| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
OT: Booting Fox News and MSNBC from Airwaves?
Blaine McCartney, Photographer
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
 |
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 1:11 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> All politicians are douche bags |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 1:12 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> The country's going to hell these days! And always has been... |
|
Michael Granse, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:26 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> Television newscasts are almost universally annoying, but a United States Senator advocating the dismantling of any news network is the sort of thing that should worry EVERYONE regardless of their political views.
It is unfortunate that Senator Rockefeller does not want We the People of the United States to know what he, his colleagues, and for that matter his adversaries in Washington are doing.
I would like to see some unfiltered news for a change. Just tell me what happened, and I will draw my own conclusions about what it means and how I should feel about it. Oh, and one more thing . . . STOP TRYING TO ENTERTAIN ME!!!!!! |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 1:28 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> Biggest problem with this? Fox News and MSNBC are not on "the airwaves" so the FCC can't do squat.
TV news has going downhill since the Reagan administration got rid of the equal time rule. Imagine, a rule that made sure that every TV station had to give each side of an argument equal air time. |
|
Jim Comeau, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 1:37 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> There are only two sides to every argument? |
|
Mike Janes, Photographer
|
Attica | NY | USA | Posted: 1:43 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> Crazy idea before getting rid of the networks, get the money out of politics, add term limits, fix them before you fix the so called "news". Just an idea. |
|
Landon Finch, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 1:46 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> People have been asked/forced to resign or fired from their jobs for saying offensive things.
While I personally can't stand FOX or MSNBC, if one of our elected officials says that he wants to use the FCC to eliminate free speech, I would argue that that is extremely offensive and that he should resign.
I say this half tongue and cheek because I think the Senator does have a point. FOX and MSNBC should get back to the facts and stop all the partisan coverage. However, that is not the job of the government, that is the job of the American people and the free market (for better or for worse). |
|
Robert Smith, Photographer
|
Brandon | MS | USA | Posted: 1:47 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> Just because you have a lot of money, doesn't mean you're not a moron. |
|
Eric Isaacs, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 2:24 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> The quote: "There's a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to FOX and to MSNBC: 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' It would be a big favor to political discourse; our ability to do our work here in Congress, and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly, in their future."
While I am not well informed on this issue, my take is that he was blowing off steam. I could say there is a little bug in me that would like to eliminate 85% of automobiles so that I wouldn't have to sit in traffic. I don't actually think I deserve to be one of the 15% of citizens who gets to keep driving but it expresses my frustration over being stuck in traffic. (besides, everyone would be asking for rides)
Maybe the Senator is in fact advocating for the FCC to take action but to me it sounds more like a poorly worded expression of frustration than a plan to take away anyone's license to broadcast. Based on the limited information given in the article I think Mr. Ryan G. Murphy, RTDNA Digital Media Editor is showing bias in his reporting.
jm2C
EMI |
|
Blaine McCartney, Photographer
|
Sheridan | WY | USA | Posted: 2:46 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> "Maybe the Senator is in fact advocating for the FCC to take action but to me it sounds more like a poorly worded expression of frustration than a plan to take away anyone's license to broadcast."
Please. MSNBC's ratings are abysmal. He would gladly sacrifice a mouse (MSNBC) to eliminate the 800-pound gorilla (Fox News) to make him appear unbiased. |
|
Eric Isaacs, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 2:50 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> "He would gladly sacrifice..."
My point is not what he would do but what he IS doing.
From the info provided there is no plan to act.
EMI |
|
Sam Santilli, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Philippi | WV | USA | Posted: 5:15 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> What do you expect from a guy whose family bought him a state? His wife Sharon is the brains of the outfit. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 7:25 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> Given that as a sitting member of Congress he has some of the BEST medical coverage in the country, he should really look into having his bugs eradicated. Pretty sure he has decent prescription coverage too.... We have drugs that will keep the bug silent while the doctors work to kill it.
In the meantime please keep your bugs away from our Constitution. |
|
Jim Comeau, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 8:31 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> He wants "quality news" so I'm sure he'll endorse a bureau to license and sanction news stations, newspapers, etc. Free press? Fourth estate? |
|
William Guerro, Photographer
|
Galloway | NJ | USA | Posted: 8:57 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> "All politicians are douche bags"
AMEN to that! |
|
Paul Calhoun, Photographer
|
Hillsborough | NC | U.S. | Posted: 8:58 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> Since Rockefeller raised the issue: How big a deal would it be if FOX and MSNBC were off the air? Do most of us care if WWE goes as long as we still have the NFL and NBA? As a former full-time journalist I certainly appreciate freedom of the press, but when was the last time you heard a "news" report on FOX or MSNBC and felt like you were actually getting the real story versus some form of spin? Are they really what we would typically call "press" and should they portray themselves as "news" or should they simply be labeled "entertainment" like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart? He obviously has his agenda, they obviously have their agendas; why should one be thought of as news anymore than the other? |
|
Jeff Barrie, Photographer
|
Indianapolis | IN | USA | Posted: 9:07 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> Paul you mean real news like last summer when CNN showed a shot of a gun toting tea party rally participant, with a military style rifle in a sling hung over his shoulder. The shot showed the gun, the back and the shoulder but no other identifying marks. Fox showed the same photo only the full frame instead of the cropped CNN version. The full frame showed it was a black guy where as the cropped version any kind of race was indistiguishable.
