ABC, NBC Won't Air Ad Critical of Obama's Health Care Plan
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/27/abc-nbc-refuse-air-advertisement-critical-obamas-health-care-plan/
Now, I'm assuming this story is true. I understand that Fox is biased and that they're competitors with the other networks, which casts a shadow of doubt on the story, certainly. If the story is wrong, then I apologize to NBC and ABC. (I wouldn't bet on that, though...)
Also, the quotes from the article seem to bear out its thrust.
NBC has questioned some of the ad's facts while ABC has labeled it "partisan."
"The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue," spokeswoman Susan Sewell said in a written statement. "Just to be clear, this is a policy for the entire network, not just ABC News."
NBC, meanwhile, said it has not turned down the ad and will reconsider it with some revisions.
"We have not rejected the ad," spokeswoman Liz Fischer told FOXNews.com. "We have communicated with the media agency about some factual claims that require additional substantiation. As always, we are happy to reconsider the ad once these issues are addressed."
Now, if anyone has watched TV in the US over the past few weeks, you'll know that ads in favor of the Bill are thick as fleas. I don't watch much live TV and I've seen at least 3 ads in favor of the Bill in that time period.
I understand that media is composed of people and people are biased. I get that. But, to start censoring paid ads based on political viewpoint? It's disgusting. They're private companies but network TV is heavily regulated by the FCC and network TV is dominated by a small number of networks.
If they ever try to re-introduce the "Fairness Doctrine" so that they can censor successful conservative radio talk show hosts, I'll bet these same clowns will be prattling on and on about how the media has a responsibility to present both viewpoints.
Originally posted by sh76All media is biased, this is exactly as it should be, nothing to debate here, move along.
[b]ABC, NBC Won't Air Ad Critical of Obama's Health Care Plan
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/27/abc-nbc-refuse-air-advertisement-critical-obamas-health-care-plan/
Now, I'm assuming this story is true. I understand that Fox is biased and that they're competitors with the other networks, which casts a shadow of doubt on the story, certai ...[text shortened]... on about how the media has a responsibility to present both viewpoints.[/b]
Originally posted by sh76So you are suggesting that factually incorrect or misleading advertisements should be broadcast because network TV is heavily regulated by the FCC and network TV is dominated by a small number of networks?
[b]ABC, NBC Won't Air Ad Critical of Obama's Health Care Plan
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/27/abc-nbc-refuse-air-advertisement-critical-obamas-health-care-plan/
Now, I'm assuming this story is true. I understand that Fox is biased and that they're competitors with the other networks, which casts a shadow of doubt on the story, certai ...[text shortened]... on about how the media has a responsibility to present both viewpoints.[/b]
Originally posted by FMFI'm suggesting, no, saying, that political ads are run all the time without regard to fact checking. There's a reason why there are so many watchdog groups that assess candidates' ads during campaigns... because the networks don't. Do you know how many candidates' ads have been shown to have contained misleading information? Happens all the time.
So you are suggesting that factually incorrect or misleading advertisements should be broadcast because network TV is heavily regulated by the FCC and network TV is dominated by a small number of networks?
All of a sudden, these networks decide that they can't run paid political ads until they investigate and independently verify every claim made by the ads? Please! Do you really think that viewpoint has nothing to do with these decisions?
Originally posted by FMFI am advocating that networks not practice viewpoint-based censorship on paid political ads.
Apparently the adverts spread disinformation about the health care proposals. You seem to be advocating that they are aired regardless.
I don't know whether the ads do or do not spread disinformation. I have seen the ad. It's mainly just vague speculation about what horrible things the Bill will cause.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/27/abc_nbc_refuse_to_air_tv_ads_critical_of_health_care_reform.html
I'm not saying I like or am impressed by the ad. It seems like fear mongering and does a lot of dubious speculation. But I don't even see any allegation specific enough to be "false." It's all speculation about the future. How can that be proven true or false?
This is viewpoint based censorship. They never do this during campaigns. They never do this to liberal-viewpoint ads. These organizations are supposed to be news organizations, not pro-Obama shills. If someone can show me any precedent for similar rejection of a pro-Democrat submission, I'll change my mind.
Originally posted by sh76You seem to be saying that because certain people have some money, they should be able to influence a debate with some factually incorrect information. The fact that the networks have realised this before making the mistake of broadcasting it seems, in your book, to be "digusting".
I am advocating that networks not practice viewpoint-based censorship on paid political ads.
I don't know whether the ads do or do not spread disinformation. I have seen the ad. It's mainly just vague speculation about what horrible things the Bill will cause.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/27/abc_nbc_refuse_to_air_tv_ads_critical_of_heal e any precedent for similar rejection of a pro-Democrat submission, I'll change my mind.
"It seems like fear mongering and does a lot of dubious speculation. " But a responsible broadcaster would broadcast it anyway as long as the fear mongerers pay?
Originally posted by sh76Freedom of speech means you have a right to express yourself.
I am advocating that networks not practice viewpoint-based censorship on paid political ads.
I don't know whether the ads do or do not spread disinformation. I have seen the ad. It's mainly just vague speculation about what horrible things the Bill will cause.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/27/abc_nbc_refuse_to_air_tv_ads_critical_of_heal ...[text shortened]... e any precedent for similar rejection of a pro-Democrat submission, I'll change my mind.
Now when we apply the definition: A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others.
We see that freedom of expression does not mean others must supply you with a soap box.
There are limits, you aren't free to commit fraud, things like slander and yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater.