• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

White House: "Fox News is not a news organization"

Status
Not open for further replies.

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
PantherLotus said:
More importantly, he's being directly asked about them. If he avoided the question they would paint it as some wild and inflammatory "THE WHITEHOUSE IS DIVIDED. WHAT'S NEXT? MILITARY COUP?"

Speaking of which, FOXNEWS really is pressing on that General McChrystal/President Obama Afghanistan troop support debate, aren't they? And today Cheney comes out and says that the President has to stop "dithering."


That's what I find interesting. Aleepermessiah is mad that Obama actually answered a question.
 

cntr

Banned
I'm mildly surprised that nobody has tried to bring up the topic of the Fairness Doctrine.

140.85 said:
I'm convinced Obama hates himself at this point. Not sure what else could explain such consistent self-destructive and self-sabotaging behavior.

I'm convinced 140.85 is on drugs at this point. Not sure what else could explain such consistent self-destructive behavior and unexplained statements.
 

Cloudy

Banned
When this pushback against Fox started, I thought it was a bad idea and they'd just be upping Fox's ratings. I've now realized that it isn't even about Fox News at all. The strategy is to shame the real media into not legitimizing bogus Fox stories by reporting them as "controversies".

Notice how the legitimate news media isn't all over the Anita Dunn Mao garbage. Normally, the rest of the media would have parrotted Fox and made that the story of the week.

The insidiousness of Fox isn't that they openely broadcast GOP propaganda and talk radio drivel. It's that real news outlets get pressured into reporting their ridiculous stories as straight news because of their high ratings and accusations of "liberal bias". They have been setting the news agenda for years now and that's enabled right-wing talking-points to seep into the mainstream.
 

Deku

Banned
Divide and conquer seems to be working for now.

The commentators hand wringing over Obama making an enemies list or singling out Fox as being dumb may have missed the point.

By favoring the rest of the media and singling out Fox as an ideological outlet, which it is, (even if the accusation that it is a wing of the Republican party may have been far fetched) the Obama administration has had an impact on how their positions on issues are reported by isolating out Fox's slant from the rest of the media frenzy.
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
Cloudy said:
When this pushback against Fox started, I thought it was a bad idea and they'd just be upping Fox's ratings. I've now realized that it isn't even about Fox News at all. The strategy is to shame the real media into not legitimizing bogus Fox stories by reporting them as "controversies".

Notice how the legitimate news media isn't all over the Anita Dunn Mao garbage. Normally, the rest of the media would have parrotted Fox and made that the story of the week.

The insidiousness of Fox isn't that they openely broadcast GOP propaganda and talk radio drivel. It's that real news outlets get pressured into reporting their ridiculous stories as straight news because of their high ratings and accusations of "liberal bias". They have been setting the news agenda for years now and that's enabled right-wing talking-points to seep into the mainstream.

This is smart.
 

tekumseh

a mass of phermones, hormones and adrenaline just waiting to explode
140.85 said:
I'm convinced Obama hates himself at this point. Not sure what else could explain such consistent self-destructive and self-sabotaging behavior.

You mean like being upfront about how he sees Fox News? Fighting for a public insurance option that nearly 60% of the country support (and which 75% support for those who cannot afford insurance)? The only thing I see wrong with what he's doing is speaking out about such a small audience overall. At the end of the day, Fox viewership is still less than 1% of the population....
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
It was better when bowiez was debating semantics. Now all we have is a large, liberal echo chamber. Let's get some real debate going!

FOXNEWS is not a news organization. They're a tabloid. What's next, "BATBOY LIVES: IN THE WHITEHOUSE!"?
 

Cloudy

Banned
ImperialConquest said:
F*cking brilliant.

It is if it works long-term. Axelrod gave it away on Sunday telling the host, "you guys shouldn't follow them". I don't think he should have said it so overtly though. No one likes to be told what to do :lol
 

Cloudy

Banned
Here is a great piece by Glenn Greenwald on what real media control looks like:

http://salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/22/media

Whatever else is true, Fox has taken on a political role that is very rare, at least in modern times, for a large American news organization. Its news coverage is not merely biased or opinionated; there'd be nothing unusual about that. Instead, it is a major participant -- the leading participant -- in organizing, promoting and fueling protests, including street protests, against the government. Fox has undertaken a role typically played by media outlets in, say, Venezuela or various unstable, under-developed countries -- sponsoring rather than reporting on protests against the government -- and it is difficult to recall any recent example that is similar.

Fox has every right to do that, but the pretense that it is a news organization is ludicrous -- transparently so -- and there isn't anything remotely wrong with the Obama White House saying so. Even those with high tolerance levels for blatant double standards should have a very hard time watching Bush officials of all people -- along with their media-star allies -- whine about criticisms of Fox coming from the White House, when the prior eight years were marked by an administration that attempted to dominate and control media coverage more than any in modern history, along with a media that seemed perfectly content, even happy, to be controlled.
 
tekumseh said:
You mean like being upfront about how he sees Fox News? Fighting for a public insurance option that nearly 60% of the country support (and which 75% support for those who cannot afford insurance)? The only thing I see wrong with what he's doing is speaking out about such a small audience overall. At the end of the day, Fox viewership is still less than 1% of the population....

They account for 40% of the cognitive dissonance though.
 

TruHero

Banned
Cloudy said:
When this pushback against Fox started, I thought it was a bad idea and they'd just be upping Fox's ratings. I've now realized that it isn't even about Fox News at all. The strategy is to shame the real media into not legitimizing bogus Fox stories by reporting them as "controversies".

Notice how the legitimate news media isn't all over the Anita Dunn Mao garbage. Normally, the rest of the media would have parrotted Fox and made that the story of the week.

The insidiousness of Fox isn't that they openely broadcast GOP propaganda and talk radio drivel. It's that real news outlets get pressured into reporting their ridiculous stories as straight news because of their high ratings and accusations of "liberal bias". They have been setting the news agenda for years now and that's enabled right-wing talking-points to seep into the mainstream.

Brilliant strategy if true.
 

140.85

Cognitive Dissonance, Distilled
Cloudy said:
When this pushback against Fox started, I thought it was a bad idea and they'd just be upping Fox's ratings. I've now realized that it isn't even about Fox News at all. The strategy is to shame the real media into not legitimizing bogus Fox stories by reporting them as "controversies".

It's still a bad idea and FOX's ratings will continue to rise. As Obama's approvals keep sliding.

As others have asked - do media outlets really want some sort of White House seal of approval? Is that really in their best interest?

This entire episode is pathetic and shameful. These are great times to be a conservative (who knew?) this admin is the gift that keeps on giving. I think some righty blogs are correct - this is about containment. Obama's burnt by the whole ACORN mess and he doesn't want it to happen again. But instead of manning up and facing the criticism he's trying to get his little busybodies to shut people up. What ever happen to rising above it all and hopeandchange?

Notice how the legitimate news media isn't all over the Anita Dunn Mao garbage. Normally, the rest of the media would have parrotted Fox and made that the story of the week.

And how exactly is this not news? :lol When you shove your face into the national spotlight, expect to have your past statements scrutinized. Especailly if you're starting some retarded war against a news outlet.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Obama's burnt by the whole ACORN mess and he doesn't want it to happen again.

This is what I mean by right-wing talking points seeping into the mainstream. Obama was burned by the ACRON crap but was that fair? What does he have to do with some ACORN employees behaving badly besides them being an advocacy group that favors Democrats (because most Democrats actually care about minority issues!)

This retarded "guilt by association" crap that Fox "News" specializes in is NOT jounalism. It is just political smearing and legitimate news organizations shouldn't follow their lead..
 
Cloudy said:
When this pushback against Fox started, I thought it was a bad idea and they'd just be upping Fox's ratings. I've now realized that it isn't even about Fox News at all. The strategy is to shame the real media into not legitimizing bogus Fox stories by reporting them as "controversies".

Notice how the legitimate news media isn't all over the Anita Dunn Mao garbage. Normally, the rest of the media would have parrotted Fox and made that the story of the week.

The insidiousness of Fox isn't that they openely broadcast GOP propaganda and talk radio drivel. It's that real news outlets get pressured into reporting their ridiculous stories as straight news because of their high ratings and accusations of "liberal bias". They have been setting the news agenda for years now and that's enabled right-wing talking-points to seep into the mainstream.

I seriously, seriously doubt the "real" media will continue refraining from Fox parroting. There's no upside to this, and the White House just opens itself up for attack.

Once Fox ratchets up the attacks again, after this spat has passed, the rest of the media will toe the line as well. Like it always does
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
PhoenixDark said:
I seriously, seriously doubt the "real" media will continue refraining from Fox parroting. There's no upside to this, and the White House just opens itself up for attack.

Once Fox ratchets up the attacks again, after this spat has passed, the rest of the media will toe the line as well. Like it always does


I hope you're wrong, but I fear you may be right. :|
 
140.85 said:
And how exactly is this not news? :lol When you shove your face into the national spotlight, expect to have your past statements scrutinized.

Mr semantics OUT THE ASS AND MOUTH to defend Limbaugh's wants this Lady to eat her words for a at worst lame joke reference.

Cognitive Dissonance, Distilled
 

Cloudy

Banned
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-e-burns/fox-news-is-the-story-wit_b_330102.html

The best article on this story that I've seen yet:

Fox News Channel is twisting American politics in an unprecedented way, and too many members of the press still aren't getting it.

The White House has exposed Fox News for what it is: not a news organization, but a partisan political entity that is waging a war aimed at destroying the Obama administration and its progressive agenda. Fox's Glenn Beck said so himself last Friday, predicting that he would soon "take the administration down."

Despite such unambiguous proclamations and the truths about Fox that they reveal, many mainstream reporters and commentators, and even some progressive ones, have spent their time effectively circling the wagons around Fox by focusing their attention not on the network, but on the Administration's comments about it. The entire matter has largely been treated as a political game -- should the White House have so bluntly criticized the press, or will the tactic backfire?

"The Obama administration’s war on Fox News is dumb on multiple levels," wrote Ruth Marcus of The Washington Post. "The Obama administration really needs to get over itself," added John Nichols of The Nation. "[T]he motivations of the White House are clear," wrote Politico's Josh Gerstein and Mike Allen. "Fire up a liberal base disillusioned with Obama by attacking the hated Fox. Try to keep a critical news outlet off-balance." That same article quoted Project for Excellence in Journalism director Tom Rosenstiel: “You should beware of politicians playing press critic."


All of this completely misses the point. The issue is not whether it was a good idea politically for the White House to say that the emperor has no clothes. The issue is that the emperor actually has no clothes. In other words, the administration's comments about Fox News aren't the story. Fox News is the story.

That's just the beginning of it..
 
Cloudy

Eric Boehlert of Media Matters cut to the heart of it in a post. He said that these established media "liberals", who defend Fox or even go beyond and chastise the Admin for what they say, Don't watch Fox News.

That was floating around in my head and seeing it made it click.

You would assume they would notice the giant gorilla flinging shit in their backyard but they are most certainly oblivious.
 

EzLink

Banned
I got fed up with fox news a while ago (it was the only news station i watched... now i just don't watch any). But they do always have guests with opposing viewpoints to "balance" it out. Apart from Hannity/Beck/Oreilly (which shouldn't count anyway since they have opinion shows, and thus are entitled to talk about whatever the hell they want) it seems like the actual news programs (Studio B, Live Desk, etc.) are neutral. The news anchors don't give their opinion, and they have people from both sides of the issue debating

Am I missing something here? Is the WH just mainly pissed at the conservative commentator shows? Didn't CNN and NBC rip on Bush all the time when he was in office?
 

Cloudy

Banned
EzLink said:
Am I missing something here?

Yes. The devil is in the details and even when you look at the par for the course shitty mid-day shows on cable news they more than occasionally dabble in smearing Obama or liberal things in general.
 

APF

Member
The whole point of partisan media (besides making you feel good when you watch MSNBC or read The Nation) is they they highlight stories which may have been overlooked by the press-at-large. It is not a good thing for the Office of the President to shame mainstream news networks into ignoring stories they may have not investigated, simply because the organizations that have happen to be ideologically-opposed to the ruling powers. In fact to do so (to abide by such a decree) is 100% contrary to the role of the press as an independent voice acting in the public interest.
 

falastini

Member
The States need a government funded news organization eg. BBC, that reports the news like proper journalists. No biases, no slants, no politics, no entertainment, just information. The shit that goes on in the public cables news networks (especially Fox) is shameful, and the population is dumber because of it.
 

Socreges

Banned
APF said:
The whole point of partisan media (besides making you feel good when you watch MSNBC or read The Nation) is they they highlight stories which may have been overlooked by the press-at-large. It is not a good thing for the Office of the President to shame mainstream news networks into ignoring stories they may have not investigated, simply because the organizations that have happen to be ideologically-opposed to the ruling powers. In fact to do so (to abide by such a decree) is 100% contrary to the role of the press as an independent voice acting in the public interest.
Simply because? Watch these videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDR47EKTrCQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRx5ethd8JU

falastini said:
The States need a government funded news organization eg. BBC, that reports the news like proper journalists. No biases, no slants, no politics, no entertainment, just information. The shit that goes on in the public cables news networks (especially Fox) is shameful, and the population is dumber because of it.
I don't think the United States has a civil society that can ensure integrity in such an organization.
 
falastini said:
The States need a government funded news organization eg. BBC, that reports the news like proper journalists. No biases, no slants, no politics, no entertainment, just information. The shit that goes on in the public cables news networks (especially Fox) is shameful, and the population is dumber because of it.


DUMBEST statement of the thread (so far!)

Once we "The States" have a government funded news org, we'll know that this is truly the end of our Great and Free nation, you know, much like Britian. :lol :lol :lol
 

falastini

Member
Rexeverything said:
DUMBEST statement of the thread (so far!)

Once we "The States" have a government funded news org, we'll know that this is truly the end of our Great and Free nation, you know, much like Britian. :lol :lol :lol


I didn't say run by the govt. I said funded by. Once they don't have to worry about ratings or sponsors, they could...I dunno... report the news? Are you saying FOX, MSNBC, CNN are better then BBC?
 

APF

Member
Socreges: shouldn't you ignore videos coming from media organizations that are "at war" with a political party?
 

Qwell

Member
Uhh... do those youtube videos really serve the purpose they were touting considering the first one is just a bunch of 2 second soundbites from the opinions of their opinion show hosts and their guests? And the second one was pretty much more of the same, there were a few news reports in there but those carried factually accurate information. Some people may not have seen those as relevant facts, but they weren't wrong.

Its like the ACORN stuff you folks keep wanting to gloss over, were there factual errors in the reports? And those asking what Obama has to do with ACORN it was Obama who kept saying they would have a "head at the table" for settings policy, and them being given the job of counting the census, so I do think it is in our interest to know how that business is run. If the tapes alone weren't enough the interview with the president of ACORN was enough to sour my taste for that organization. Show me an actual lie and maybe I'll give the benefit of the doubt, but its just like that Rush quote that is being spread around. No one can produce the actual audio of him saying that, they just keep calling him a racist desipite his number 2 guy being black. And considering all his shows are archived if he did say that actual quote I'm sure someone could bring up the actual audio for it.
 

Socreges

Banned
APF said:
Socreges: shouldn't you ignore videos coming from media organizations that are "at war" with a political party?
I'll take this aversion as a concession of yours that NO, this isn't simply about being ideological opposites.
 

APF

Member
That's fine, I took your response as demonstrative that partisan media has utility for educating the public on issues that other media may have overlooked.
 

Socreges

Banned
APF said:
That's fine, I took your response as demonstrative that partisan media has utility for educating the public on issues that other media may have overlooked.
You'd call the assertions in those videos "educating"? Well, I guess we'll just stop right there. And no, this is not a matter of us being from different ideological strands. I can appreciate completely different perspectives, but I'm also able to distinguish between mere belief and outright, systematically-produced bullshit.
 

APF

Member
Uh, you're the one who posted those links to prove some point, not me. I think I see what's going on here, but as of yet you don't realize your posts are backfiring.
 

Socreges

Banned
APF said:
Uh, you're the one who posted those links to prove some point, not me. I think I see what's going on here, but as of yet you don't realize your posts are backfiring.
No. "Assertions in the video" being the assertions by Fox News, obviously, not the assertions by Media Matters. Again.

[edit]

Wait wait wait. We have to reset here. I didn't realize you were talking about Media Matters in the first reply. My mistake. Let me reply again.
 

APF

Member
But I was talking about MediaMatters' attempt to educate on the subject of FoxNews, and your use of their "systematically-produced bullshit"

Edit: np
 

Socreges

Banned
APF said:
But I was talking about MediaMatters' attempt to educate on the subject of FoxNews, and your use of their "systematically-produced bullshit"

Edit: np
Right, your post was just a little confusing and I didn't get what you were driving at. This takes us in a completely different direction.

PS, I like how instead of realizing that we were clearly talking about two different things, you were content to think that my posts were "backfiring" as I completely undid myself. :lol

APF said:
Socreges: shouldn't you ignore videos coming from media organizations that are "at war" with a political party?
I've never said that I completely agree with how the White House has handled this (Have they said that everyone has to ignore videos from media organizations, btw? Is that an actual implication?). And that's the central departure point. I think exposing Fox, however, is a completely different story and I took issue with your simple treatment of "the organizations that have happen to be ideologically-opposed to the ruling powers" and replied with the montages compiled by Media Matters. Simple.
 

Kinitari

Black Canada Mafia
Qwell said:
Uhh... do those youtube videos really serve the purpose they were touting considering the first one is just a bunch of 2 second soundbites from the opinions of their opinion show hosts and their guests? And the second one was pretty much more of the same, there were a few news reports in there but those carried factually accurate information. Some people may not have seen those as relevant facts, but they weren't wrong.

Ignoring those videos, there are plenty of other things that Fox News does that is so unprofessional it hurts my stomach ("Birth Certificate Conspiracy! Is Obama an American?" sort of shit) - then there are those times they purposely shopped democrats to look like... I don't even know, ugly versions of themselves. Then there's the whole... organizing and funding Tea Party Rallies, telling the crowd what to cheer, turning on the cameras and saying "Wow! Listen to that crowd cheer! These people are serious!".

I mean.... this isn't a hard game to play. They have plenty of shit on their hands.

Its like the ACORN stuff you folks keep wanting to gloss over, were there factual errors in the reports? And those asking what Obama has to do with ACORN it was Obama who kept saying they would have a "head at the table" for settings policy, and them being given the job of counting the census, so I do think it is in our interest to know how that business is run. If the tapes alone weren't enough the interview with the president of ACORN was enough to sour my taste for that organization.

Please... I am being sincere here, try and get your news and fact checking done at some neutral sources. Obama has never - ever --- ever said that he wanted ACORN at the head of any policy creating table. Ever. And Acorn was one of - 30,000 groups and organizations helping with the census - do you know why everyone picks out ACORN out of these 30,000? Even then, I can agree that ACORN needs to do some work, and maybe get rid of their commission based pay structure (as it can attract many unscrupulous employees) - but that has nothing to do with Obama - and trying to connect him to it is just... wow.


Show me an actual lie and maybe I'll give the benefit of the doubt, but its just like that Rush quote that is being spread around. No one can produce the actual audio of him saying that, they just keep calling him a racist desipite his number 2 guy being black. And considering all his shows are archived if he did say that actual quote I'm sure someone could bring up the actual audio for it.

I am from Canada, and I can probably give you a list. One off the top of my head, is the Tea Part Coverage they did - after it was all done, they took out an add in some newspaper saying "How did CNN, MSNBC and [other news stations] miss this! Fox news is awesome!" (may not be word for word) - this text was at the top of a picture showing the protesters. This picture was taken by CNN's personal camera that ignores the fact that those Tea Parties were on ALL the channels. What those other news organizations where not doing was staging events and rallies, and encouraging protesters to scream and shout, and using this as material for their 'News' broadcasts.

Not to be mean, but did you really not know any of this?
 
EzLink said:
The news anchors don't give their opinion

They give it all the time, I don't know how you can say otherwise.

This is the Fox formula:

Reporter: I'm telling you anchor, I'm here on the scene where that democrat said that thing and real Americans are scared.

Anchor: What about parents? Shouldn't they be terrified for their innocent childrens' minds?

Reporter: You're right anchor, there's a real chance that thing that democrat said will make them Russian, gay or both.

Anchor: Thanks reporter. *Turns to co-anchor* Wow, can you believe that? It just goes to show that just when you think some of the democrats aren't commie queen pedophiles, they go and try to take even more of your rights. Gosh.