Does FOX lean right? Yeah I would say so but they also have left leaning pundits/ talking heads. Leaning left in the "news delievery" business, well lets see, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and I guess you'd have to throw MSNBC in there but, would the numbers even qualify them as a national program? |
|
Jeff Barrie, Photographer
|
Indianapolis | IN | USA | Posted: 9:14 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> You know Eric Issacs, rather than getting rid of FOX & MSNBC, I would prefer that 2 or 20 new stations leaning left or right, wouldn't matter, would pop up vs having less sources and letting congress do their business with less supervision from the press as the Senator suggests.
And, I would ask the Senator, just what has the government done in the last 50 years for us to have faith or hope in our government? |
|
Paul Calhoun, Photographer
|
Hillsborough | NC | U.S. | Posted: 9:24 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> Jeff, if it is slanted left or right do you really have a right to call it news or package it as news? Someone in this thread raised the question of FCC regulation, has the time come for that? It wouldn't be an infringement on free speech because you could still say anything you wished, but you couldn't call it "news" unless it met agreed upon criteria. Would that really be so bad? If some people don't understand WWE is acting that doesn't affect world affairs. But if a majority of people don't understand FOX and MSNBC and yes, CNN, are sometimes acting, that can be a big deal. If you and I can't yell "Fire" in a theater why should a TV station be able to misrepresent an issue or a politician's voting record and call it news? |
|
Jeff Barrie, Photographer
|
Indianapolis | IN | USA | Posted: 9:31 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> Paul, I see where your coming from and I agree. News should be delivered without any slant at all but, that isn't or doesn't seem to be a reality anymore. Sad but, thats the way it seems. I guess the best thing to do is check a variety of sources, which is what I do most of the time, and you would be surprised at how things are slanted one way or the other. |
|
Paul Calhoun, Photographer
|
Hillsborough | NC | U.S. | Posted: 10:05 PM on 11.18.10 |
| ->> Jeff, so is it the media's fault for exploiting the public's apathy and general lack of knowledge, or is it our fault for being so apathetic we let them do it? I covered the protests in front of the Supreme Court after the Bush-Gore election and I have covered election violence overseas, and the major difference is no one is swinging machetes here. Yet. Are we going to get to that point or is someone going to step in and bring down the enmity? In front of the Supreme Court it was easy to see who was covering the event and who was trying to inflame the crowd and create an event. Yet both sides claim to be "news" organizations. Maybe that is the point Rockefeller and whoever mentioned FCC regulation were making? |
|
Michael Myers, Photographer
 |
Miami | Florida | USA | Posted: 11:38 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> I just read what was actually said, not what was posted here. I don't think he's saying what many of you think he's saying...
Having a free press, freedom of speech, etc., is a huge part of what makes our country work, and in this case, maybe we'd be better off if some of the issues mentioned up above were improved.
Those of us taking "news" photographs are under certain restraints, keeping a separation between "fact" and "opinion". There are a lot of "news" shows that maybe don't know the difference, but far more likely know exactly what's going on, and use their way of presenting the "news" to push people towards their way of thinking. There ought to be some way to separate "news" from "spin".
I don't know what the better "answers" might be, but I see nothing wrong with what this fellow did, in pointing out that there is a problem. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 11:49 PM on 11.18.10 |
->> I think the senator was trying to say something that is important that is sorely missing:
We live in times where the media on the left and right make money by stirring up the emotions of people. The more true believers that watch your network, the higher your ratings and the more you charge your advertisers. Yes, it's not the first time in journalistic history that it's been done, but never on the scale that is happening today.
What's being sacrificed is the willingness for both sides to find compromise. Talking heads spit out their venom and essentially admonish that there will be NO COMPROMISE. And it's costing all of us. If this continues, I fear for our democracy.
Add in the recent Supreme Court decision that allows corporations - both foreign and domestic - to contribute to campaigns - and folks, we're in some very deep doo-doo.
Yes, it's wrong for the Senator to propose censorship. But what he was saying was important.
Are these "news" networks really news organizations? They wrap themselves in that flag? But are they? Let's use Fox as a example since they are the most successful. Keep in mind that it's run by Roger Ailes, who worked for Nixon. He isn't a journalist - he was a political consultant who worked for Reagan and Bush I. He could care less about being a impartial journalist. Of course, his boss Mr Murdoch has made a fortune finding the lowest common denominator throughout the free world. Journalist? These people only care about one thing: Advertising revenue. The other side isn't any better.
For the record, these are the people that some think people think represent a conservative viewpoint. Hogwash. I'm a conservative... at least a fiscal one. These people are wolves in sheep's clothing. If you think otherwise, you're entitled. Again, the left is no better because the message is the same: NO COMPROMISE.
I recently purchased two used books of Arnold Newman's work. In it were images of various American politicians. As I looked at them, I remembered thinking - we need people like this now. They could find the middle and make it work.
You may not like the messenger, but, if you're going to be a good citizen, you need to understand the message. For a U.S. Senator to be as direct as he was... that's your first tip off.
Fear for your country. If this doesn't end.. let's just say I'm glad I am 59 and not 29 in many, many ways. |
|
Eric Isaacs, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 1:16 AM on 11.19.10 |
->> Hey there Jeff Barrrie,
I'm curious why you directed your comment to me. I haven't voiced an opinion other than to say that the available facts don't match the continuing argument. I don't think its a reading comprehension issue so much as that people are too willing to make assumptions and inferences instead of taking comments at face value. When any senator, left or right, submits legislation to censor any media outlet than I will be outraged.
As far as I can see he has not done that. |
|
Bryan Hulse, Photographer
|
Nashville | Tn | USA | Posted: 8:51 AM on 11.19.10 |
->> I vote we allow Fox News, MSNBC, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Maher and everyone that sparks controversy and discussion from any viewpoint to continue as long as they maintain an audience and their sponsors choose to keep them on the air. Then we all make our own personal decision if we want to give all, or some of their thoughts credibility. Or we can choose not to listen to them at all.
It is called freedom of expression and Consumer Sovereignty.
What a concept!
I agree with Matthew: “All politicians are douche bags” |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 9:16 AM on 11.19.10 |
->> Here's the problem with calling a politician a name: After you do, what do you do?
Answer: NOTHING
It's easy to bitch and complain. Don't think that people that get paid a lot of money to know those kinds of things don't know that. The fewer citizens who get involved, the fewer voters politicians have watching them.
Know your representatives. Know their positions. Websites like OpenSecrets.org allow you to see who the big hitters were who contribute to your Congressperson's campaign. Important stuff. So how many of you have actually visited the website and taken a look? Then you can ask questions.
(Ex: So Congressman, can you tell me why you took $5000 donation from a gas and oil company when your district is one of the leaders in wind power and a leading producer of corn that goes into making ethanol? Isn't that a conflict?)
Easy to call them names. For 5 minutes work, you can actually meet them and watch them squirm. Holding them accountable is what you're supposed to do. That's how the system is supposed to work.
Easier to bitch to no one, tho, isn't it?
Michael |
|
Blaine McCartney, Photographer
|
Sheridan | WY | USA | Posted: 9:49 AM on 11.19.10 |
->> "I just read what was actually said, not what was posted here. I don't think he's saying what many of you think he's saying..."
I think he does. You got to read between the lines...ESPECIALLY with politicians. |
|
Bryan Hulse, Photographer
|
Nashville | Tn | USA | Posted: 10:17 AM on 11.19.10 |
->> Ahhhh. So the spin to kill Fox News (or MSNBC) is to say it isn’t a news organization? I get it! So, who determines if it a proper news organization? Some really really really smart person, sitting in an office in Washington, that has no bias towards media content? Obviously it has to be someone MUCH smarter than the rest of us that are ‘apathetic’ or obviously don’t have the proper knowledge of such things (since we may not agree with their assessment).
I don’t want to get into a spitting match here. But if Michael has heartburn that Fox News is owned by Roger Ailes, I can explain my similar heartburn towards the ownership and agenda of NBC/GE. I’m sure we can all join the spitting match by giving other examples. It becomes pointless, really.
The REAL point is, it is up to the consumer to decide what is right and what is wrong.
Michael: So, you are a ‘fiscal conservative’, yet don’t believe in the free market when it comes to media/news agencies and free speech? Hmmmmmmmmmm. Or do you actually believe that some outlets on TV or on print aren’t owned by a corporate entity that has some sort of bias or political/corporate agenda? Really?
I have some simple advice for those that don’t like Fox News: Don’t watch/listen.
And I have some simple news for those that don’t like MSNBC: Don’t watch/listen.
I have some simple advice for those that are NOT apathetic and WANT to have proper knowledge: Read from and listen to multiple ‘news’ or ‘opinion’ sources, know their agenda, know their ownership, and actually make decisions on your own.
BTW: My comments about ‘all’ politicians was tongue and cheek. I’m sure Matthew meant it that way too. |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 12:28 PM on 11.19.10 |
->> Bryan,
To be honest I was pretty serious. lol
I was just watching the Larry Flynt movie last night about this same exact issue, free speech. What he had to go through in order to win that right for everyone in the media industry plus ordinary Americans was simply amazing. |
|
George Holland, Photographer
|
Paul Calhoun, Photographer
|
Hillsborough | NC | U.S. | Posted: 10:42 PM on 11.19.10 |
| ->> I was on the road all day and just had time to check back in on this topic. Nothing to add except to say WOW! You folks served up some impressive commentary! Ironic that photographers seem to have better and broader insight on this topic than many of the writers I knew when I was a full-time journalist. |
|
Jeff Barrie, Photographer
|
Indianapolis | IN | USA | Posted: 10:59 PM on 11.21.10 |
| ->> Eric he didn't or doesn't have any plan to submit legislation from everything I have read or heard but, as you pointed out it was more like a wish to have the FCC step in and regulate. To me that is even worse than legislation to censor and I think that is why I replied it directly to you. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|