriver in the same time slot? Please?
dang
Kerry has to ask the American people: Do you really believe this shit?
Absolutely. However, on the bright side of bias, I hear Michael Moore is *this close* to inking a deal with Pay-Per-View to have F911 on television the night before the election. It's not comparable to Sinclair's massive potential audience, but it's something.
Off to The Hague with them.
The precendent has already been set, with the Nurnberg trial and conviction of Hans Fritzsche.
Fox, Murdoch, Clear Radio, Jack Welch, Limbaugh, Sinclair, and quite a few others.
War criminals.
Atrios,
How about putting together a petition threatening to boycott Sinclair sponsors? It would require getting a list of those sponsors, but a petition with 40 or 50,000 names sent to each of those sponsors telling them they will be boycotted and why they will be boycotted might make an impression.
To repeat, what can be done about it. Because it is bad news for Kerry, is far worse than anything Rupert Murdoch has ever done, and is unprecedented media interference with an election.
OT: Why isn't the prisoner abuse scancal even on the radar anymore?
http://www.newtimesbpb.com/issue...ews/
norman.html
Top Ten Questions Audience Members Were Not Allowed To Ask During Tonight's Debate
10. Who's a better one-term president--you or your father?
9. Is it annoying being married to a woman who always smells like ketchup?
8. With oil at $50 a barrel, why aren't we looking into cheaper barrels?
7. Which best describes your economic policies: "Preposterous lies" or "Absolute crap"?
6. Senator Kerry, what impact do you think your large, canoe-shaped head will have on the economy?
5. What is your favorite episode of "Sanford and Son"?
4. Do you prefer flipping or flopping?
3. Which one of you is Dukakis?
2. Do you think John Edwards would be interested in dating a New Jersey Governer?
1. If either of you win, will you pardon Martha?
Can we find out who the largetst shareholders of Sinclair are and see if we can put pressure on them? Their have to be some people with ties to big corporations that have stock in this company. That might be one route to take. They might really support showing the movie, but not want the bad publicity more.
You can be sure the talking heads on TV will be talking about this now until electon day - another round of "Free publicity" - just like the SBVT shit that went on for three weeks.
Either way we are fucked. If we make a stink about it, all it does is draw attention to the movie. If we do nothing, the shit airs.
Jesus Christ! I wrote "their" instead of "there" .. God I hate it when people do that!! AHHHHHHHHHHH
From today's LA Times editorial page:
EDITORIAL
Paging Bill Clinton
"Bill Clinton was a rarity — the smartest kid in the class with whom everyone wanted to hang out. John Kerry is no Bill Clinton. The senator comes across as the smartest kid in the class, but a recent Zogby poll shows that only 9% of Americans would prefer to have a beer with him rather than President Bush.
Kerry failed in Friday night's town hall debate to address this weakness and bond with the audience, leaving ideologically uncommitted voters to choose between the smarter candidate and the likable one. Bush elicited more laughter from the audience, though he himself wasn't particularly engaging. At one point, the famously remote Kerry presumptuously assumed that only he, Bush and Charles Gibson, the moderator, would be affected by any tax increase for people making more than $200,000. Was he rendering a verdict on what the audience was wearing?"
Um, no assholes. He DIDN'T KNOW THE PERSONAL FINANCIAL HOLDINGS OF THE AUDIENCE, BUT HE DID KNOW THAT HE, BUSH AND GIBSON ARE WEALTHY, WEALTHY MEN.
That's why.
The rest of the editorial is very good to Kerry.
And eff the "beer drinking" crap. Grow up!
Duncan, details and link please.
Those of us who live in a Sinclair media area (here in beautiful Asheville, NC) can certainly turn this around on them. This happened last time when they banned Nightline.
Sinclair has two frickin' stations here in Columbus, OH. I have already written ABC (which is one of the affiliates here in C-bus)telling them that I won't watch anything ('cept MNF) if they let Sinclair pull this shit.
Maybe 60 minutes will trot out that Niger claim story they axed because God Forbid they didn't want to inform people before the election.( okay so I can dream can't I).
As clear a violation of campaign laws as I have heard of.
Has anyone seen the movie? Unless it is a complete hatchet job, I think it could backfire. Many, many people admire Kerry's anti-war activism in the 70's. Let's face it, everyone agrees now (except the most virulent history-hating freepers) that the war was a collosal mistake. Kerry was on the right side of history then, as he is now. Even if Kerry loses this election, history will vindicate him as having been right about everything.
I say, "Bring it on!" But I agree, there needs to be a group on our side shouting for fairness.
The more I think about it, this might actually work! Trust me on this...
Okay... are YOU in a Sinclair market? Do you have access to a local activist organization that's been working for Kerry?
Have them on official letterhead write to every competitor of that TV station, urging them, as a matter of "balance in the market", to run "Fahrenheit 9.11" opposite the Swift Boat Liars. CC everything you do to Michael Moore and the DNC.
If even one (or two or three!) affilliates give this idea a thumbs-up, Round Two is: get a shitload of publicity for the grassroots action you took! Have the organization you're working through send publicity to every NATIONAL outlet about what they did, and HOW IT SUCCEEDED.
This may actually offset the negative effects of the entire Sinclair scheme! Really. Do it. And again, trust me, this WILL be effective, even if only ONE TV station (and Sinclair's got dozens of markets; all it takes is ONE!) nibbles at the bait... it's all in the p.r!!!
"What can be done to stop this?"
-jmac
Contact Michael Moore? He's could be effective in screaming biasbiasbiasbiasbiasbias!
http://www.michaelmoore.com/
"Now, who do we get to scream "biasbiasbiasbias"?
Robert M. Jeffers"
US! US! US!
Phone numbers,,, we need phone numbers for all these staions,,
Calling time !
Then let's *do* something about it. Make some noise. Who do we bombard with letters and emails? Where do we go for on-the-street protests?
Just a few days ago, "we" got Luntz booted off of MSNBC. We can change things about the media. So . . . let's!
what is clear is that we need to develop strategies to pulverize the pocketbooks of companies that support this type of thing without giving them too much publicity. someone should do some research and identify the most important companies that do business with the RNC and don't play both sides of the fence so that those of us with a helluva lot more education than the high school drop outs who watch Fox spend our money wisely
Oh, the whores will pay for their slime.
Can they rest their foul heads at bedtime?
They considered it cool
To promote this damn fool;
Now they're linked to an ongoing crime.
I work 7 days a week. One of the things that makes it slightly easier on the weekends is listening to NPR. The past year the network has moved dramatically to the Right.
I turned it on this morning and right away they are talking about the debate. I'm already cringing thinking about how they are going to spin it. Sure enough, they turn to the unbiased expertise of Mora Liason.
I switched over XM radio. Thank god I have AAR.
I live in IA and have written the following letter to the Cedar Rapids Press-Citizen:
Dear Editor,
It has come to my attention that Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBG), which owns KGAN here and KDSM in Des Moines, has directed its stations to preempt regular programming shortly before the election in order to show a movie attacking John Kerry's patriotism. To my knowledge, they don't plan to show a similar movie criticizing the president.
SBG's CEO David Smith is free to support the candidate of his choice (and he has; giving the maximum of $2,000 to Bush), as are the rest of Sinclair's employees (search for Sinclair on opensecrets.org). However, he overreaches every time he uses his unique position as a broadcaster to air political editorials after newscasts and to hide news damaging to the president. He abuses the public trust. He sits in Maryland and cherry picks what image of the US Government we in Iowa get to see, an image that serves his own political agenda. All over air waves given to him by the people so he can better serve us.
It's despicable—more befitting soviet-style media practices than what one expects from American broadcasters.
Sincerely,
etc.
Duncan, opps...didn't see earlier link downthread. Need coffee.
Thanks.
Me thinks its shitstorrm time.
I totally agree with everyone who says we need to do something here. Given that Sinclair reaches a quarter of all the households in the U.S., and given that we know (sadly) that the Swift Boat horseshit is effective, this is no small thing.
What can we do?
- Petition Sinclair not to do this.
- Boycott affiliates, shareholders.
- Try to get another broadcaster with comparable market share to run F9/11 or Going Upriver.
I don't know which of these would be best, but Atrios and other big bloggers should really try to put something together.
Again, given the potency of the Swift Boat smear and Sinclair's market share, this is a really big deal. We cannot take this lying down.
I mangled facts worse than Bush did!
http://factcheck.org/
article.asp...@docID=275.html
Corporate Headquarters
Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc.
10706 Beaver Dam Road
Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030
410-568-1500 (Main Telephone)
410-568-1533 (Main Fax)
Investor Relations Contact
Lucy A. Rutishauser
VP Corporate Finance and
Corporate Treasurer
investor@sbgi.net
Sales Questions
Darren Shapiro
VP Sales
410-568-1500
-or-
Jeff Sleete
VP Marketing
410-568-1500
Web Site Concerns
Mike O'Malley
Corporate Webmaster
webmaster@sbgi.net
Dave
I'm with you, of course this is illegal. Someone will go to court to stop this.
Someone said in the last thread that PBS aired Fahrenheit 911? I've found no evidence of this? Anybody know?
SBG--SOVIET Brocasting Group
I think I read about this in Clancy's "Red Storm Rising": damn Rooskies aired "Battleship Potemkin" before an important political announcement.....
It is a problem with our democracy that a sinlge film's single showing or a particularly rousing rendition of the national anthem at Game Seven could actually swing an election one way or another.
Keep the polls open for a week.
This makes me SO ANGRY!
Perhaps House and Senate Dems for the affiliate areas should be bombarded with mail. If memory serves me right, doesn't Sinclair broadcast in WV. Then it's time to email Senator Byrd. The only way to deal with bullies is to bully them back.
If we make a stink about it, all it does is draw attention to the movie. If we do nothing, the shit airs.
I certainly agree with the first part. As to the second, campaigns have been buying half-hour or more blocks of airtime to run extended infomercials the night before the election for years now. By that point, the vast majority of people are so fucking sick of the endless number of campaign commercials filling every fucking station break, they make a determined effort to avoid them, and, if the extended spot happens to pre-empt their favorite program, they get more pissed than ever.
While I think there are certainly legal avenues to pursue in this matter, and a massive threat to major stockholders and advertisers is certainly in order, I really don't want to give the issue any more free publicity. As always, the best advice is to just ignore the moronic brownshirt fucks.
Phone numbers,,, we need phone numbers for all these staions,,
Calling time !
sgo
No no no no, NO NO NO-O-O-O-OOOOO!
Okay, last time: do not waste YOURS, begging the snake not to be a snake!
Organize your efforts either SHEDDING LIGHT on what Sinclair's doing... NOW! Or work your ass off to get individual competitive stations in each and every Sinclair market to run F-911 (nothing less; hit 'em with the big guns, or not at all!)!
Don't even waste your breath on Sinclair. They know full well what they're doing. That's why they're doing it.
here is a link to all their Television stations
Here
http://tinyurl.com/4cxhy
"Now, who do we get to scream "biasbiasbiasbias"?
Robert M. Jeffers"
US! US! US!
Well, then, in the immortal words of Bluto Blutarsky:
LET'S DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's time the old Senator got email on what the media are doing within his constituency:
http://byrd.senate.gov/
I believe we should hold the broadcasters using free air to a higher standard, and not give Sinclair a free pass because they're evil.
People tuning to an anti-Kerry movie with knowledge of the agenda behind it is better than people thinking that it conforms to any standard for broadcast integrity.
Another good question is will any of this bias change after Kerry is elected President?
I have sent emails to FCC, my congressman, Kurtz and all major TV networks expressing outrage and alleging a breach of public trust of use of public airwaves. You can do it too!
sgo,
Thanks. I'll be calling all the stations in New England.
NY post's page six have a teaser about Fahrenheit 9/11 being shown on television the night before the election, but no story, or no story that I could link to.
I have sent emails to FCC, my congressman, Kurtz and all major TV networks expressing outrage and alleging a breach of public trust of use of public airwaves. You can do it too!
Bombard those Congressmen and the Putz with email!
Wonderful. This airing must be stopped but not at the risk of going back to all this Vietnam crap. I had hoped we had moved passed these swift boat liars.
Barry Champlain said:
No no no no, NO NO NO-O-O-O-OOOOO!
Okay, last time: do not waste YOURS, begging the snake not to be a snake!
huh?. Don't call them on it is your position eh?
I'd say scream at the snake, pull on it's tail and chop off the head.
Wasting my time? hmmm,, I can't think of a better thing to do than piss off Sinclair,, since they piss me off to no end.
out whoring again:
(Atrios had something on this in April, but I can't find it)
http://tinyurl.com/52bks
Sinclair Broadcasting's David Smith Busted In Prostitution Sting
David Deniston Smith, president and chief executive officer of Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc., was charged with committing an unnatural and perverted sex act in a company-owned Mercedes. He was arrested in an undercover sting a Read and St. Paul streets, a downtown corner frequented by prostitutes.
Police said Mary DiPaulo, 31, ran across the street to a 1992 Mercedes, registered to Sinclair, and got in on the passenger side. Police followed the car onto the Jones Falls Expressway, where they said they witnessed the two engage in oral sex while Smith drove north.
Here is the link to the companies Sinclair owns an interest in:
http://www.sbgi.net/business/ven.../
ventures.shtml
" ...but what's really bad is the "liberal media" will be quiet about it."
They cover for each other just like cops do.
Get control of the FCC and revive fairness. If we don't this is only going to get worse.
RT: Hurray for Dan Kennedy of the Boston Phoneix for telling the truth and saying that Cheney was a "profligate liar" on WGBH's "Beat The Press" last night. Bob Zelnic immediately started the waffels for Cheney and (again Hurray) Callie Crosley backed up Dan Kennedy's point.
Emily Rooney (the little old whine maker's daughter) tried to keep a lid on the most interesting thing to ever happen on her program by complaining about "political discussion" breaking out on her program.
OT: Yesterday did have some good news, the Cristo junta has been forced out at WBUR. No idea yet who will replace die Fuhrerin but someone will.
The Fairness Doctrine - RIP
while Smith drove north.
and the passenger headed south, if you know what i mean... wink, wink.
The Fairness Doctrine - RIP
Stinky
Revive It Promptly?
If you had to run on their record, you'd smear all the time, too!
Looking at this objectively with a group of undecided voters, we came away with the impression that President Bush said it best:
"He's got a record. He's been there for 20 years. You can run but you can't hide."
Ideed!
John Kerry has a 20-year record of weakening national security and President Bush was on the offensive last night against John Kerry's naive and dangerous ideas.
Just wait until Wednesday!
(Check out the attached site for more information)
Right-wing hypocrisy? Dog bites man.
what you have to remember is that the corrupt corporate patrons have a lot more to lose if bush is thrown out than a few disgruntled viewers, so they will do absolutely anything to keep bush in power.
Tokyo,
I agree (nice name, by the way!).
Here is what I came away with from the debate:
Kerry suggested limiting the War on Terror to a hunt for Osama Bin Laden. This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the War on Terror.
Kerry said that Saddam Hussein was a threat, but said we should not have dealt with that threat.
Kerry suggested that Saddam Hussein could be contained with sanctions, in contrast to his own previous assertion that a "policy of containment" would be "disastrous."
Kerry proposed a return to failed policies of unilateral negotiations with North Korea that proved a failure during the Clinton administration.
Kerry refused to retract his proposal for a "global test."
Kerry again denigrated our allies by saying we are going it alone.
He's unfit for the office, IMO.
Its GMT+9, and so, i am hitting the rack...
night troops, go get sinclair and harass the bush camp into its night bivouac.
carry on.
I agree, Kerry is unfit, Just look at what he said last night and the FACTS:
John Kerry has a 20-year record of supporting bigger government, higher taxes and higher health care costs.
President Bush exposed John Kerry's hypocrisy on health care by addressing John Kerry's $1.5 trillion health care that would take away choices without reducing the cost of health care.
John Kerry blocked medical liability reform ten times.
President Bush exposed John Kerry's record of proposing $2.2 trillion in new government spending.
Easy choice!!
oh and dont feed the trolls, even the moronic ones.
If we make a stink about it, all it does is draw attention to the movie. If we do nothing, the shit airs.
I certainly agree with the first part. As to the second, campaigns have been buying half-hour or more blocks of airtime to run extended infomercials the night before the election for years now. By that point, the vast majority of people are so fucking sick of the endless number of campaign commercials filling every fucking station break, they make a determined effort to avoid them
Oh, to watch the habits Four-Eyed Lib'rul, as it, leeming-like, commits suicide! 
Listen to me. Why? Because I know a little something, not much, but a little, about the general subject of mass media.
"Oh, nobody will ever watch it" is UNBELIEVABLY NAIVE! Sinclair is not doing this as a "Hail Mary" pass. They don't own Greek diners, urinal manufacturing plants or Dial-A Maid franchises. They own TV stations. They make a shitload of money owning TV stations. Why? Because advertisers pay big bucks to rent precious seconds on TV stations.
You know those "infomercials" that you so disdainfully say no one will watch anymore? They're still on. As opposed to the days of either signing that puppy off, or showing a great old B&W "B"-flick on "The Late Late Shows" of old, the sponsors today shell out God knows how many millions of dollars per year to run that crap. Now, they wouldn't, would they, if SOMEONE weren't making it profitable for them to do so?
I say again: the value of Sinclair's running this thing is not to be questioned, at this point. It WILL have an impact, period. Sorry if you don't see it. The best you can hope for is to do something to blunt that impact, if possible.... like getting F-911 on the "other" channel, and hoping you'll pick off a percentage of the Stupid surfers, before Sinclair does.
Now THAT accomplishes something effective. But saying that we should just ignore it and "not draw attention to it" is pure suicide. They're not doing this for their health.
