• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

TV anchors decrying 'fake' news put spotlight on Sinclair Broadcast Group

hanger4 said:
How does honesty in news manipulate our thoughts and ideas ?? Wouldn't it be paramoumt to making informed decisions ??
Click to expand...

How can anyone make an informed opinion when all of the media they have access to pushes the same, self-serving, distorted viewpoint? (rhetorical; don't bother)

That's what Sinclair and others like them are going for - monopoly. If you aren't worth a few (non-debt leveraged) million, this should bother you.
 
hanger4 said:
These broadcasters are employed by Sinclair and they've set company policy, a centrally-crafted message of honesty and integrity in news reporting. Oooooh the horror.
Click to expand...
That may be their PR line, but it isn't what reality shows.

In other words, they're ****ing lying.
 
The Mark said:
That may be their PR line, but it isn't what reality shows.

In other words, they're ****ing lying.
Click to expand...

They've already proved they're lying by their past actions. That, along with the fact that Sinclair threatens employees if they quit should tell anyone that this is not a good thing.
 
TheGoverness said:
What don't you get about this not being about "honesty" and "integrity", and about corporate ambition? They are pushing propaganda. This is not that hard to understand, and I've explained it to you multiple times.

Talking to a brick wall is not fun.
Click to expand...

But you've not rebutted the statement read except to call it propaganda. Apparently you believe honesty and integrity in reporting is propaganda, sad.

You're right, talking to a brick wall isn't fun.
 
hanger4 said:
But you've not rebutted the statement read except to call it propaganda. Apparently you believe honesty and integrity in reporting is propaganda, sad.

You're right, talking to a brick wall isn't fun.
Click to expand...

When a sitting president's administration has struck a deal with a massive media company, the last thing anyone can expect is honesty and integrity. Like I said, I think you know this. But since it suits you, you don't care.
 
Last edited:
TheGoverness said:
Nobody said that. I have a problem with ALL biased media, whether it's CNN, MSNBC, or from the Sinclair Broadcasting Group. Either you have a problem with all biased media, or you don't. You don't get to just be against the bias that you don't like, at least not without looking like a giant hypocrite.
Click to expand...

Leekholer2, to whom I was responding, implied such.

And yes I do have a problem with bias media, the statement read indicates no bias.
 
hanger4 said:
Leekholer2, to whom I was responding, implied such.

And yes I do have a problem with bias media, the statement read indicates no bias.
Click to expand...

But the actions of Sinclair suggest otherwise. You can choose to ignore that all you like, but that's reality. The Trump admin struck a deal with Sinclair. Now what do you think that means? That means that the administration now gets to control the narrative. That's not OK. Not in any way, shape or form.
 
leekohler2 said:
Did they consolidate the media into one corporation that reaches 72% of all households in the US to spread a message? Nope. You're either not reading the links that have been given to you, or you are intentionally ignoring them because what's being pushed suits your agenda. Its all right in post #31 for you.
Click to expand...

All the media groups I listed with connections to Obama and the Clintons reaches that much or more.
 
hanger4 said:
All the media groups I listed with connections to Obama and the Clintons reaches that much or more.
Click to expand...

Really? So they struck a deal with them like Kushner did? Got some proof?
 
hanger4 said:
The statement leek, the statement.
Click to expand...

The reality of what Sinclair has done in the past, hanger4, the reality. Talk is cheap- actions, not so much.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
How can anyone make an informed opinion when all of the media they have access to pushes the same, self-serving, distorted viewpoint? (rhetorical; don't bother)

That's what Sinclair and others like them are going for - monopoly. If you aren't worth a few (non-debt leveraged) million, this should bother you.
Click to expand...

Sinclair can't nor does it own all the stations in a viewing area.
 
leekohler2 said:
When a sitting president's administration has struck a deal with a massive media company, the last thing anyone can expect is honesty and integrity. Like I said, I think you know this. But since it suits you, you don't care.
Click to expand...

A deal for straight reporting, oh the horror.
 
Anthony60 said:
You realize that the media pushes anti Trump stories at a rate of about 90%, don't you? CNN and NBC's stories were 93% negative about Trump in his first 100 days. I wonder if the coverage of Obama was similar? I'm sure everyone here expressing discontent with this story were equal upset about the lack of honesty against Trump.
Click to expand...
Have you considered the coverage reflects the subject?

It's kinda' like saying: "93% of the media coverage claims Trump lies." Well, yeah ...
 
hanger4 said:
A deal for straight reporting, oh the horror.
Click to expand...

"Straight reporting" as dictated by Corporate in admitted collusion with the tRump Gang.:rofl:rofl
 
Thelion said:
"Straight reporting" as dictated by Corporate in admitted collusion with the tRump Gang.:rofl:rofl
Click to expand...

It just amazes me. I'm out of this thread. I can't deal with the stupidity and ignorance.
 
hanger4 said:
The statement leek, the statement.
Click to expand...
The level of belief I have in the truthfulness of PR statements released to the press is inversely proportional to how many reasons I can see for the person or organization releasing the statement to lie.

And I see a really large number of reasons for Sinclair Broadcasting to lie, so I'm not accepting any claims made in a statement they make as true or accurate without independent confirmation of it.

Edit: This is also why I rarely believe everything I hear in any PR statement released by corporations or politicians.
 
leekohler2 said:
No, a deal to control the narrative.
Click to expand...

Greetings, leekohler. :2wave:

Why do you believe that anything in the media is now suddenly going to change? People are going to believe what they have always believed, so what makes this important now? Folks will still tune in to the station they usually listen to. As a matter of fact, since humans are naturally curious by nature, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that many people will tune in just to hear what the publicity is all about! :roll: I will, and I am not alone in this! :no:
 
Chomsky said:
Have you considered the coverage reflects the subject?

It's kinda' like saying: "93% of the media coverage claims Trump lies." Well, yeah ...
Click to expand...

Yep. but it's the media that is lying most of the time. And it's not really that, it's that they decided to be negative on Trump. If he did exactly what Obama did, it would be negative.
 
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...vision-propaganda_us_5ac2c6d4e4b09712fec38b95

n 2013, I was a young news director at a struggling small station in the Midwest, having worked my way up the ranks as a producer in larger markets. I’d uprooted my family the year before and moved from the West Coast to “earn my stripes” running a newsroom. I had a small team with a handful of veterans and eager new reporters I enjoyed mentoring.

That fall, Sinclair Broadcast Group bought the station. Sinclair was not a household name at the time, but it did have a reputation in the business for being heavy-handed in station operations and for having a conservative editorial lean. The company first made national headlines when it forced all its stations to run an anti-John Kerry documentary just before the Democratic nominee lost the 2004 presidential election.

It began with the “must run” stories arriving in my inbox every morning. “Must-run” stories were exactly what the name suggests: They were a combination of pre-produced packages that would come down from corporate, along with scripts for local anchors to read. We had to air them whether we wanted to or not.
Click to expand...

The Sinclair style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom