The Show Must Go On [“... CBS sell-out of artistic freedom.”].

The Baltimore Sun ^ | November 6, 2003 | unknown

[johnny7]

IT'S NO TRIBUTE to the old trouper, Ronald Reagan, that CBS executives planning to broadcast a miniseries based on his life suddenly crumbled in the face of a little adversity. Nor could the former president who believed so strongly in the freedom to speak out in a democratic society be pleased by a self-censoring gambit that smacks so of political correctness.

[johnny7]

The commies are like rust... they work 24/7.

[LeftiesBinWhinin]

So the lefties think they know what the Gipper would have been thinking about this POS show?

...I don't think so.

[LakeLady]

"Nor could the former president who believed so strongly in the freedom to speak out in a democratic society be pleased by a self-censoring gambit that smacks so of political correctness."

Reagan supported our right to speak the TRUTH and/or our opinion. Not our right to misrepresent fiction as fact.

[randita]

Reagan supported our right to speak the TRUTH and/or our opinion. Not our right to misrepresent fiction as fact.

I doubt Reagan would have even been too concerned about the latter with the exception that he wouldn't have tolerated the government doing so, but what he would support are free market forces and choices. He would have applauded the grassroots action of millions of people who made the effort to express their displeasure over this venture.

No one censored CBS. They censored themselves.

It's so refreshing to see the left on the receiving side of the PC bunk for a change. I wish it were a more common occurence as it illustrates how hypocritical they are about freee speech..

[johnny7]

Regan was the first president I actively backed. His military and economic policies were like a breath of fresh air after the stench of the Carter.years. Next to Teddy R., he was the best president of the 20th century.

[IronJack]

IT'S NO TRIBUTE to the old trouper, Ronald Reagan, ...

No. Huh uh. In the topsy-turvy world of the Left, it is a tribute if it crucifies him. Of course, that only applies to vitriol directed against the Right. If one of THEIR people was similarly skewered, they would be howling like wolves with a toothache.

Once again, the Left is trying to use the Right's sense of morality against it. But there's nothing moral about supporting immorality, and this movie, consisting as it does of lies and innuendo, is as immoral as Alec Baldwin's bookie.

[LakeLady]

So true. Isn't it odd that when conservative sources of insensitivity, "mis-speak", inaccuracy or just plain stupidity try to apologize, correct or censor themselves, they are excoriated by the media for their blunder; but it's never suggested that they are trampling on their own right to free speech? Why is it then, that when lib CBS tries to correct an obviously poor judgement call on their part, they are accused by dummies of censorship?

[DustyMoment]

SeeBS' problem with 'The Reagans' is that Leslie Moonves commissioned a hit piece on Reagan and that's what he got. He failed to anticipate that the script would be leaked and that conservatives and admirers of Reagan would protest this fabricated hit piece posing as a docudrama. The GOP had NO involvement, to my knowledge, in the grassroots protest of the film.

The whole purpose of the film was to sully Reagan's reputation. Dems know that, to develop a film that portrays Clinton as a great and brilliant president (their goal), they must first sully the reputations of Reagan and G.W. Bush (that hit piece is likely in the works). As long as these two men enjoy reputations of honor, ethics and integrity, SeeBS can never get their film filled with "dramatic license" portraying the Clintons as the saviors of America.

The fact that SeeBS caved so quickly is proof positive that they knew what 'The Reagans' was and they got caught with their dirty hands in the cookie jar. Right now, this whole thing can't go away quickly enough for them.

[I still care]

Ah yes, the Baltimore Sun. Did they write an equivalent editorial when Dr. Laura's show was censored and taken off the air?

[Egon]

So....

If I have the urge to call someone a jerk, but at the last second, I decide better of it... does that mean that the ACLU will sue me for violating my own first amendment rights?

I'm so confused. Only Democrats with Turrett's syndrome are going to survive the new culture.

[Scannall]

Only the govenment can censor things. And would the author of this whine fest censor the average persons speech when they complain about this kind of BS? Or do we have to sit down, shut up and watch?

Here's the 1st amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

And are these not the same people that'll kick a 3rd grader out of school for praying over a sandwich, or over a test?

Dan

[Grampa Dave]

[FierceDraka]

Artifstic freedom, schmartistic schreedom - Bullshizzy. Anyone who thinks television is about art should be put in a straight-jacket and locked in a rubber room.

The television industry is about making MONEY, not art. Five minutes of watching the swill that the networks crap out will confirm that it is definitely not about art.