So the FCC chair is threatening networks that broadcast unfavorable news

T. A. Gardner said:
And, if by struck, say one were hit by a piece of shrapnel that punctured the skin of the aircraft and that needed say, a two-hour repair would you argue that the aircraft was somehow destroyed or left inoperable for an extended period?
Click to expand...
You deflecting from the OP.
 
Brendan Carr, another POS who is devoid of dignity, and a lackey to wannabe dictator Crazy Trump.
 
Carr is not looking at Trump. He is a P 2025 person who is looking at the big picture, the consolidation of all news under right-wing corporate control. He works for Miller.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The "damage" was minimal on them. It is more a case of the USAF applying an abundance of caution to their operation following the attack.

HDWRUH-XwAAYWMQ


This is a shot, post strike of the tanker fleet. I don't see any heavily damaged aircraft in it.
Click to expand...
Not the point, is it?
 
Noking said:
If this isn't the way that a fascist dictator intimidates the news to suit his agenda, then what is it.


President Donald Trump’s attack dog atop the FCC, Brendan Carr, garnered lots of attention on Saturday for threatening the licenses of local broadcasters over news coverage he deemed to be “fake.”

Click to expand...
If "fake" equals a lie, then shouldn't the MSM news outlets be held to a standard where they don't deliberately lie to the public with the news stories they run?

Dan Rather got fired at CBS years back for running a story about Bush II and being AWOL using forged documents that were at a minimum questionable in both content and origin when his newsroom at CBS got them. The management of that newsroom didn't care that they were questionable and pushed the story out anyway.

Within 3 days, document experts around the world were saying the documents were frauds. There were additional people coming forward that knew where the documents originated and that they were frauds. Rather and a number of managers at CBS were fired.

If that last thing didn't happen, and CBS didn't retract the story, should the FCC do something about that?
 
martin said:
Not the point, is it?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is the point. The damage was minimal. The news about the damage was minimal. It'd be like 5 service members get minor bruises and small cuts requiring a bandaid as the result of an Iraqi drone attack and the news running a story titled "Five service members wounded in Iranian drone strike!"

It is sensationalizing the irrelevant to produce a negative story that is meant to hurt Trump and the US.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Yes, it is the point. The damage was minimal. The news about the damage was minimal. It'd be like 5 service members get minor bruises and small cuts requiring a bandaid as the result of an Iraqi drone attack and the news running a story titled "Five service members wounded in Iranian drone strike!"

It is sensationalizing the irrelevant to produce a negative story that is meant to hurt Trump and the US.
Click to expand...
Could just as easily say "meant to help the US". But that is not the point either. In this country we don't abide a political appointee threatening broadcast licenses.
 
martin said:
Could just as easily say "meant to help the US". But that is not the point either. In this country we don't abide a political appointee threatening broadcast licenses.
Click to expand...
Yes, we do and always have. Broadcasters, whether it is radio, television, or something else, are licensed because there is only so much bandwidth available. It has also always been a legal issue when someone lies to you whether it is some newspaper practicing yellow journalism, a television news program, or a snake oil salesman. We have rules about truth in advertising for the same reason.

So, when news outlets sensationalize the news to the point where it borders on outright lying, they need a reminder they have a duty to the public to put out the truth. Or would you prefer that we have news that is the equivalent of Infowars, Alternet, and Pravda to rely on?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
If "fake" equals a lie, then shouldn't the MSM news outlets be held to a standard where they don't deliberately lie to the public with the news stories they run?

Dan Rather got fired at CBS years back for running a story about Bush II and being AWOL using forged documents that were at a minimum questionable in both content and origin when his newsroom at CBS got them. The management of that newsroom didn't care that they were questionable and pushed the story out anyway.

Within 3 days, document experts around the world were saying the documents were frauds. There were additional people coming forward that knew where the documents originated and that they were frauds. Rather and a number of managers at CBS were fired.

If that last thing didn't happen, and CBS didn't retract the story, should the FCC do something about that?
Click to expand...
deflect, distract, and distort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top