No doubt. President Bush was in command of the issues, the facts, and the stage, and clearly won on style and substance last night. He exposed and dismantled Kerry's record of voting against intelligence funding, against our troops, against medical liability reform and against tax relief for working families.
Bush/Cheney '04.
I love it when the brownshirts post and answer themselves.
Guess they've got a "warm body" problem down in the boilerroom these days. Better not wait too long, "guys," those slots at Jack-in-the-Box are filling up fast!
oh and dont feed the trolls, even the moronic ones.
Hubris Sonic
How about if we slip them some d con?
I gotta say, President Bush won a decisive victory last night. The President presented impassioned, thoughtful and concise arguments that left Kerry looking petty and defensive as he sputtered out tired, false political rhetoric and distortions that shattered his credibility and contradicted the Senator's 20-year record of being on the wrong side of history on national security and domestic policy.
The Fairness Doctrine - RIP
Stinky
Revive It Promptly?
It might not be a bad idea to get the old fairness doctrine tape and incorporate it somehow into an ad. People react strongly to nostalgia and with all the events since Bush took office, a kinder, gentler time could be a powerful motivator.
SBG also runs the ABC affiliate in St. Louis.
Got us a troll with multiple personalities.
Yawn.
Excuse me, but how does Kerry is "unfit for the office, IMHO" translate into "undecided"? You trolls must think we're as shitforbrains as you are.
Stolen Honor, Sherwood and the Moonies
I wish Atrios would give me some link love.
“Well, I Think That The President Stepped Up His Game Tonight, And I Think That He Came With A Game Plan In Mind, And Tried To Execute It On That Stage.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball")
Dear trolls,
YOUR MONKEY LOST LAST NIGHT ...NOW GET OVER IT
thank you
All non trolls please return to your seats now.
"Bush Came To Play Tonight."
Yeah, I'm buying that suddenly all these undecideds chose to start posting here, there being so many places on the Internets to post and all.
Exactly when did the "guy you'd like to have a beer with" criterion become a major factor in presidential elections? Did people think Lincoln would make a great drinking buddy? FDR? Truman? Eisenhower?
"I Think President Bush Was Most Effective, Is When He Brought People Into The Oval Office, Talked About Meeting With The Iraqi Finance Minister, Talking About Going To The Situation Room And Talking To General Tommy Franks, And Then, Finally, Also, Bringing Up Senator Kerry's Senate Record. But You Did See, I Think, A Lot Of Skill Out There Tonight."
"The President Did Well" And Exuded An "Air Of Confidence."
George Bush has a 20-year record of driving every enterprise he's handled straight into the ground, leaving taxpayers to clean up the mess.
Senator Kerry exposed Bush's hypocrisy on spending by pointing out that Bush has saddled taxpayers with more red ink than all previous presidents put together..
George Bush and the GOP blocked SEC reform ten times.
Kerry exposed Bush's record of spending more than Clinton, whose pay-as-you-go fiscal policies briefly brought our government back to sanity, until dry-drunk Bush got ahold of the controls.
The choice is easy!
"George W. Bush Came To Play."
"The Guys In Western Pennsylvania, Working Class Guys In West Virginia, Ohio, These Guys Who Are Concerned About Their Lost Jobs, They Like A Tough Customer As President, And The President Came Off As Tough, Assertive, Confident, Even Defiant."
That was directed upthread to Sam.
"George W. Bush Came To Play."
Too bad it's not a game..
Poor Stupid little Monkey....
George Stephanopoulos, is there an orifice he hasn't presented to Bushco yet?
Go after the sponsors. Destroy them.
After Kerry is in office, we can work on having Sinclair's broadcast license revoked.
OK. How can we respond to the Sinclair strategy? What should we do??
Bad economy already...advertisers cannot AFFORD to alienate us en masse
So we must boycott all advertisers products willing to support this trash programming.!!
i couldn't have said it better myself last night.
Chris Matthews, the choice of chimpy's chubby chasers.
fuck Sinclair, and fuck that coked-up lunatic who claims to be our elected president.
Go after the sponsors. Destroy them.
After Kerry is in office, we can work on having Sinclair's broadcast license revoked.
Seraphiel
What he said. Start now.
Sinclair, the conservative owned broadcast group which owns 62 TV stations, also requires their stations run editorials, which they produce, which are usually somewhat to the right of Limbaugh. Sinclair is also the group that refused to air the Nightline program which ran the names and pictures of soldiers killed in Iraq.
http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/...ves/
000857.html
I gotta say, President Bush won a decisive
No, you don't gotta say that. Cuz it shows everyone how stupid you are.
ZZZZ ZZZ ZZZ zzz..
Y'know, I've always taken it with a
grain of salt when Eschatonians suggested
that the trolls might actually be paid
Republican operatives, rather than just
obnoxious jerks.
Untill today.
It's illegal. Corporations cannot fund partisan hack jobs. Sinclair is no different. This is not "news coverage" so they get no exemption.
stilwell over at kos posts relevent info.
"Electioneering Restrictions and Disclosure
Under The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), funds from corporations (whether nonprofit or for-profit entities) and unions may not be used to pay for "electioneering communications," which are broadcast, cable, or satellite communications that:
* refer to a clearly identified Federal candidate;
* are broadcast within 60 days before the general election of the candidate or within 30 days before the party primary, convention, or caucus that nominates the candidate; and
* are targeted to the "relevant electorate," i.e., over 50,000 persons in the State or Congressional district that the candidate seeks to represent.
Exemptions are provided for news stories, commentaries, editorials, and candidate debates and forums. BCRA gives the FEC authority to make additional exemptions, so long as they do not "promote, support, attack, or oppose a Federal candidate."
Airing a feature-length attack ad does not constitute "news coverage."
The Campaign Finance Institute describes itself thusly:
The Campaign Finance Institute is a non-partisan, non-profit institute, affiliated with The George Washington University, that conducts objective research and education, empanels task forces and makes recommendations for policy change in the field of campaign finance.
OK. How can we respond to the Sinclair strategy? What should we do??
I'm going to sit down Monday night, tune in my local Sinclair affiliate, and start writing down advertisers.
If everyone does the same thing, we should be able to compile a nice list for freeping.
The troll is probably getting minimum wage, or even better, Rove talked them into doing it for free.
Stupid, troll, they would have paid you more if you were smart enough to ask.
"I think the President was most impressive when he didn't poop his pants on national TV, as it looked like he really wanted to. Such self control is quite amazing."
Andrea Mitchell
Wow, Unka Kkkkarl must be ignoring his own overtime rules and paying his minions extra to get up early on a Saturday morning. Or maybe Mom told them they have to buy their own Cheetos this week.
Guys, face it. Bush is toast. You got to watch him self-destruct right in front of your very eyes. He couldn't debate my high-school aged nephew. Kerry's going to win and his coattails just may bring in the Senate as well. Get used to it.
We need to start looking for a Rove connection, as far as I can tell it's October and this certainly is a surprise.
"When the President asked if anyone wanted some wood, I really wanted some. He's quite the salesman"
Chris Matthews
I sincerely hope they're paying these dipshits. I couldn't think of a greater waste of campaign dollars.
There is a corporate profile available at The Center for Public Integrity.
Does anyone have a link for this story?
I want a Daily Show interview of a Sinclair Broadcast Group executive.
Peter Pumpkinhead | Email | Homepage
I love the smell of XTC in the morning.
Just emailed NY Times with this story. If they changed their minds about Nightline, they can be shamed into taking this crap of the schedule. For the love of God, IT'S THE MOONIES!
"When the President rudely interupted Charles Gibson, I think that sent a clear message to Osama Bin Laden that he too would be rudely interupted if he tried to ask a follow up question, and I think that resonates with the American people."
Tim Russert
Ah, yes, the trolls are out in force. I love the smell of desperation in the morning.
In all fairness, they really do believe that Bush won last night, because he was purely pandering to his base and they are his base. So of course they loved it, and heard what they wanted to hear.
The rest of the world saw an agitated Bush shout and bully the moderator, get testy with the questioners, and once again refuse to admit he has ever made a mistake (saying that some appointments were mistakes when some of your ex-appointments have been pointing out you have no clothes doesn't cut it -- that's blaming someone else). The rest of the world heard someone tell us how well things are going economically when they know of their own knowledge that it is not true.
The hardcore loves that little cowboy swagger and schoolyard taunts; this rest of the world says "holy shit! And this is the guy who has his finger on the button?"
Ducktape:
What you said.
Kerry needs to do two things in the last debate:
1) Outmaneuver the "flip-flop" argument by saying, "My opponent's PR machine has painted me as indecisive, but I know that the American people can see through the PR. It's only PR, and the reality is different. Was I indecisive in combat? Was I indecisive when my boat came under fire and I steered it into the assault and took out a machine-gun nest? Was I a flip-flopper when I ran out in a hail of bullets and saved that Green Beret? Was I a girle man when my men took fire and so I took aim - and killed the enemy in combat? Was I a flip-flopper then? No, and I won't be as your commander-in-chief."
2)Kerry must undercut the issue of likability: only 9% will have a beer with him? "Unlike my opponent, I may not be the guy you want at your backyard barbeque. But in these times, it's not who you want to have a beer with. Who would you rather be in a foxhole with?"
Kerry would have been much better off if he had done these two things as his opener in Coral Gables in order to frame the issues for all the derbates. It's as if he and his staff don't know how to strategically outmaneuver his opponents and defalate their arguments.
Perhaps all the various interested parties should buy up all the advertising spots available during the broadcast. Or, better yet, something that directly challenges the patriotism of the President. Bring out all the ads, have ads that go through all the junk that's happened in America since Bush was elected. Run ads with video clips of his finer moments during the debates.
Write letters to your local Sinclair stations saying you'll never watch their station again after this. Write to the advertisers telling them you won't buy their products. Picket in front of the affiliate stations. Make this a big issue, and when given press face time use it to talk about how wonderful John Kerry is. Go around town and put anti-war leaflets in the front windows of newspaper kiosks.
To quote from Yellow Submarine: "Today, the world goes Blue!"
fuck Sinclair, and fuck that coked-up lunatic who claims to be our elected president.
Jim, the link to the story in the LA Times is on the previous thread about the SCLM.
Jim, the link to the story in the LA Times is on the previous thread about the SCLM.
Thanks Platypus, I'm blind today. I need some of what Mr. Bush was having last night.
I don't think the only answer is trying to get F9/11 onto broadcast stations.
I think a better solution would be to create a immediate counter documentary about what W was doing from 68 on. Use photos and voiceovers, spend 4 days sunk deep in Kitty Kelley etc., then get to work. Maybe a few interviews with writers and observers from tv shows plugging their books and the like, and the hundreds of other books and articles about the Lost Years of W.
Cheerleader. Gentlemen's C as a legacy. TANG 'service'. Grounded for missing physical. (And again in 2004, why does this guy keep getting away with this crap?) Failures in business. Mano a mano. Harken insider trading. The land grab for the Rangers staduim and trading Sammy Sosa, well I could go on and on and on....
There's plenty of young sharp directors, video wizards with Final Cut Pro who do't want to see Bust have 4 more years. It could divided up among a group of activist artists who could spend a few days on their segment.
Don't know how it could be broadcast, but maybe there's some sort of guerilla media it could be spread through out the Inter-Nets (sic) and get some play in other media forms.
And of course, there could be a corresponding narrative about Kerry. Volunteered for Vietnam. Prosecutor in MA - something I don't think he emphasizes enough. Senator. BCCI. Iran-Contra. Using quotes from various worthies praising him for his behind the scenes work on so many laws and issues. Hero. DA. Senator.
This move by Sinclair stinks so high. It's proof and warning that winning this election for Kerry and taking back the Senate (getting more and more likely every day) are not going to solve all our problems. It's going to be a long hard road, but at least we're on the best road possible now. Re-regulation, local control, fairness doctrine, truly low-cost air-time, and mandatory free time during normal viewing hours for candidates are just some of the things we're going to have to demand and see instituted.
Hey Pumpkinhead, if Bush and Osama did meet, I don't think Osama would be asking Bush any questions much less a follow up one.
Can anyone share registration info for the LATimes?
This is clearly illegal from Sinclair and they will pay a big price for it. Bloggers are going to trounce them in the media. Keep up a good work!
Anonymous:
If we can get some people to do this I will research it (Kelley on down.) I've never been so pissed at the GOP in my life. They've just figured out the Bush is an incompetenet fool and now must do everything they can to keep him in power.
Steve Simels at 12:06 PM ~ love that allbum! Great response.
The Sybil troll above is spewing RNC talking points. What a hoot!
Rather than force a showing of "Fahrenheit 9/11" the night before the election, I recommend showing "Going Upriver." I like both films, but the latter is quieter and, in its way, more persuasive.
If you haven't seen it, go see it.
carblogger,
Does mailinator/mailinator not work?
If not, try bugmenot.com.
Steve, that was me...not used to continually typing my name in HaloScan each time I post.
Folks,
I suggest that rather than writing in your letters that it's dispicable what SBG's doing, write instead that it's illegal. It's not a matter of taste or morality but rather of law.
More on Sinclair:
http://www.disinfopedia.org/
wiki...Broadcast_Group
Sent my little letter of protest to the wahoos who run the Sinclair plantation here. I held myself back and didn't call them New Age Nazis running propaganda films "Triumph of the Greedy over the Clueless" and "Watch this Drive"
Got us a troll with multiple personalities.
Yawn.
just me
Or mebbe just the usual; multiple trolls with no personality. Which is more iritating? Jeez, it's like trying to choose between Jock Itch and Athlete's Foot...
I have just purchased the http://www.stopsinclair.com website address. It will take about 24 hours for it to be up.
What I need from all of you right now is HELP - this means helping me to set up some pre-made pages by way of text. I want to be able to cut and paste the text right into a webpage - a VERY SIMPLE ONE.
PLEASE SEND TO:
STOPSINCLAIR@YAHOO.COM
I am working on this bigtime.
Lean on the advertisers. They will cave and Sinclair can't run anything if they can't pay their electric bills. It would be doubly good to hit the ones that were just indicted on the Delay scandal. Sears is an example. I'm not a fan of it, but the fundies have shown us that it works with the major companies.
Make this an opportunity!
As someone alreaday posted, this smacks of unfairness, and in so doing, opens the door for 9/1l to be aired at or around the same time. Hit CBS, NBC, ABC hard with this story, they already know 9/11 shown the week of the election would be huge ratings, they simply need an excuse to justify the risk for advertisers, who can now argue that they advertised on BOTH Sinclair's movie and 9/11. I'm sure someone is in touch with Michael Moore, but this is exactly the type of thing he can pull off.
This is a major gaff by BushCo, Inc.
Steven, "Going Upriver" sounds really excellent and I'm dying to see it, myself... but as it proved when it hit boffo b.o., F-911 is a BIG DRAW.
Stupids (our target!) who will not feel like sitting through a "documentary" will cancel their plans to sit home and get a free viewing of that great big famous "Michael Moore flick", which Oprah and Access Hollywood have been jabbering about.
And as experience has shown, this movie is DEADLY, when it comes to hearts and minds. They couldn't destroy it... they couldn't minimalize it. They would never even have tried, if the movie weren't Republican Fucking Kryptonite.
We need NUMBERS (or, as they call it in television, "cume"). It's a simple matter of ice cream vs. Triaminic!
Make a move to get Sinclair to show "Going Upriver." Make it a public campaign.
An email-phonecall campaign against Sinclair, is also smart. http://www.sbgi.net/ is their website. Notice they are public, making their executives vulnerable to shareholder derivative lawsuits. CEO's are required, by law, to pursue profit, not an ideological agenda. If you hit the advertisers hard and cause them to drop sponsorship(even if just during the airing of the movie) it must be brought to the attention of the CEO and Board. FCC complaints, FEC, and an action brought in Federal Court all would make the profit motive dubious.
The same goes with advertisers, their CEOs(provided the companies are public) MUST pursue profit. Boycotts need to be organized immediately in order to demonstrate the potential loss of revenue for supporting Sinclair.
In sum, I think a good strategy would be to
1)get this story to michael moore, use this as leverage to push for 9/11 on the networks the week of the election.
and
2)Do the contrapositive, i.e. boycott/phone campaigns/email Sinclairs advertisers on one hand and Sinclairs CEO and Board on the other.
Here is a list of Sinclair execs with email addresses.
http://www.sbgi.net/about/
execut...xecutives.shtml
Here is a list of Sinclair execs with email addresses.
http://www.sbgi.net/about/
execut...xecutives.shtml
Spectator Consumer
WHY?!?!?
"Look, Smithers! Some bloggers have organized an effort to tell us they disapprove of our propping-up our Determined Leader! Well, this puts a whole new spin on things. If these people don't want our viewers to see our bold vision of America, maybe we ought to reconsider! Send out a memo... put 'Fear Factor' back on, immediately!"
Corporate Amurica ain't no damn democracy, campers...
This isn't just a movie, it is potentially the Presidency. Look below at the stations Sinclair owns in "swing states." Even if the movie swayed a few thousand people in each state, it might end up being the difference in close contests.
Sinclair owns:
3 stations in Ohio
3 stations in Florida
2 stations in Iowa
2 stations in Wisconsin
2 stations in Missouri
3 stations in North Carolina
1 station in Michigan
1 station in Pennsylvania
How about someone, say, knocking together a documentary about how Sinclair broadcasting controls its local affiliates, and giving it to competing broadcasters to show?
I'm going to be protesting at WLOS, anyway. It's tough on the local staff, because it is Asheville's only local station. And I know that lots of the reporters and crew resent the editorial control exerted by Sinclair head office.
But I'd urge them to walk out in protest. Or wear Kerry pins when reading the news.
My point exactly, spectator!
YOUR solution: write letters to the fascists, complaining that they're a bunch of mean, unfair meanies.
MY solution: Put the biggest documentary in American history... proven hands-down to be anathema to Bush and the Iraq War... on a few channels OPPOSITE them. Steal a few audiences right the fuck out from under them.
Then... turn what you've done into national headlines (it's so easy, it's probably automatic).
My God, do the proverbial and oft-mentioned math!
Do you seriously doubt there aren't emails/letters/meetings with the Bush campaign and these folks????
Of course there are. Smith is abusing his authority, and he cannot allow a lawsuit to subpoena phone records/emails or it would be clear he wasn't acting on behalf of shareholders.
Citing the Simpsons is cute, but this isn't a cartoon, and CEOs of public companies are routinely sued, fired, fined and prosecuted. David D. Smith won't pull this crap off the air because he cares what we think, he'll do it because it is his ass on the line.
Sherwood is a Moon enabler, I don't think he is moonie. Moon doesn't need us to be moonies - he is driving the bus "naturally."
Sinclair is another unwitting organization helping Moon in his "natural subjugation of the American government and population."
Just like Bush 41, Falwell and all the rest, read about it...
PLEASE READ AND LEARN.
anonymous in nc,
Drop me a line, I'm an Asheville resident and would love to help out any way that I can.
oops try again
Please READ
Platypus: I think the way to do this is the same as the 'Nightline' thing, which is to go through the Asheville VfP group.
I wonder what it would take to make a 30-second commercial that discusses Sinclair's political bias. And its executives' predilections.
What's shitty here is that WLOS is the primary media outlet showing political ads for the local House race. Patsy Keever's campaign has had to shovel too much of its money to Sinclair just to counter being slandered by Charles 'Leona Helmsley' Taylor.
It's amazing how 90% of the above sophomores want to follow exactly the same strategy that benefited the Dems through GOP stupididty over Fahrenheit 9/11.
Follow the lead of the pros: don't make this more than a minor story. Or, IF, it can be shut down legally, do so IF it is slam dunk and doesn't become potential embarassment that drives news cycle and enlarges audience.
This isn't hard. Free your mind.
Barry, honestly, I think getting 9/11 aired would be the best solution. Let them run their movie, 9/11, I have no doubt, would get more viewers and what not.
Airing 9/11 is the best option, if we can get it done. There needs to be a fallback option, going after Sinclair's execs. In truth, I think it will be easier to get Sinclair to pull this movie than to get 9/11 aired. I just have no doubt that this David D. Smith's decision is not financially motivated and I would bet there is a long record of calls, meetings, minutes, emails and memos to prove as much. Now, I can't prove they exist, right now, but we don't have to convince a judge...yet. I think it is safe to assume such records exist, a lawsuit would bring them to light, and Smith won't risk his cush job.
Push the 9/11 angle, I agree, thats the best solution all the way around. If that doesn't work, I pretty confident we can at least stop Sinclair.
Magnum,
You're the tops - 'course I didn't find out about it until too late, but BugMeNot is pure genius.
With respect, the 'Nightline' broadcast was shown by the local Fox affiliate -- the only one of the GSP-based stations that gives a shit about WNC -- because of a focused, non
How about this? Demand local panel discussions and get local members for veterans' groups to defend Kerry and refute the SwiftBoatShitheads. Because no-one in WNC is going to stick around for a token panel discussion taped in Sinclair head office; but if you've got local people, more will tune in for that than for the actual movie.
ugh. 'because of a focused, non-sensational protest campaign'.
It's amazing how 90% of the above sophomores want to follow exactly the same strategy that benefited the Dems through GOP stupididty over Fahrenheit 9/11.
No, it isn't stupididity.
In a nutshell, this is a "TV program"... in dozens of markets in swing states. And the impact it will have will be nothing at all like that from a movie.
Why? Because it's on TV, dummy!
In the case of a movie, you actually have to be swayed by such inadvertant publicity as the Rethugs caused F-911 to have, that you'd actually have to get off your ass and pay to go see it. Television is a different ball of McLuhan's Household Wax.
I urge you to look at the NUMBERS, after this piece of shit travesty airs. Let's say it has typical WB affilliate evening cume. No, I don't know what that is, but I do know it's considered "low".
Look at that "low" cume. DO YOU REALLY WANT THAT MANY STUPIDS SEEING THIS THING?
This is HUGE. If y'all do not understand this, I can't help ya.
I think Sundance would run 9 11 wouldn't they? They run Franken and they are running the concert on Monday night, why not 9 11? I know Michael Moore has a deal going with pay per view the night before the election but I do not think the pay per view thing is a done deal at this point. I think Michael Moore would do just about anything to defeat Bush.
This story scares me -- if the smirking chimp is going to steal this election, he will need to point to some "dramatic event" that justifies an irrational swing in voter turnout and preferences. Is the purpose of this decision to give the spinmeisters a something to point to when the bogus vote counts come in? THIS IS SCARY STUFF!
i agree that this very bad news for Kerry and getting it pulled is more important than trying to get F. 9/11.
to do: Letters to your representatives in Congress, letters to the editor, calls to the FEC and FCC, this must break some election law.
CBS refuses to run a commercial from Moveon, but Sinclair mandates their stations run a 42 min. commercial bashing Kerry. SCLM. ARGHHHHHHH
And for the guy that called people sophomores...just like the Swift Boat story, ignoring it will not make it go away. What finally killed the Swifties was going on the OFFENSIVE. I understand the thinking of why Kerry didn't attack them sooner, but the right wing enjoys too much media clout to allow dems to ignore away a story.
The movie might not end up mattering, but I don't think we can sit back and assume that, given the location of Sinclair's station. As close as the election looks, we have to err on the side being pro-active.
I agree, we risk making the story bigger than it is by threatening boycotts and such, but we have little choice. The bully has taken our lunch money, we can either sit back and hope the bully gets his eventually, or we can hit back.
Dems need to investigate David D. Smith and ties to the Bush campaign. With a couple affidavits an injunction can put a stop to this.
Barry Champlain,
So drive the numbers up, jerky. Just ask ,"What would Rove want?" If it's not too hard, try for something different.
If you have't noticed, we're being provoked.
I guess its time to watch the morons prevail.
the liberal bias is that there is a movie highlighting Kerry's vietnam era activities, and I have never heard it's title or who produced it mention here, or anywhere.
the question I have is when we have ABC, and CBS , fuctioning as political action committees of r the Democratic party, why are my tax dollars funding NPR?
This anonymous poster saying we should ignore the story has little to offer. Your solution appears to call people names for having a strategy you don't share. You may be right, ignoring the story might be the best decision, but what do you base this on? Why wouldn't FoxNews, Rush/Hannity not be able to attract attention to this movie anyway? Where has ignoring something of Karl Rove worked?
So drive the numbers up, jerky. Just ask ,"What would Rove want?"
More like, "What hath Rove wrought?"
This is a done deal, and now some of us, beefy, are trying to figure out the best possible solution. Let's review, shall we:
SOLUTION #1: Ignore it. It will go away. All the audience for all the TV stations in all the swing states will mean nothing at all, and BTW, Sinclair won't do a single thing to promote this broadcast on their own, so whew! we're safe THERE;
SOLUTION #2: Write whining letters to Bush's minions at Sinclair, in the hope that they'll see the light and find the true Jesus;
SOLUTION #3: Write to Sears and tell them that after this election is over, we're never again going to shop there, unless you pull your ads off all Sinclair stations in Ohio... and Pennsylvania... and Florida... (etc.);
SOLUTION #4: Write to Michael Powell at the Bush FCC and tell him to invoke a law that doesn't exist, to help screw the people he was installed there to fellate, in the first place. Michael feels your pain, and will get right on it;
SOLUTION #5: Go Rove one better, and engineer a showing of a blockbuster movie that'll snag just about every available TV viewer at that hour, and (in the good old American spirit of "competition", I might add!) blow Rove/Sinclair's entire plan right the fuck out of the water.
Pick one.
Let's take the Sinclair Group down.
Our friends at DU have roughly the right idea, I quote:
Folks, this is the most outrageous thing I've read this election. A conservative group that owns TV outlets that reach into nearly a quarter of the nation's homes is FORCING its local stations to PREEMPT ITS REGULAR PRIME-TIME COVERAGE, just days before the election, to air a film attacking Kerry's military record.
I won't even bother repeating the story here - you can read it all in the Los Angeles Times. The conservative group is the same one that refused to air Nightline's homage to our fallen troops.
Read the article and then someone out there find out which EXACT local stations belong to this Sinclair Broadcast Group. We are going to take those stations down. I want to know the exact stations, with proof (find me the source), then I want to help coordinate a campaign to kill their advertising. I cannot run a second Web site, someone else needs to start it and run, but you can copy it after our StopDrLaura.com campaign (the site is still up as an archive), and I'm happy to give advice and help with publicity.
We need to know which of our local stations is in bed with the president and this right-wing zealot and we need to destroy them. I'm talking get every single advertiser to leave those stations. Publish the advertisers email and phone and contact them, demanding that they stop funneling their money to partisan un-American TV zealots who are trying to throw our election. I suspect most advertisers will not like hearing about this story.
__________
Here's a putative initial list of their affiliates, also from DU. If one of these stations is local to you, start doing the work to take them down: confirm that they are Sinclair-owned, call them to complain, tell your friends that their station sucks, call their advertisers to tell them that you no longer purchase their products, and won't as long as they advertise on this station.
The list of putative Sinclair stations:
Asheville/Greenville WB 40 WBSC-DT14
Baltimore FOX 45 WBFF-DT46
Buffalo FOX 29 WUTV-DT14
Cedar Rapids CBS 2 KGAN-DT51
Champaign/Spfld,IL NBC 15 WICD-DT41
Columbus ABC 6 WSYX-DT13
Columbus FOX 28 WTTE-DT36
Dayton ABC 22 WKEF-DT51
Dayton FOX 45 WRGT-DT30
Des Moines FOX 17 KDSM-DT16
Milwaukee WB 18 WVTV-DT61
Minneapolis WB 23 KMWB-DT22
Nashville FOX 17 WZTV-DT15
Oklahoma City FOX 25 KOKH-DT24
Pittsburgh FOX 53 WPGH-DT43
Portland, ME CBS 13 WGME-DT38
Sacramento CBS 13 KOVR-DT25
San Antonio FOX 29 KABB-DT30
Spfld/Champaign, IL NBC 20 WICS-DT42
St. Louis ABC 30 KDNL-DT31
Tallahassee NBC 40 WTWC-DT2
Consumer Spectator,
You had it right earlier. Stay on the offensive. Get F911 out there.
You beat Rove by going mano a mano. Never explain, never complain and know your limits.
(And he called me dummy, frist, I mean first)
By the way, Don't overestimate the impact of the Sinclair airing. Again, if you're doing what Rove would want you to do, it's probably not efficacious.
That said, all of Atrios' comment on this re:media hypocrisy are valid.
Yes, it's a scandal. It's almost as bad a network running a 15 minute hit piece on a candidate in the nation's premiere current affairs program a few weeks before the election, based on forged documents.
That would be terrible, wouldn't it "atrios"?
Asheville area WLOS locals! I am getting a group together that can coordinate both online and offline work to put the pressure on WLOS. I need your help. If you would like to help email me at bycottwlos@gmail.com . Let's get to work.
I hate to say it, but complaints will probably only draw more attention to it and thus draw a larger audience. It seems to push the bounds of FEC rules a bit, given their obvious intent. Seriously though, there needs to be some thought as to whether complaining to the station and/or it's advertisers would be successful in stopping it's broadcast; otherwise, it'll just serve as free publicity.
The question is not
"What does Rove want?"
the question is
"What does Rove Expect?"
He expects us to react slowly and without co-ordination.
this is the Dem's M. O.
CONTACT THE FCC AND TO YOUR LOCAL NEWSPAPER/TV STATION:
* Mail: Federal Communications Commission
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Consumer Complaints
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20554
* E-Mail: fccinfo@fcc.gov
* Phone: Toll Free: 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) voice, 1-888-TELL- FCC (1-888-835-5322) TTY. Our Consumer and Mediation Specialists are available Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. ET
* Fax: Toll-Free: 1-866-418-0232
AP Story:
LOS ANGELES The Los Angeles Times reports that a broadcast group has ordered its TV stations around the country to air an anti-John Kerry film days before the election.
Sinclair Broadcast Group owns or programs content for stations in 62 markets, including several swing states.
The Times says it has ordered stations to run "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal." The documentary features former P-O-Ws blaming Kerry's anti-Vietnam War efforts for prolonging their plight.
Sinclair gained attention in April when it refused to air a "Nightline" segment on seven stations. In the segment, Ted Koppel read the names of U-S soldiers killed in Iraq. Sinclair called it a political statement disguised as news.
Electioneering Restrictions and Disclosure
Under The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), funds from corporations (whether nonprofit or for-profit entities) and unions may not be used to pay for "electioneering communications," which are broadcast, cable, or satellite communications that:
* refer to a clearly identified Federal candidate;
* are broadcast within 60 days before the general election of the candidate or within 30 days before the party primary, convention, or caucus that nominates the candidate; and
* are targeted to the "relevant electorate," i.e., over 50,000 persons in the State or Congressional district that the candidate seeks to represent.
Exemptions are provided for news stories, commentaries, editorials, and candidate debates and forums. BCRA gives the FEC authority to make additional exemptions, so long as they do not "promote, support, attack, or oppose a Federal candidate."
Airing a feature-length attack ad does not constitute "news coverage."
The producer of this hit piece disguised as a movie used to work for Tom Ridge in Pennsylvania. He had a contract with the Bush Administration to do a Web site for first responders. Karl Rove's fingerprints are all over this. Details here.
I want to see someone buy up time in the same markets, opposite the Sinclair showing, and run Fahrenheit 9/11. Visit my site and add a comment if you agree.
i just wrote some emails to my congressman, senators, and the ny times. what else can i do? this is outrageous!
Jeebus, I can't believe that amazon actually posted my review of Carlton Sherwood's book
Consumer Spectator knows what he or she are talking about. The best bet: get either or both 9-11 and Up River on BROADCAST television (not cable). There is no way the Repugs could stop it if Sinclair is allowed to air this bullshit. They are opening a proverbial "can of worms"...
I think the republicans were effective at keeping their base away from F911 by continuously whining about Michael Moore. Only a small percentage of republicans have seen the film. On the other hand, announcing the anti-Kerry film now does sound like they are attempting to get more publicity. If it is already available on the internet, maybe they just want more people to log on and download. They can always back out of showing the movie later (since they know that they legally can't) after the free publicity has run its course. I think complaining to advertisers and sympathetic congresspersons is the best strategy. After all, the campaign should take on the legal challenges and work to discredit the credibility of the film before it gets shown. These accusations have been discredited time and time again.
Anyway, anyone who thinks Bush won the debate last night probably is also self-deluded enough to believe he is winning the war on terror. Kerry has the momentum. No doubt about it.
"har":
-none of the lies spread by the warbloggers escaped refutation; CBS backed out because of their inherent corporate media brainlessness, not because of some silly lie about all writing being cursive prior to the Nineties.
-the docs story had absolutely no bearing on the larger and older story, never refuted or much contacted by "Bush" and out since his awful congressional run in the late "Seventies", which is still valid.
-the anti-"Kerry" slanders received more time and less criticism even though they are categoric lies, in perfect "Orwellian" fashion asking us to hate a man who volunteered to go to war as "cowardly" and love a "man" who escaped it as brave.
-it would also be worse because it is a movie and this was a "news story"--which is more real for Americans, which do they take more seriously?
-It is not "unfair" to run a news story that makes your guy look full of shit if he is full of shit, that's what the news is there for, that's actually the job it's supposed to be doing. This is not news. This is a typical Rethug recitation of lies refuted long ago hoping to manufacture truth through repetition. And it is unabashedly partisan. There is no comparison.
http://www.eonline.com/News/Item...7,00.html?
tnews
Good news. Michael Moore is definitely seeking broadcast of Fahrenheit 911 (although DVD distributor could be opposed).
Maybe, the Sinclair shenanigan is the opening
test
Sinclair lists all their TV holdings with all the appropriate, clickable, net addresses.
What can you do?
Find the stations in your area and, at the very least, send them a thoughtful email.
The more I think on it, the more I'm thinking Rash Nussell has it right, I bet this never airs. What would the networks do?
The networks and their advertisers cannot be happy their content isn't aired. If you look at the affiliates, they aren't just Fox...at least one of the big networks would be angry about this...wouldn't they? This isn't like a public service ad afterall; I have no idea how these affiliates contract with the networks, but it seems pretty strange.
The networks grant exclusive rights based on locality afterall, they can't be happy with affiliates choosing not to air their content. And when you think about it, unlike Nightline where Sinclair simply pulled the show, this time they are pulling shows not because of their content, but to show this other Sinclair approved, pro-bush crap. In essence, Sinclair is now competing directly with the networks providing their own programming.
More...aren't the networks Sinclair has licensed from, in part, responsible for what is presented? If, for example, Sinclair had an ABC affiliate on, say, channel 7, ABC has to share liability one would think, for what is broadcast on channel 7. ABC owns the rights do they not, not the Sinclair licensee? Would ABC, or these other networks like the negative exposure, or possible FCC fines they make have to pay?
FYI, I'm not a media lawyer, so I really don't know the answers to the above. That said, my hunch is that the network lawyers may ultimately pull the rug out from under Sinclair.
jim - You say you cannot run a second website. -- Well take a look at this post by chicagodude in this thread, quoted below. He's got the perfect solution, he already registered a great address and is looking for material to put up. You should get together with this guy posthaste. Go back further in the thread to find his homepage link. Then you and others can start putting up lists of sponsors and their phone and fax numbers, and e-mail addresses.
"I have just purchased the http://www.stopsinclair.com website address. It will take about 24 hours for it to be up.
What I need from all of you right now is HELP - this means helping me to set up some pre-made pages by way of text. I want to be able to cut and paste the text right into a webpage - a VERY SIMPLE ONE.
PLEASE SEND TO:
STOPSINCLAIR@YAHOO.COM
I am working on this bigtime."
We can't let this stand. We have to fight this more than anything we've fought since freaking Rosa Parks.
This is clearly abuse of the publically owned airwaves -- and Kerry has to come out and say so.
This is a few powerful Bush people attempting to use their concentrated wealth and power to manipulate -- undermine -- our democracy.
We also should inundate Sinclair with information about whistleblower protections for employees and affiliates that don't want this to happen. Sinclair is a large company, most people at these affiliates work at them because they were offered a job...it's a living...they don't necessarily support this crap. These friends inside Sinclair and the local affiliates need to be reminded that they cannot be expected to commit illegal acts on behalf of their employer and that they (and their jobs) are protected by whistleblower statutes if they come forward to thwart shareholder fraud and generally when coming forward for the public good.
http://www.whistleblowers.org/
ht...protection.html
While I support your effort and believe that all legal, economic, public airwaves/equal access, and competing programming options are appropriate to pursue -- I believe that the comments posted at Eschat so far have missed the most sinister part of this story. If there are plans to steal this election with voter fraud, it looks like the administration will need to be able to "point to" events, that they can claim are "outside of their control," that cause the manipulated election results to vary from the polls that clearly indicate that this momentum is moving towards a Kerry victory.
In other words -- please consider Sinclair's action as an attempt to help Karl and company steal this election. Sure, this sounds kind of "far-out," but so does the entire Iraq situation, the security alerts, and any number of other issues that should have made this election a mandate on George Bush's record -- which would mean a Kerry landslide. The Bush administration will need all the dirty tricks it can pull off to proclaim victory -- Al Gore decided, for the sake of the country, he would not challenge the legitimacy of the 2000 election. If Bush is re-elected under questionable circumstances, there will be many questions that will have to be answered. Airing this movie does not have to swing voters to be effective -- it just needs to provide a rational reason for a Bush victory.
I hope I am wrong on this -- but I would not be surprised by anything this administration does. It is the sheer audacity and recklessness of many of this administration's decisions and policies that makes them effective -- who would have possibly imagined that the leader of the "free-world" would have such a corrupt government? It makes me long for the days when the biggest problem we faced was a blow job in the oval office. This is serious stuff and we need to be careful about how we react -- merely airing 911 will not neutralize the propaganda value AFTER the election if the results are fraudulent! I pray that you continue to have the courage and strength to continue the important work you are starting -- I also pray that we do not react in a manner that actually helps the crooks succeed.
Okay, I haven't read every post in this thread, and I haven't seen the movie Sinclair wants to run. But Sinclair may have stepped on its, er, accoutrements. The movie may not qualify for the "news documentary" exception to the Equal Time law or otherwise be exempt from Equal Time. If it isn't, a Bush opponent would have a right to an equal amount of time, during which Sinclair can have no control over content. Now, here's the good part: Not only would Kerry have such a right, EVERY opponent candidate for president would have such a right--Nader, the Libertarians, every blessed one of the little splinter party presidential candidates, and often there can be dozens of them. Each of them commanding the same length of time, and Sinclair powerless to do anything about it. And they would have the right to prime time, if Sinclair's movie runs in prime time. It would wipe out Sinclair's prime time schedule.
A lot of pieces would have to fall into place, and someone needs to get a legal analysis of the situation done quickly. I can't believe Sinclair would do this without thinking through the equal time ramifications, but someone should check and, possibly, advise every splinter party that here's an opportunity for prime time exposure for their candidates.
This would be a lot easier than trying to talk Sinclair's competitors into airing F 9/11.
Contact your local station using Sinclair's own, easy to access, list.
What about the timing of this? Assume they do intend to air this at the last minute, pulling network shows to do it, why announce it ahead of time? Maybe there is a good reason, but it may just be announced just so that it is pulled. If you follow this logic, Sinclair has to pull this movie(which it never intended to air) to bolster the case that 9/11 shouldn't be aired. Conservatives whine that their movie was "censored" by the Kerry team, it's only fair 9/11 doesn't get aired either. Of course, last I heard, 9/11 wasn't getting much traction for broadcast like Moore wished, howerver maybe there is something afoot and this is meant to counter it?
ooof.
spectator consumers has fenced himself in. less caffeine.
and me sincerely doubts that abc network is responsible for broadcast of non-network material on non-network owned stations (though good conspiracy mindset)
and no, sinclair's not doing it for preemption of F9/11 airing (though good conspiracy mindset)
sinclair is a DINOSAUR. they're shriveled-up mean. buzzards ain't got no brother type mean.
don't be scared, it's only election wasteland.
GE and Disney execs feeling respectable at the Club tonight. for now.
This may be a bit long-winded for a comment, but I think it's important to take a look at this development in the broader context of the beast that the media has become. If you have the patience to make it to the end of this post, you will see that I am not just theorizing but actually proposing a course of action. And please forgive me if it sounds like I’m lecturing – it’s genetic.
First, it's important to note that what Sinclair is doing is by no means an unprecedented departure from the normal state of affairs in today's media. For years we have been inundated with virtually 24/7 ads for conservative causes on both radio and television that have been presented as news (Fox) and as the common folk speaking out (Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, etc.). This is occurring all the time on both the (barely) regulated airwaves and the (almost) unregulated cable industry. And now liberals are trying to play catch-up with Air America Radio which owns or leases all of its stations *and* provides all of its own content. There are practical differences between Air America and Sinclair (reach and TV versus radio) but no fundamental conceptual or ethical differences. And there are also perceptual differences and that is key.
The media is and always has been a beast with a mind of its own. Every time someone thinks they have unlocked the secret to using it as tool for mass manipulation, it twists and squirms and branches a new head, confounding the pundits and “experts”. And I think that is particularly true in this election cycle with the increased influence of the internet.
I’m not a big fan of boycott threats, which I see as essentially economic blackmail and a bottomless pit. Advertisers are already afraid of their own shadows, which is why our commercial mass media is as insipid as it is. An organized boycott always makes the organizers look like they have something to hide or fear. Ultimately, I think it weakens both the cause and the media itself. The key to defusing this particular situation is not to try to stop it but to make it work to our advantage (which will probably stop it anyway).
This decision by Sinclair made a prominent position on the front page of this morning’s L.A. Times, as did their decision not to run the list of names of the killed-in-action on Nightline earlier this year. Most people in this country see television stations and other media outlets as neutral conduits of content even though the wonks know otherwise. This perception is the basis for my proposal. News is effective only when the messenger is trusted and the stakes for the major media corporations in this are profound.
What I propose is a massive, internet-organized communications effort aimed at the mainstream media with special focus on the local radio and television stations and newspapers in the areas covered by Sinclair. Emails, letters, faxes and phone calls in mass numbers do have an effect on coverage. There are many, many peopl
PART II (yeah, it's long):
There are many, many people who don’t know who Sinclair is and what they stand for, just like there are many people who don’t know Murdoch and Fox for what they are. And remember, Sinclair is not a monopoly. They do have competitors in all their markets. Massive coverage of who they are and what they stand for will bring them out of the closet and force them to either explicitly declare themselves as partisan, back down, or, perhaps, offer a fair alternative like screening Up River in its entirety. The fact that they are trying to justify this as news should prove they are still hiding under the cover of impartiality.
Coverage by the national media will filter down to the localities both via the networks and through added pressure on the local media. If this becomes a firestorm, and I think it can, we will not only have defused this effort, we will have inflicted a serious blow to the credibility and influence of Sinclair Broadcasting. We will have woken up a segment of the viewing public to the realities of their beloved opiate. And rather than seeming like we have something to hide, we will be exposing one of the uglier heads of the media beast. In other words, rather than treating this as a calamity, treat it as an opportunity. This is Nightline material, folks. (Yep, don’t forget Nightline!)
In order to do this, we will have to create and disseminate an accurate and detailed fact sheet with detailed information about Sinclair and the people behind the making and funding of this film as well as contact info. Communications to the media should focus on:
1. The political leanings of the people behind the film and Sinclair backed up by facts.
2. Facts and statistics on previous coverage by Sinclair, if they exist.
3. The fact that Sinclair is treating this as news.
4. The fact that Sinclair is airing this the day before elections thereby circumventing factual rebuttal before the election.
5. The fact that no other outlets *anywhere* seem to think this is news.
And maybe when this is all over it will open the door to an honest post-election discussion of what the media has become and what we can do about it other than the fake McCain/Feingold crap that did absolutely nothing. (BTW, does anyone else besides me find McCain to be the most deplorable character in the whole political picture at the moment?)
BTW, does anyone else besides me find McCain to be the most deplorable character in the whole political picture at the moment?
Don't know about most but he is certainly the one who has pulled the wool over the most eyes. As soon as he'd signed on with Feingold I had the sinking feeling that phony "reform" gives .
How many times does he have to prove he's a right wing Republican? By his actions, words are cheap.
I think getting 9/11 aired would be the best solution
9/11 is not the best choice to air next to the Sinclair thing. There are better docs out there.
Looks like we have had lots of comments here arguing for reinstituting the fairness doctrine. I agree.
As terrible as Bush has been I am seeing a silver lining in his horrible administration. Apathy seems to be dying, tens of thousands of people have registered to vote and record numbers are volunteering their time and energy to get this jerk kicked out of office.
I believe we will win, but then what? To me we need to focus this massive energy unleashed by Bush's horrendous administration to prevent a repeat of what he was able to foist on the American public. Bad times present great opportunities for the ushering in of progressive ideals, but there is a real danger that we will go back to sleep once a more benign administration takes office.
A great deal of "ink" in the blogosphere is spent attacking the terrible job our media has done. Let's do more than preach to the choir and get organized to take back the FCC. Let's pretend broadcast media is brand new and figure out how to force it to pay attention to the public interest again. The airwaves belong to all of us the same way the air does. Let's revive the Fairness doctrine (eliminated during Reagan's term), strengthen limitations on media consolidation to force corporations to spin off media outlets, lets return to rules which restricted the percentage of advertisements allowed per broadcast hour (eliminated during Reagan's term). Let's take some of the money out of elections by forcing broadcasters to grant free time to our candidates so they can present themselves and their ideas to the public.
In November we will take back our government. In January lets take back the media! The future of the Republic depends on it.
GO!
If we learned anything from the 9/11 debacle it should be that trying to pull the movie will only result in more people wanting to see it wondering what it is you are trying to censor.
A good alternative (not 9/11, not good enough and the people that are going to see it have already seen it) is a better idea.
Why not just open a whole new front.
Amazing how even politically minded don't see it sitting there. The root cause of so much of this and never talked about. Too late now.
Oh, well it was likely too late 10 years ago.
you couldn't be more wron about the people that are going to see Fahrenheit 911 have already seen it
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/
2004...f2540cfb32.html
The possibility of f911 being broadcast on network tv between now and the election has got to be a major concern for Rove/Bush.
We know how Rove works too, look at the Swifties. Rove knew Bush's guard service was going to be targeted by the Dems as Kerry was a war hero. Now the typical play would have been to try to bolster Bush's record...Rove doesn't work that way. Rove went out and got Oneil to get some anti-kerry vets to sign on, then he got Oneil a ghostwriter and publisher to put out a book, he provided him with the ad firm that did Willie Horton tv spot, and he had the Hannity/limbuagh/foxnews tease the book and the ads for months. Consider Rove.
Now we have f911, which doesn't look like it will air, but Moore is pushing hard. Rove's problem is that f911 would generate lots of viewers, making it tough for the networks to resist.
I don't think it is outlandish to theorize that Rove might push a ridiculous anti-kerry smear piece through bigtime Bush supporter David D. Smith at Sinclair. Sinclair announces they will show it, pre-empting all content on all their networks, running it in primetime. This predictably draws lots of complaints, Sinclair pulls the movie and conservatives get to shout about censorship and go hog wild if f911 is considered to be run.
I don't think this scenerio is the most likely one, but it sure wouldn't surprise me.
Agggh. Don't fall into the typical well-intentioned liberal trap of flailing about over what's right and just and what people "ought" to do (e.g., airing F-9/ll ought of some vague sense of fairness--hey, we're talking about broadcasters, arent we?), until you determine whether there's already a handy legal remedy.
It may well be that section 315 of the Communications Act (aka "Equal Time") provides almost a tailor-made remedy. If a station airs a "political use," every competing candidate is entitled to equal time. For no charge, by the way, if the movie is aired without charge to the Bush campaign.
So Sinclair airs this movie; the next day Kerry, Nader, the Libertarian, the Vegetarian, the goddam Justice for Mararoni and Cheese Party candidates all demand equal time. Sinclair has to afford it. Period. There goes Sinclair's prime time schedule.
The Kerry camp needs to be on the phone with their communications lawyer.
I can't disagree more strongly with the last anonymous poster about people who have already seen f9/11 being the only people that will see it.
On the contrary, I think Moore has been so demonized by the right wing, that even liberals feel the need to explain their support for him. Many people have not seen f911 because they don't want to be seen as a fringe wacko.
People really don't understand the numbers of TV viewership. A prime time network airing of F9/11 would mean MILLIONS of people that HAVE NOT SEEN IT, would see it. They would be in the safety of their own homes, not even needing to be seen renting it. Moore's movie in primetime would result in the housewives, the grandmas, all seeing Bush has they have never been allowed to see him before.
If there are any movie makers in the audience you could make history if you can tell the story of the Republicans since Reagan. All the greed, the hate and the lies. All the rotten scandals. Their agenda to enrich themselves at everyone else's expense while, through phony "think tanks" persuading the American people that they only have their best interests at heart. All the ghastly things they've said and coninue to say on a regular basis (Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, Delay, Doolittle etc.) their connections to the Moonies, the Council for National Policy, PNAC etc, and the hard core Religious Right. This is a world class story that needs to be told. Get scientists to say why Bush is on a mission to wreck the environment. Let people know that the neocons want "total war". Include high ranking but disillusioned Republicans and every day Repubs.
Put this story on opposite and NO ONE will watch the other thing. It's a tall order this close to the election but Sinclair has actually done the left a favor by opening an opportunity. They can't cry foul since they plan to do the same thing. It will require the collaboration of lots of people but as the saying goes, "the truth is out there".
The only reason this race is even close is because average joe voter doesn't know what's really going down. This could be Democracy's last chance in this country. Next stop 1984.
From the excellent Center for Public Integrity site linked way above in comments, it appears that Sinclair has a huge debt (from buying a ton of stations). I'd want to find out what financial institutions hold that debt...
it seems to me that an attack on the film itself would backfire, as would a boycott. i like what "nobody" had to say in his/her long post about collecting info and making a case to the american people, but i think we can go farther with it.
i'd like to see a centralized location for all info on sinclair, press releases sent to all political reporters, parent stations (sinclair owns cbs, nbc, abc, fox, wb and upn affiliates). put heat on the parent companies to ask sinclair to adhere to normally accepted journalistic standards of fairness and accuracy by targeting all media.
also, a critique of sinclair itself, and an analysis of their on-air editorializing would back up any claims of bias, as would background info on all members of sinclair's corporate board and key personnel.
since the company has a page on it's website about ethics, it makes sense to target their credibility. if we can make a case for why sinclair and their affiliates are not to be trusted, and bring any discussion to communities with a sinclair station, this controversy will backfire on them before it even starts. their stock is already down about 2% (it's only at $7/share).
sinclair may seem like a large company, but it is vulnerable on a local level. their affiliates rely on viewership to drive revenues, and if people stop watching sinclair affiliates' local news programming, their profit goes down.
anyone with deep pockets might want to consider buying a few shares of sinclair stock later in the year...
david
Don't know how it could be broadcast, but maybe there's some sort of guerilla media it could be spread through out the Inter-Nets (sic) and get some play in other media forms.
Piggyback it on those damn junkmail aol disks, or do the JibJab thing and get the world to email it.
Wouldn't the Campaign be in the best position to stop Sinclair? Consider this: If the movie can be shown to be factually inaccurate, John Kerry can file suit. As a part of it, the campaign can ask for an injunction. When Sinclair pleads First Amendment, we claim equal time. The settlement is either show both films or neither.
The Campaign also needs to file with the proper authorities that Sinclair is using the public airwaves to illegally influence an election.
I totally support the idea of the website and targeting sponsors and shareholders, but we have to get Mary Beth and Joe on this as quickly as possible. Who's got the hook-up?
Let's write about the hypocracy.
Let's not stoop to their level and organize boycotts.
Four years from now, there might not be any documentaries shown in theaters or television, as a result.
Freedom of speech protects the liars, as well.
Like I wrote on the boycott website:
Why not get them to show another movie along with it. Like the George Butler doc on Kerry, Fahrenheit 9/11 or Triumph of the Will (with Bush digitally inserted).
Let's demand equal time.
Let's not become an angry book burning mob.
Peace
Why Are We Back In Iraq?
That's an idea. Maybe pro-Kerry films like "Going Upriver" or "Fahrenheit 9/11" ought to be screened in communities where the anti-Kerry movie is being telecast.
Maybe a pro-Kerry group can offer free tickets to screening that same night - with celebrity guests, to goose up turn-out.
They could try to air it on TV the same night on another channel. Perhaps a "news" show can air it on public access TV. (Offering equal time to President Bush, of course.....)
application consolidation loan student application consolidation loan student application consolidation loan student. new home mortgage new home mortgage new home mortgage.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