Co-anchor: Just shameful. Up next, America's awesome new tank that will have terrorists on the run - defense experts say it can flay an arab at up to 300 yards, you're not going to want to miss this.
 

Insertia

Member
I've come to learn Fox News doesn't represent real republicans. Just crazies
All of my republican pals hate to be associated with the Fox crowd.

It is very important that Fox isn't muddled with actual news outlets. That's been my mindset for many many years. Fox passes itself as a CNN for the anti-gay/anti-immigration/uneducated crowd.
The birth certificate and death panel stories for example. How shitty is our media that these lies and non issues are covered?
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
LiveFromKyoto said:
They give it all the time, I don't know how you can say otherwise.

This is the Fox formula:

Reporter: I'm telling you anchor, I'm here on the scene where that democrat said that thing and real Americans are scared.

Anchor: What about parents? Shouldn't they be terrified for their innocent childrens' minds?

Reporter: You're right anchor, there's a real chance that thing that democrat said will make them Russian, gay or both.

Anchor: Thanks reporter. *Turns to co-anchor* Wow, can you believe that? It just goes to show that just when you think some of the democrats aren't commie queen pedophiles, they go and try to take even more of your rights. Gosh.

Co-anchor: Just shameful. Up next, America's awesome new tank that will have terrorists on the run - defense experts say it can flay an arab at up to 300 yards, you're not going to want to miss this.

Like I said before, CNN ran with the headline "Saddam's Threat to The Babies of America" before the Iraq war, for a segment that was all about terrorists potentially wanting to poison baby food products.

All your media are owned by entertainment companies really, or conglomerates that have an interest in not delivering actual news.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
A GOVERNMENT FINANCED MEDIA? YOU MEAN LIKE THE BBC, PBS, APM, AND NPR? YOU MEAN THE GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO NOT ONLY BE MANAGING THE AIRWAVES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR TELEVISION, THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO FINANCE STATIONS AND BRAINSWASH US ALL BY MANIPULATING OUR BRAINS?!

TO WAR!!!11111

(Seriously, :lol @ people saying the prospect of a state financed tv channel being scary. )
 

legend166

Member
PantherLotus said:
It was better when bowiez was debating semantics. Now all we have is a large, liberal echo chamber. Let's get some real debate going!

FOXNEWS is not a news organization. They're a tabloid. What's next, "BATBOY LIVES: IN THE WHITEHOUSE!"?


Real debate?

I'll try some points:

- PoliGAF is so completey unaware of itself, that in the very same thread which they rag on Fox News for being a horrible news organisation (which it is), they post articles from the other side of the coin, The Huffington Post, and treat it as legitimate (you thought I was going to say MSNBC, but that's dumb). Doing so completey waters down this desire for an actual fair and balanced (actually, not crappy Fox News buzzwords) new sources. You guys really just want a liberal version of Fox News.

- By focusing on Fox News, Obama is deflecting legitimate criticism. I mean, it's easy to pick apart Fox News' arguments, because most of the time they're either slanted, exaggerated, outright lies, or all of the above. By acting as if the only complaints are such, the Whitehouse can get people to ignore the legitimate complaints - that despite having the presidency and majority in the house and sentate, they're not actually doing anything.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
legend166 said:
despite having the presidency and majority in the house and sentate, they're not actually doing anything.

Are you fucking kidding me? No administration has done this much in its first year since the New Deal.

The only reason it doesn't seem like anything is getting done is because the largest piece of legislature, the health care bill, has been stalled for months. We literally had been waiting since July for the Senate Finance Committee to get something done, and only now are we finally getting to see a full Senate bill. The House has been sitting on a complete bill for months now, and has made half a dozen alternatives for analysis since Baucus has stalled for so damn long in the other chamber.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
GaimeGuy said:
A GOVERNMENT FINANCED MEDIA? YOU MEAN LIKE THE BBC, PBS, APM, AND NPR? YOU MEAN THE GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO NOT ONLY BE MANAGING THE AIRWAVES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR TELEVISION, THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO FINANCE STATIONS AND BRAINSWASH US ALL BY MANIPULATING OUR BRAINS?!

TO WAR!!!11111

(Seriously, :lol @ people saying the prospect of a state financed tv channel being scary. )
Uh, government funding represented an already small share of what PBS and NPR take in before it was cut further several years ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom