Fox removing Ron Paul’s name from their news?

ARealConservative · 01-10-08, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

I'm not making bets with a hysteric who can't even look at reality clearly. Wow, this seems awful important to you, champs. And you are also taking the "democratic process" comment way further than I ever asserted and applying it to a small facet of the argument. But keep on. It's funny. Just do me a favor and look the other way when you speak; I'm kinda getting tired of having to wipe your mouth foam off myself.

This is funny.

You started off saying something stupid. I called you on it. you pretended to not want to debate.....but kept coming back to the thread anyway.

And the latest is that claiming our support is .00005% took the wind out of my sales.

Like I said - you can't debate at all. It is funny.

jallman · 01-10-08, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenb

I'm not emphasizing blame on only Fox news, they were just one of many News Organizations that refused to put him up on anything even when he was getting good numbers. They were all the same when he actually did post good numbers.. they'd take down the poll, or remove Paul.

You're right about there being many more places to get information these days. But if you sit back and look at the majority of people in this country... you'll realize they believe damn near everything these news outlets spew. Which can be very dangerous when they all have motives, or other reasons for not reporting, or reporting stories / people in different lights.

I think the whole situation is kinda ****ed up.

Then I would say the blame goes to the people and not the networks. The networks offer news people want to see. Paul just hasn't been making the news people want. Capitalist principles apply to the media; unless, of course, you would like to see the Fairness Doctrine enacted again, which I see as simply being an end run around the principles of free speech.

But you know...we do have activist journalism now instead of objective reporting. And the sad thing is, it appears to be what the people want. That also tells me that Ron Paul didn't make enough of an impact to make the people force change on the networks. But what can you do?

stevenb · 01-10-08, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

Then I would say the blame goes to the people and not the networks. The networks offer news people want to see. Paul just hasn't been making the news people want. Capitalist principles apply to the media; unless, of course, you would like to see the Fairness Doctrine enacted again, which I see as simply being an end run around the principles of free speech.

But you know...we do have activist journalism now instead of objective reporting. And the sad thing is, it appears to be what the people want. That also tells me that Ron Paul didn't make enough of an impact to make the people force change on the networks. But what can you do?

I agree.

My main problem is with their editing of posted works.

Look at the polls they had him on, that he got a ton of support.. then removed him... or "reset the poll". How do you explain that? Other than they had a hardon for keeping him out of the news? Or out of any reasonable expectation of anyone else liking him.

That's my main problem with how Ron Paul has been treated in the media. I understand they report on what people like... but when they actually reported on him and got responses back.. they edited them to keep the appearance that he was a nothing.

I know the world isn't fair... but come on now.

ARealConservative · 01-10-08, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

Then I would say the blame goes to the people and not the networks. The networks offer news people want to see. Paul just hasn't been making the news people want. Capitalist principles apply to the media; unless, of course, you would like to see the Fairness Doctrine enacted again, which I see as simply being an end run around the principles of free speech.

But you know...we do have activist journalism now instead of objective reporting. And the sad thing is, it appears to be what the people want. That also tells me that Ron Paul didn't make enough of an impact to make the people force change on the networks. But what can you do?

reality check

1) The New Hampshire GOP - who was the sponsor - protested and backed out.

2) the Leno Show - who felt this was a huge disservice - brought him back a second time and made a major stink about his exclusion.

This had nothing to do with what the people wanted. Some people, like Navy Pride, Hannity, and now you seem to be fine with it. But the vast majority of people felt it was a horrible decision.

jallman · 01-10-08, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARealConservative

This is funny.

You started off saying something stupid. I called you on it. you pretended to not want to debate.....but kept coming back to the thread anyway.

And the latest is that claiming our support is .00005% took the wind out of my sales.

Like I said - you can't debate at all. It is funny.

So much gnashing of teeth because you made a claim that .0005% is significant when it comes to representative air time for Paul but made then turned around and made the claim that .0005% isn't significant when describing a group representing Paul supporters. I simply showed your dishonesty.

All you've done is make snide comments and direct ad homs repeatedly, even when I tried to stick to the topic and back my assertions up. I gave you your opportunity to behave like an adult and take part in the conversation stevenb and I are having but you keep on being a jerk about it. And you wonder why I didn't want to discuss it with you when I saw the beginning of your downward spiral for what it was.

The best thing you could do at this point is cover your face with ash and put on sack cloth to protest how Paul is so persecuted. The imagery, at least, would have more impact than your "debating" has. Have fun with that.

jallman · 01-10-08, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARealConservative

reality check

1) The New Hampshire GOP - who was the sponsor - protested and backed out.

2) the Leno Show - who felt this was a huge disservice - brought him back a second time and made a major stink about his exclusion.

This had nothing to do with what the people wanted. Some people, like Navy Pride, Hannity, and now you seem to be fine with it. But the vast majority of people felt it was a horrible decision.

Show me some numbers. So far you got yourself, Leno, and the New Hampshire GOP. What's that, about 502? Ok.

jallman · 01-10-08, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenb

I agree.

My main problem is with their editing of posted works.

Look at the polls they had him on, that he got a ton of support.. then removed him... or "reset the poll". How do you explain that? Other than they had a hardon for keeping him out of the news? Or out of any reasonable expectation of anyone else liking him.

That's my main problem with how Ron Paul has been treated in the media. I understand they report on what people like... but when they actually reported on him and got responses back.. they edited them to keep the appearance that he was a nothing.

I know the world isn't fair... but come one now.

Okay, so you show me where these edits took place and expose this vast media conspiracy against Paul and I will be happy to concede a few points in my argument. A few points, mind you.

I simply do not see Paul as a viable candidate and I don't think any media outlet has any obligation to give Paul air time if they don't believe it will help their ratings. However, I am willing to concede that Paul was thrown under the bus in the pursuit of those ratings.

stevenb · 01-10-08, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

Okay, so you show me where these edits took place and expose this vast media conspiracy against Paul and I will be happy to concede a few points in my argument. A few points, mind you.

I simply do not see Paul as a viable candidate and I don't think any media outlet has any obligation to give Paul air time if they don't believe it will help their ratings. However, I am willing to concede that Paul was thrown under the bus in the pursuit of those ratings.

I can't prove a conspiracy, but there is lots of discrepancy involved...

Political Polls, Election Polls, Online Polls and More | YouPolls

Ron Paul Wins Pajama Media Poll, So They Remove Him Again! : The New Liberty

Let the Banning Begin ... Polls Remove Ron Paul

ALERT! GOP Straw Poll REMOVES the “NONE” Option & Gives Paul 0%! | The #1 Source for Ron Paul News

:\ Most modern online polls have mechanisms preventing spam from only a couple individuals from flooding the poll for one person. That alone with the phone polls that they conducted in which they denounced him for "messing with their poll"... etc..etc.

I wouldn't have a problem with it if they weren't doing this... cause it is their business to run afterall.

jallman · 01-10-08, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenb

I can't prove a conspiracy, but there is lots of discrepancy involved...

Political Polls, Election Polls, Online Polls and More | YouPolls

Ron Paul Wins Pajama Media Poll, So They Remove Him Again! : The New Liberty

Let the Banning Begin ... Polls Remove Ron Paul

ALERT! GOP Straw Poll REMOVES the “NONE” Option & Gives Paul 0%! | The #1 Source for Ron Paul News

:\ Most modern online polls have mechanisms preventing spam from only a couple individuals from flooding the poll for one person. That alone with the phone polls that they conducted in which they denounced him for "messing with their poll"... etc..etc.

I wouldn't have a problem with it if they weren't doing this... cause it is their business to run afterall.

Then I am more than willing to concede that issue. Ron Paul clearly got thrown under the bus in some instances and you have shown that. I guess the only option would be to boycott those networks and hurt their ratings. If enough Paul supporters would do that instead of throwing snowballs at pundits...

stevenb · 01-10-08, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

Then I am more than willing to concede that issue. Ron Paul clearly got thrown under the bus in some instances and you have shown that. I guess the only option would be to boycott those networks and hurt their ratings. If enough Paul supporters would do that instead of throwing snowballs at pundits...

Truth...

I hope that next election even this election there is more involvement from everyone... including the younger generations.