Somebody wants FOX News and MSNBC off the air.

[jesseps]

Video

 

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV): "There's a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to FOX and to MSNBC: 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' It would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly, in their future."

 

(Courtesy of Real Clear Politics)

[LindbergMTL]

The more you pushed against something, the bigger it gets. He just gave them much more power now.

[MTLskyline]

Why is he against freedom of speech? I don't agree with anything on MSNBC, but I believe they have a right to voice their opinions, and I will always defend their right to do so. Similarly, I would expect the same courtesy from left-wingers toward Fox News.

[Cataclaw]

Yeah, this is silly.

 

Free speech is free speech, period. You can't just cancel Fox News or MSNBC.

 

Besides, something like 1% of Americans watch these cable news channels regularly. It's not like they're a huge influence on people's lives anyway.

[rosey12387]

While I disagree with it, I understand his position.

 

It goes beyond the fact that these two networks each have a clear biased opinion. It's that TV hosts on both networks manipulate facts and interpolate information from breaking news stories that mislead the public. Are their audiences hearing what they want to hear? Perhaps. But if people want to watch fiction there are plenty of shows on the major TV networks for that. (Granted, this happens on almost every news channel, the CBC included, but there has to be a limit to how far you can go before it gets ridiculous.)

 

Perhaps what's needed is regulation on news networks. If you state to be a news channel, i.e. non fiction, then your content should be as well (verifiable, quantifiable...).

[MtlMan]

While I disagree with it, I understand his position.

 

It goes beyond the fact that these two networks each have a clear biased opinion. It's that TV hosts on both networks manipulate facts and interpolate information from breaking news stories that mislead the public. Are their audiences hearing what they want to hear? Perhaps. But if people want to watch fiction there are plenty of shows on the major TV networks for that. (Granted, this happens on almost every news channel, the CBC included, but there has to be a limit to how far you can go before it gets ridiculous.)

 

Perhaps what's needed is regulation on news networks. If you state to be a news channel, i.e. non fiction, then your content should be as well (verifiable, quantifiable...).

 

 

Vouloir faire taire quelque chose pcq on ne l'aime pas (et dieu sait à quel point je déteste le genre de désinformation que fait FOX), c'est effectivement très stupide. Cette démarche serait démesurément exagérée. Ceci dit, je crois effectivement que ceux qui véhiculent des informations faussées, ou tendancieusement racistes, haineuses, etc. devraient répondre de leurs actes. Le free-speech ce n'est n'est pas le free-for-all! Manipuler l'opinion en caviardant des bribes d'infos, ou en présentant des préjugés et des allégations pour des faits avérés, c'est un jeu qui finit toujours par stimuler la haine, la violence. Rien de bon pour le débat public, ni pour la société, donc.

[Habsfan]

While I disagree with it, I understand his position.

 

It goes beyond the fact that these two networks each have a clear biased opinion. It's that TV hosts on both networks manipulate facts and interpolate information from breaking news stories that mislead the public. Are their audiences hearing what they want to hear? Perhaps. But if people want to watch fiction there are plenty of shows on the major TV networks for that. (Granted, this happens on almost every news channel, the CBC included, but there has to be a limit to how far you can go before it gets ridiculous.)

 

Perhaps what's needed is regulation on news networks. If you state to be a news channel, i.e. non fiction, then your content should be as well (verifiable, quantifiable...).

 

 

I completely agree with Rosey. He said it well. I also disagrtee with the idea of "banning" FOX and MSNBC, however, if they label themselves as "news" channels, then all the info that is circulated on those channels must be verifiable.

 

1/2 of the things that idiots like G. Beck and S. Hannity spew are totally false and are outright lies! The same could be said of a few people on MSNBC(they have a tendancy of exagerating to a point where it is no longer true) and the lies that both channels spew are only serving to divide the country and do absolutely nothing good to inform the citizens about the actual TRUTH. News should be objective (à la BBC and to a lesser degree CBS)... not subjective crap that we hear on these networks.

 

If these channels do not want to change the way they "report" the news, then they should not be allowed to be called "news" shows.

[MTLskyline]

What I think would be the best idea would be to divide these quasi-news channels in two.

 

Make a Fox News and MSNBC News channel, both of which are pure news or documentaries with no opinion/talk shows (although they can report whatever way they like as long as they are not giving opinion). Then make two opinion channels: Fox News Talk and MSNBC Talk. That's would be the political pundits' venue. This way, people know exactly what they're getting on each channel.

Modifié 18 novembre 2010 par MTLskyline

[MtlMan]

What I think would be the best idea would be to divide these quasi-news channels in two.

 

Make a Fox News and MSNBC News channel, both of which are pure news or documentaries with no opinion/talk shows (although they can report whatever way they like as long as they are not giving opinion). Then make two opinion channels: Fox News Talk and MSNBC Talk. That's would be the political pundits' venue. This way, people know exactly what they're getting on each channel.

 

Actually, I........... agree!

[pedepy]

there's nothing wrong with freedom of speech, but you can't let it get in the way of journalistic integrity.

 

i think what most people have a problem with is how these "news" networks let their bias skew how they do their reporting; if it's opinionated, it's not journalism anymore. problem is, the line has gotten awfully blurry in the past few years. that's what needs to be addressed in america (and, if nothing is done about it, soon enough right here in canada as well).