PDA

View Full Version : Sinclair Defends Iraq War Dead Against ABC



Nightstalker
04-30-2004, 07:16 PM
Friday, April 30, 2004 3:15 p.m. EDT
Sinclair Defends Iraq War Dead Against ABC's Propagandizing

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/4/30/152035.shtml

In the face of blistering criticism from the liberal media, Sinclair broadcasting courageously refuses to back down from its decision not to carry ABC's "Nightline," which will air the names and photos of soldiers who have been killed in combat in Iraq.

The boycott will affect eight ABC-affiliated Sinclair stations.

Said Sinclair general counsel Barry Faber, "We find it to be contrary to the public interest."

At issue is Friday's "Nightline," which will consist entirely of Ted Koppel reading aloud the names of U.S. servicemen and women killed in action in Iraq, a program that Sinclair and others charge is using the deaths of Americans serving in Iraq for purely political purposes.

In a statement Sinclair Broadcasting charged: "Despite the denials by a spokeswoman for the show, the action appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq.

"We do not believe such political statements should be disguised as news content. As a result, we have decided to preempt the broadcast of 'Nightline' this Friday on each of our stations which air ABC programming."

ABC, however, claims that the broadcast is "Nightline's" tribute to America's fallen soldiers, which simply seeks to honor those who have laid down their lives for this country.

As NewsMax.com reported in our article Sinclair, The Next Fox, 'Fair and Balanced', the Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBG), the nation's largest independent group owner of stations, according to Broadcasting & Cable, strives, like Fox News, to be scrupulously fair and balanced.

It has earned the scorn of the dominant liberal elitist mainstream media where left-wing, anti-Bush bias is the standard fare.

Sinclair's refusal to remain silent in the face of ABC's apparent exploitation of America's Iraq war dead reflects credit on the company, as opposed to Koppel and "Nightline," which may view our war dead as fodder for their anti-war bias.

In fact, Fox News itself asked Koppel for comment, and he told them he didn't have time to appear but he did have time to go on liberal "Air America" radio with Al Franken to talk about mistakes the Bush administration has made in the war in Iraq.

The Media Research Center's L. Brent Bozell said that ABC can do whatever it wants with the program, but thinks ABC has been more anti-war than other stations, and says "Sinclair did the right thing by refusing to be a part of an editorial" by Ted Koppel, who will read the names of the war dead, but will not say anything about what they died for.

cheesemouse
04-30-2004, 08:09 PM
[ QUOTE ]
strives, like Fox News, to be scrupulously fair and balanced.

<hr /></blockquote>

In case you haven't figured this out yet the 'fair and balanced' thing is an inside the beltway joke, it's an in your face joke ment to mean just the opposite..Dahhhhhhh....I guess some people will believe anything......FAIR AND BALANCED.......BAHHHHAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAA...man, that cracks me up.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Nightstalker
04-30-2004, 08:12 PM
Thanks, but I know about that little joke. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

I am glad that you enjoyed that.

Qtec
04-30-2004, 09:21 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The boycott will affect eight ABC-affiliated Sinclair stations.

Said Sinclair general counsel Barry Faber, "We find it to be contrary to the public interest."
<hr /></blockquote>

Who says they have the right to decide what is in the public interest! If you dont want to watch, dont watch.

Q

eg8r
04-30-2004, 10:45 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Who says they have the right to decide what is in the public interest! If you dont want to watch, dont watch. <hr /></blockquote> I think because of the simple fact that they are free to broadcast whatever their hearts desire so long as to not step on the toes of the horrible FCC. However they sugar coat it does not matter it is their call. Would you have rather heard them say, we think the reading of the names is stupid and we choose to air something else? Would that be easier on your ears?

eg8r

Ross
05-01-2004, 06:40 AM
So, say some pointy-head liberal station owner was given a license to be the sole broadcaster of Fox Network in your city by your US government. He then decides to block the airing of Fox shows that he personally deems to be politically motivated to help the Republicans, say Bill O'Reilly's No Spin Zone. You wouldn't have a problem with that?

Personally, I don't want my TV programming to be censored based on the political whims of any numbskull local station owner, whether he/she is liberal or conservative.

Nightstalker
05-01-2004, 08:08 AM
Well what do you call what CNN and the other major news networks do when they are just reporting how awful things are and how many soldiers are dying in Iraq every day? No, there is no censorship there at all right? They report everything regardless of partisan influences. Yeah, tell us another one.

Wally_in_Cincy
05-01-2004, 08:23 AM
Although Sinclair has the absolute right to do this I think it borders on censorship.

Hannity's take on this yesterday was this: the producer of this show said he was inspired by the Life magazine in 1969 that published the photos of all the soldiers that died that week in Nam. That issue was blatantly anti-war and it added fuel to the anti-war fire that was blazing at that time.

So on the surface the reading of the names doesn't seem so bad, but you have to look at the motivation.

Hannity interviewed Koppel yesterday. He asked him if he was going to read the names of all the 9/11 victims too. Koppel said ABC covered live the reading of the names on 9/11/2002.

eg8r
05-01-2004, 10:14 AM
[ QUOTE ]
So, say some pointy-head liberal station owner was given a license to be the sole broadcaster of Fox Network in your city by your US government. He then decides to block the airing of Fox shows that he personally deems to be politically motivated to help the Republicans, say Bill O'Reilly's No Spin Zone. You wouldn't have a problem with that?
<hr /></blockquote> Bad choice, I don't like Bill O'Reilly. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif It is their network, and I don't think the government should be allowed to decide what is going to be broadcast (albeit I think some indecency laws should apply eventhough that is a bit contradictory).

If a network is broadcasting something I don't want to watch, then I don't watch it. Life is full of choices.

eg8r