Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

    What on Earth is this garbage?

    In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution (sic) - a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela.. . The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks in the U.S. government to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country.
    Anyone think that a man who admires the Venezuelan government's seizure of their country's media should be a position to influence the FCC?

    http://www.sodahead.com/united-state...143935/?page=7

    What's this "diversity" crap? What's with taxing conservative talk radio to pay for liberal talk radio? That's like taxing NBC to pay for BET's network costs. :P

    Interesting that President Obama has stated that he has no intention of reimposing the Fairness Doctrine yet has appointed a commissioner/czar/whatever that will essentially enforce exactly that. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

    A good article on the poor performance of progressive talk radio: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...hhctd.asp?pg=1

  • #2
    Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

    For those that aren't familiar with the "democratic revolution" currently going on in Venezuela: http://www.miamiherald.com/1463/story/1185474.html

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

      From the 3rd article in your initial post..

      By just about any measure, the Fairness Doctrine was an unfair impediment to free speech, and a public disservice in an open democracy. But it was something else as well: It was a federal regulation that had kept Rush Limbaugh--and Laura Ingraham and William Bennett and Sean Hannity and others--off the air.
      Was the doctrine really the impediment, or was it the desires to the companies running these stations desire to maximize profits and minimize oversight?

      Also from that article,

      As often happens, this particular initiative had exactly the opposite effect from what the FCC intended. Over the years station owners grew so wary of attracting the scrutiny of federal regulators that they largely banned discussion of political issues on the air, and mandatory public service programming was deliberately anodyne.
      Remember back in those times when the news was just reported, and not spun to make a particular point for us, the viewers? Would it be a horrible thing to go back to those days, when people expressed opinions in newspapers (and acknowledging todays enviornment, the internet) and the "news" was just that, the news?

      The problem in my opinion is today biased reporters from both sides of the fence pass off what in the 1940's would have been called propaganda as "news reporting and discussion of current events". Know why Cronkite was so well reguarded by everyone? He just reported the news, he didn't spin it like what happens today.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

        ^^^ Golf Clap!

        I deserve a ribbon for Mortar Specialist

        Artillery conquers and infantry occupies.
        J.F.C. Fuller

        Proud to have been a member of the 5th, 71st and my beloved 19th

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

          Reporting has always been biased. It's just more obvious, today, with so many viewpoints able to point out the bias of the "mainstream media". That bias isn't manifested overtly by a reporter telling you his opinion, but by selective reporting. Show the people you agree with, and hide the others as if they were your crazy aunt.

          As to taxation, sounds kinda like the British TV tax. We're already taxed to pay for PBS, why not for liberal talk radio? The precedent is already set.
          Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

          snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

          Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

            Originally posted by ScratchMonkey View Post
            Reporting has always been biased. It's just more obvious, today, with so many viewpoints able to point out the bias of the "mainstream media". That bias isn't manifested overtly by a reporter telling you his opinion, but by selective reporting. Show the people you agree with, and hide the others as if they were your crazy aunt.
            This is true, reporting bias has always existed, but wouldn't the bias before this rule was repealed by accuriately represented by saying the bias was shown by deciding what was and wasn't news and not what point of view you skew the "news" to?

            Isn't it strange that today there are more "news" shows on then ever before, but they are actually showing less news then before and instead doing entertainment programming?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

              When there is only one source of news, how would you even know if it was skewed? They could skew it anyway they wanted and most people would never find out.

              These days there are so many different sources of news available that it's fairly easy to demonstrate when one particular commentator is way off base. I much prefer this way to the old way.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                Originally posted by Kerostasis View Post
                When there is only one source of news, how would you even know if it was skewed? They could skew it anyway they wanted and most people would never find out.

                These days there are so many different sources of news available that it's fairly easy to demonstrate when one particular commentator is way off base. I much prefer this way to the old way.
                Sigh, one source of news? Let me see, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and newspapers somehow equaled one source of news?

                What's wrong with the concept of news shows, you know, sticking to the news, and leaving the spin and fluff pieces for others? What's wrong with networks that promote themselves as news networks stick to giving the news? Commentary and news reporting are supposed to be two different things, what's wrong with making sure they indeed are?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                  Originally posted by Morganan View Post
                  What's wrong with the concept of news shows, you know, sticking to the news, and leaving the spin and fluff pieces for others? What's wrong with networks that promote themselves as news networks stick to giving the news?
                  You know, thats a good question. You should call up NBC and ask them. :)

                  Commentary and news reporting are supposed to be two different things, what's wrong with making sure they indeed are?
                  Who's gonna do the making sure? A lot of commentators will come right out and say, "I'm a commentator", and then its easy. But when you have commentators calling themselves reporters on a regular basis, whose job is it to decide which ones are "real" reporters and which ones are really commentators in disguise?

                  I have an answer to propose for that, by the way: I think the audience should decide that, and then abandon the fake news reporters as untrustworthy. And to a large extent, that's exactly whats happening.

                  But all of that is missing the point of this article. The "fairness rule" doesn't require fairness in news reporting -- it requires fairness in commentating. News reporters get off free. They aren't regulated. But commentating is heavily regulated, so that will just lead to even more mixing of the two. Commentators will have to call themselves reporters to avoid legal sanctions.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                    Originally posted by Kerostasis View Post
                    You know, thats a good question. You should call up NBC and ask them. :)
                    Do I have to for the 2 people to stupid to figure out why they do this? It's because they make more money doing it this way.



                    Who's gonna do the making sure? A lot of commentators will come right out and say, "I'm a commentator", and then its easy. But when you have commentators calling themselves reporters on a regular basis, whose job is it to decide which ones are "real" reporters and which ones are really commentators in disguise?
                    Err, the same body who made sure before the law was repealed?

                    I have an answer to propose for that, by the way: I think the audience should decide that, and then abandon the fake news reporters as untrustworthy. And to a large extent, that's exactly whats happening.
                    <sarcasm>Hehe, that's exactly what is happening today. There are far less political commentary shows on today that exist on "news networks" then there were a year or so ago, CNN, MSNBC and FoXnews all closed their doors within the last year.....</end sarcasm>

                    But all of that is missing the point of this article. The "fairness rule" doesn't require fairness in news reporting -- it requires fairness in commentating. News reporters get off free. They aren't regulated. But commentating is heavily regulated, so that will just lead to even more mixing of the two. Commentators will have to call themselves reporters to avoid legal sanctions.
                    Weird, when the rule was in effect, all news agencies steered clear of anything but the most vanilla of commentary so they wouldn't have to worry about any possible negative effects coming down on them due to the rule. They stuck to delivering the news and left the commentary to others, who were not covered under the rule since they weren't using public airwaves to give their commentary. Today you feel they would do basically the exact opposite, interesting..

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                      This wouldn't apply to network media. It's the radio broadcasts that will be effected. There are an abundance of conservative talk radio and a relative dearth of liberal (aka progressive) talk radio (600 to 100, respectively). That's what this new position is intended to effect, the "lack of balance". It's like the government stepping in and declaring that there are too many Wal-Marts and not enough Targets and K-marts.

                      And the question remains: is a gentleman who sees the government seizure of all media in its country as an "incredible democratic revolution" the person who really needs to be in charge of what's "fair" and what's not in terms of public airways?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                        The real question to be answered that Gill is who is making/distributing the shows. I cant make a judgement with no information. On the surface it would seem to make sense that this is politics as usual, (dem pres and congress) but until we have more information about the breakdowns it is tough to say for sure either way.

                        An example, what if Clearcast is running 2/3's of the conservative shows on stations they own as a corporate "decree" whether they are profitable or not and they also refuse to run liberal shows on their stations? I'm not saying that is what is happening, but without more information it can't be discounted. There is really only what, 3-5 big media companies with a heavy presence in radio anymore, what if those companies only wanted to give one type of commentary and didnt care if it was profitable or not, they could almost consider it similarly to PAC money.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                          Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that conservative and liberal radio shows were both equally good at attacting audiences and making money. And suppose further that you got the leaders of 4 of the 5 big media companies to decree that only conservative radio shows would be on their station regardless of the money, because they just liked conservative radio that much. Do you know what would happen next? That 5th company would suddenly become the national leader in radio and grow to 2 or 3 times the size of the others.

                          The only reason to start restricting what kinds of politics could be on the radio would be if we ran out of radio bandwidth to license new stations. But as it is now, anybody with some capital could start up a new radio station and start broadcasting some liberal talk radio. And every once in awhile, they do. And they usually lose their shirts on the deal.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar

                            Originally posted by Morganan View Post
                            Sigh, one source of news? Let me see, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and newspapers somehow equaled one source of news?
                            The "mainstream media" tend to copy each other. You have to step outside of that to get unbiased reporting, or at least some balance from rival media.

                            BTW, the campaign finance laws make exceptions for large news organizations. You can cover just one party and not be busted for "contributions" or failure to report them. Or cover one party with respect while giving the other equal time and treating them like the tin foil hat crowd. And SCOTUS ruled that this is ok, that Freedom of the Press doesn't extend to small organizations backing candidates, just big ones like NBC et al.
                            Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                            snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                            Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                            Comment

                            Connect

                            Collapse

                            TeamSpeak 3 Server

                            Collapse

                            Advertisement

                            Collapse

                            Twitter Feed

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X