ABC and NBC wont run Anti-Obamacare Ad

George said:
NRA has said a number of times the print & broadcast media have rejected thier ads while running anti 2nd Admendment groups ads for free.
Click to expand...


If those ads are the same ones 5.56 runs here I can understand why, its called broadcasting standards and given that much of the NRA's "advertising" is based on half truths (I am being generous here), innuendo and scaremongering to run their advertisements would open them up to all sorts of legal action.

I haven't seen the "Anti-Obamacare" advert but I suspect that major media outlets have looked at it and decided that to run it would expose them legally because in the end all media would run bin Ladens messages if the thought they could get away with it and make money at the same time.
 
Rob Henderson said:
You said the same thing about people bashing FOX news, and so I said the same about liberal media. Because it's just as bad on BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN. Liberals bash conservative networks, and conservatives bash liberal networks. Neither side is innocent.

Chukpike, you're not understanding what I'm asking from you. You said "these companies" which was BLATANTLY referring to major news television networks, as that was the topic we were discussing. I asked you for a statement from someone representing a major news television network who said anything negative about another major news television network, and you either could not, nor would not give me the appropriate sources. You have FAILED to comply with the rules.




Semantics are a *****, aren't they?
Click to expand...


Then report this to the moderators. As anyone can read the 3rd web source I supplied is CBS.

Quit trying to move the subject away from the refusal of NBC and ABC to run the ads.

You want to defend them, then show us the reasons why they refused the ads.

If the ads violated FCC regulations fine don't show them.(show us the problem).
If they violate network policy, show us the policy.
If it is just because as you say, all networks are biased, then admit it and move on.

Just beating a dead horse to detract from the thread is wasting everyones time and doesn't move the discussion forward.
 
MontyB said:
If those ads are the same ones 5.56 runs here I can understand why, its called broadcasting standards and given that much of the NRA's "advertising" is based on half truths (I am being generous here), innuendo and scaremongering to run their advertisements would open them up to all sorts of legal action.
Click to expand...
The NRA knows that the Lib Media is going to check the NRA's facts, while not checking the other way. I don't see the "half truths & innuendos" on thier part vs the blatant lies told by the antis. Then you have the Media, say, discussing semi auto Assault Weopans while running video of machine guns hosing a target.
 
The Media would run ads for the devil himself if there was a dollar to be made. To me the very fact that they have refused to run these ads says that they have litigation concerns, as that is about the only thing that will stop them.
 
Another question.
A lot of folks here hiss when they hear socialism.
Most TV and radio stations are privately owned. In other words, it's private property. Shouldn't they have the right to run what they want to (under the constraints of law) and not air what they don't want to? What if you had a radio or TV company and you wanted to run 2nd Ammendment advertisements but the law forced you to also run anti-2nd Ammendment advertisements if you did so? Wouldn't you be screaming "socialism" and whining about private property and individual rights?
I have a pretty good feeling that would be the reaction.
Doing this the way of the rugged individualist, the solution would be for you to create your own TV or radio company, buy a channel frequency and then broadcast what you want on it.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
Another question.
A lot of folks here hiss when they hear socialism.
Most TV and radio stations are privately owned. In other words, it's private property. Shouldn't they have the right to run what they want to (under the constraints of law) and not air what they don't want to? What if you had a radio or TV company and you wanted to run 2nd Ammendment advertisements but the law forced you to also run anti-2nd Ammendment advertisements if you did so? Wouldn't you be screaming "socialism" and whining about private property and individual rights?
I have a pretty good feeling that would be the reaction.
Doing this the way of the rugged individualist, the solution would be for you to create your own TV or radio company, buy a channel frequency and then broadcast what you want on it.
Click to expand...

The building and equipment the stations have they own, they do not buy the frequencies they are licensed to operate at. The airwaves are public property in the US.

A little to complex to explain here as it does not pertain to the topic. In a short lesson companies can not buy frequencies in the United States. They are considered property of the people. They are administrated by the FCC and can only be leased.

The government does not own the airwaves like in most countries. In the US the 2nd Amendment makes it hard for the government to do hardly anymore than make sure companies transmit on their leased frequencies.
 
True but that's very much like how one may have private property (their home for instance) but it exists on United States sovereign territory.
Within constraints of the law, you can do just about whatever you want with it. This includes putting political endorsement flags on your lawn. You are not required to put up the flag or sign of every Presidential candidate during election season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top