CBS, NBC Pass on Bush Speech

NewsMax.com ^ | 11/08/01 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[weegee]

He may not have asked them to, but several stations ran online polls to see whether they shoud air the speech. All offered the same viewing option.

They are also cutting back on the amount of time spent on the national convention coverage in election years (and even then it is not equal).

This is why parties need to be able to spend unlimited finances buying air time. If the media opts out of covering the words of the sitting president at a crucial time in our history, then there must be other avenues available.

[Sueann]

Geeeee - pretty big opinion for somebody who just arrived at FR today - 11/8/01.

Take your stupid opinion and peddle it somewhere else. You obviously didn't vote for the President; and ... you are not supporting him now!

What the networks did tonight proves to me they have made their choice: they are with the terrorists. Since they have made that choice, I guess I don't need them either!! And ... you can tell them that for me.

[Dengar01]

Thank you for flaming me for my length of being a true FReeper. I'm glad you resorted to such a low. BTW you may not know this but I was FReeping my @ss off during the 2000 election. Just because I was a lurker doesn't qualify me as a newbie. I know several FReepers who have been on FR longer than I was (as posters) and they could gladly tell you that I was a lurker, so as you resort to low attacks, maybe you should get a life. And just because I watch a television show doesn't mean I'm an anarchist of the ACLU. You are sounding just as bad as the radical leftist groups, the only reason I changed from a lurker to a full fledged FReeper was because of 9/11... I could gladly tell you what went on here at FR while I was a lurker. Get with it.

[JD86]

Well said. And ditto.

[Penny1]

"I used to work at a newspaper, and I distinctly remember that they could care less if people complained as long as they kept their subscriptions. I hate to be a cynic, but surely TV stations would be even less concerned. "

Yes, but I believe you need both. When people call up the LA Times and say that because of a certain article or editorial they're cancelling their subscriptions....and they get hundreds of calls and cancellations about the same item in the paper....someone's probably going to notice and care. If they don't, well, they don't stay in business or do well in their business for very long....

After all, we only have to look as far as Bill Maher and Politically Incorrect to see that we can have an impact....

If ratings go down for TV stations, they need to know why. I do think you are doing a disservice to people by saying that their voice doesn't matter or that those news organizations couldn't care less what the audience thinks. If they have less and less of an audience, they really have to care or surrender their position in the business. Your cynicism is not helpful in this case.

There's a reason why the head of CNN started calling his reporters on the carpet for not providing balanced coverage--it's because people didn't JUST turn the channel, they said WHY they turned the channel. I was one of them...and I know that based on their ratings data (compared to other cable news channels) and this recent "mandate" that we can make a difference.

I really am annoyed with people who try to tell the American people that their voice doesn't matter. The only time the voice of the people doesn't matter is when they don't use their voices enough and when they don't follow through with action.

-penny

[LarryLied]

This is why parties need to be able to spend unlimited finances buying air time. If the media opts out of covering the words of the sitting president at a crucial time in our history, then there must be other avenues available.

EXCELLENT OBSERVATION! One which everyone needs to remember when McCrazy or someone else brings up campaign finance reform again. No one can refute what you just said.

[JD86]

Take it easy. You are protesting too much. Lots of us were lurkers before 9/11....and your post was a little pretensious....in my humble opinion...

[Penny1]

That would be so cool. Isn't this a sweeps week or something important to the tv types?

I believe we are in the middle of sweeps...that would be too cool if the speech pulled in higher ratings than the other shows....not that I'm holding my breath, but it would be nice.

-penny

[Hazzardgate]

Silas's downfall was perfect television for the times. Here's to Frank!!

[Sueann]

Probably, because the locals here in San Diego didn't show the President, except Channel 10 ABC. I'm surprised KUSI didn't show it, and neither did the PBS station.

[onyx]

Now that you've had your tantrum, Get Lost. You're not worth a further response.

[Libertina]

KOB TV, did carry the speech live. I guess that was a local decision
Same here in Puget Sound area. ALL stations carried the President's speech: abc, nbc, cbs... local decisions. (But I was lucky enough to watch FOX! :)

[Little John]

I sent an email complaint to the FCC asking that they revoke the licenses of CBS and NBC for failure to serve the public interest during wartime. www.FCC.Gov It can't hurt and will at least cost them a bit to reply to the FCC and hopefully all those who complain and ask for a respose.

[Vicki]

I really am annoyed with people who try to tell the American people that their voice doesn't matter. The only time the voice of the people doesn't matter is when they don't use their voices enough and when they don't follow through with action.

It annoys me to no end when family and friends tell me that it doesn't do any good to vote, write, fax or email your representatives.

Like you I try to tell them that if enough of them would get off their duffs and make an effort, we could change things. They are so wrapped up in their little worlds and they would rather complain than actually put forth the effort to do anything about it.

[calmseas]

What is "CBS" and "NBC?" The letters must mean something, I suppose.

[JD86]

LOL

[GeorgiaSuzy]

This checking to see how "new" somebody is to FReep is starting to bug me. Go on, folks, look at mine too. I also was lurking here and enjoyed very much reading the articles and the posts. I never felt the need to post anything myself before 9/11 because everyone pretty much said all the things that I would have said, too. I finally registered and began posting after 9/11 because I HAD to register in order to respond to something. I think a lot of people lurk and read a while before getting up the nerve to actually post. I am sure that you do not advocate that seniority and length of service on a job should mean more than the skill at which you do your job; does making comments about people being "newbies" mean that newbies should simply be seen and not heard? Just add to the "numbers" in our grass roots movement but never speak up about anything? Gee, what fun! I certainly wish that before people make these rather snotty comments about the "newbies", they would consider that everyone who takes the trouble to register and post here is another soldier in our grass roots conservative movement. If one of us "newbies" accidentally posts a *gasp* vanity post in the wrong place, perhaps you could kindly point it out instead of flaming. We FReepers seem to agree on many things, but we are also individuals who have different opinions, too. So what, as long as we agree on the important things? Or are there already enough grass-roots conservatives around that you don't need any more?

[pray4liberty]

I'm bloody steamed at WHYY (PBS Philadelphia), my tax dollars pay to keep them broadcasting and they didn't see fit to air the speech either.

Shame!

[rdf]

Thanks for the ping.

And for the kind words.

I thought this part of the speech was the best [you should know that I have no TV, and get my info from the internet, especially FR]

*******

This new enemy seeks to destroy our freedom and impose its views. We value life; the terrorists ruthlessly destroy it.

We value education; the terrorists do not believe women should be educated, or should have health care, or should leave their homes.

We value the right to speak our minds; for the terrorists, free expression can be grounds for execution.

We respect people of all faiths and welcome the free practice of religion; our enemy wants to dictate how to think and how to worship, even to their fellow Muslims.

This enemy tries to hide behind a peaceful faith. But those who celebrate the murder of innocent men, women and children have no religion, have no conscience and have no mercy.

We wage a war to save civilization itself.

We did not seek it, but we will fight it and we will prevail.

*********

I'd add that it is crucial that President Bush use these events to work for a restoration of our principles. To the extent that he did, and does, it is, to me, important whether the networks broadcast his words. I think they should, and I am angry that they did not.

You know how adamant I am about the life issue, and how I did not approve of the ESCR decision. Here is an opportunity to take the offensive on life; the speech itself points that way.

I hope and pray that Mr. Bush will become insistent on the connection between our defense of innocent life in the war, and our duty to defend it here.

It would almost be a miracle, but I'd like to dream of the day when he reversed his ESCR decision, citing his new found appreciation of the paramount importance of loving and securing the rights of human life, in every stage and form, including a due reverence for its bodily remains, no matter how tiny.

I think you'll like the next Keyes column on WND, by the way.

Best to you and all,

Richard F.

[Defender2]

Well what else could you expect from Communist Bull Sh*t(CBS) and Nothing But Communism(NBC)!!!! I'd actually would expect the same from All Bullsh*t Communism(ABC), Communists News Network(CNN), TASS Bull Sh*t(TBS), PRAVDA Bull Sh*t(PBS)!!!! Then there's Fairweather(which way is the wind blowing today) FOX....... Free Republic's the Best News Service BAR None!!!!:-)