While this is certianly within their rights to do, it’s yet another troubling sign of an increasingly fragmented public discourse, and a focus on partisan infighting being the be all and end all of far too much.
What’s really dishonest here, though, is their claim that Nightline is focusing on just one negative aspect of the war. That’s disingenous in two respects.
First, Nightline has aired countless segments exploring all facets of the war. They’ve run plenty of shows about all the great things happening in the rebuilding of Iraq, about life after Saddam, about what the soldier’s lives are like, etc. To imply that they are giving a one-sided account by only focusing on the fallen tonight is outrageous.
Secondly, from the pre-clips of the show, it’s pretty far from a negative or anti-war piece. It refers to their deaths as a great sacrifice. It features people who are proud of what their children did. From Sinclair’s lying diatribe, you’d think that it insults the soldiers or belittles their sacrifice. But on the contrary: it places all the soldiers in positions of great honor, lionies them, calls them heros, etc. About the worst things it says are things like “families have to face the terrible cost” and other standard boilerplate that even FoxNews approved programs air all the time.
While using an opponent’s words against him can be an elegant and effective debate tactic, it works a lot better when it actually makes sense. What newspaper on the planet would EVER shove war casualty stories to a hidden corner of the paper? This is the industry that lives by the credo, “If it bleeds, it leads.”
And you should have changed “know-nothing” to something like “know-too-much.” In your parody, ABC is not trying to suppress anything. Plus, jingoism is generally not a fault of the left wing, but the right.
Frankly, while I don’t agree with the way that they’re doing it, I think its really hypocritical of some to deny this company the same rights that you give to Koppel.
As the response says, the media COULD read the thouasands of names of the WTC dead. But they don’t.
The media could plaster the front page with stories of newly opened schools and hospitals, or tell the stories of those totrured by Saddam. But they don’t.
Most, if not all, of the “news” coming out of Iraq is negative. And anyone who thinks that the only happening in Iraq is what they read is just as stupid as the Sinclair Group.
Frankly, it’s time to realize that, just like the Sinclair Group, all media is controlled by people with certain biases and that those biases affect what many people hold to be Truth.
Oh, wait. It’s you. Never mind.
So it seems the Sinclair group has an agenda. I don’t think that’s anything to get up in arms about. They can choose to broadcast whatever they wish (within the FCC regs), or choose not to. Yeah, it’s stupid and probably will end up biting them on the ass in the end, but that’s the free market. If some liberal group wants to to do the same thing, well more power to them.
It’s not like they are the only source of programming available to us. We can choose to go to their competitors.
i’m trying to figure out why it was a show of support for the families of the 9-11 bombing to use the ruins in a presidential ad, but it is disrespecting of killed soldiers families to hold a roll call so that we can know of theri lost ones valor, and share in their grief.
Every year on Memorial Day my hometown’s American Legion reads off a list of all of the veterans who have died in the last year, as well as all of those who were killed in action in any of our wars. Is the Legion post “asinine”?
While not being a violation of the First Amendment and its definition of government censorship, I find it difficult to not consider it censorship in any form.
Not that censorship of this kind is bad on its face, but it is censorship.
Now that we are aware that Sinclair didn’t do their homework (on Koppel’s previous tributes to the victims of September 11 and on the number of troops killed), may we judge their decision now?
I don’t think that Ted Koppel has made any great secret of Nightline’s motives. He was forthcoming about what inspired the idea.
What I find most interesting is that the factual information is considered anti-Bush policy.
Heaven help us when people begin to see truth as “propoganda.”
The media could plaster the front page with stories of newly opened schools and hospitals, or tell the stories of those totrured by Saddam. But they don’t.
[QUOTE]
You’re full of it, because Nightline has done programs on precisely those things.
I was aware of that. However, as Snooooopy pointed out, Furt’s attempt to turn my words against me was “sloppy”, shallow and not germane to the topic of this thread (i.e., the Sinclair Group’s decision not to air Nightline).
Look, as much as I might be tempted *[feeling hostility towards JamesCarroll building, holds breath and counts to ten] , * I won’t insult you back because I try to maintain some decorum on the internet *[begins chanting “Serenity now” to suppress anger]. * If I was feeding a troll, I’m sorry but it was just an impulsive response on my part that I’ll try to avoid in the future [with clenched teeth, resists urge to tell JamesCarroll to commit a physically impossible carnal act]. Let’s just agree to disagree and be more polite to one another from this point on [abruptly pulls himself away from the computer and storms across the room to go punch a hole in the wall].