It's absolutely wrong, and Sinclair should be punished for this, no doubt about it.
If it were in theaters or Pay-per-view, I'd say OK. But aired on public airwaves? No, that is just wrong.
And to add insult to injury, the Right still insists that a chimera they refer to as The Liberal Media exists.
Uh, Dan Rather certainly thought so.
If anyone had done any research on John Kerry during the primaries they would have found he is the worst canidate for the Democrats to nominate. I spent two days with a web browser and I found all the dirt about him with no problem. Why would you nominate someone without doing any research on them? I watched a documentary on TV about Kerry that was made 10 years ago and that was enough for me to dislike him, his integrity, and his political views.
I would not allow it to be seen on public television. Farenheit 9/11 was played it theaters and they still had a problem with it. I disagree with it being played on public T.V.
All I have to say is what Kerry response has been in the past when the other side behaves like a 2 year old, "BRING, IT, ON!"
1Foot: We're familair with your dislike for Kerry. Is your dislaike germane to the ballot question?
OHO! these are the same people that we jumping down our throats when the dems were being supported by celebrities. Yes, it's all right to cheat, as long as it benefits Kerry. Guest_597cc said that celebrities should be entitled to their opinion and they should be allowed to present it to the public. What now, eh? Looks like the tables have turned, and those "celebrities" aren't with you anymore.
Kerry's integrity you say 1foot...hmmmm, What integrity has George Bush shown? This man couldn't spell the word without having some communication device up his suit jacket and some 6 year spelling it for him. This man is an embarrassment and the idea his supporters don't see it is incredible. The U.S. is allegedly the MOST powerful country in the world and it is headed by the most inept, dumbest, and the true definition of what is a goober...You have not idea how much others look at him and his supporters and wonder when will this nightmare end...
Correction: You have *no* idea...
Celui makes an excellent point. Why is one form of media endorsement, like say just about all of hollywood acceptable, when another sort is totally unacceptable and should be punished? If the only difference you can come up with is that one supported kerry and the other bush then you might want to rethink your stance on this.
And if we're to apply the same standard that the left applied to f911: why are you leftwing nuts trying to censor this expose on kerry? Don't you believe in first amendment rights? Have you even seen it? If not then how can you say it isn't all true?
Mojo, this is very scary indeed.
Actually after thinking about if for a while I think it's the movie makers choice if they want it to be shown public or in theater. I saw the documentary description and I don't think it bashes Kerry at all if you compare it to 'Farenheit 9/11' and how that documentary bashed Bush. John Kerry's speech that all US troops are baby killers was kind of un-patitic but that was then and this is now. Also, I don't think there's nothing wrong with John Kerry standing up and speaking against the atrocities. The entire Veit Nam war was a lie and was full of atrocities so that can justify him speaking against the war.
Choices 2, 4, and 5.
Excellent points Liberal_Democrat...
As if I care what a WHOP thinks. Elect your own gov't and don't worry about mine. We have saved your country's ass before so step off.
herz: A modicum of investigation shows these things for what they are ... more bitterness about his war opposition which is now spun into lies, like the Swift Boat fiasco.
Broadcasters have no obligation to air every vitriol-spun allegation by every crackpot.
Sinclair is *not* a news agency nor is it in charge of any News service. It is a flagrant political ploy.
It would have been contemptible in the preceding weeks. Two weeks before the election ...? Please! I think more of your intelligence than to believe that *you* believe this is anything else.
Looking forward to seeing it on tv. This is what happens when abc and cBS wanna rig the election. Sinclair should be commended for it's efforts to thwart the powerful liberal media.
sad but true: the people deserve its the government it has. period.
works for any country.
'herz: A modicum of investigation shows these things for what they are ... more bitterness about his war opposition which is now spun into lies, like the Swift Boat fiasco.'
The swift boat vets were never disproven, they were merely threatened with lawsuits from the kerry campaign until they shut their mouths. Sound like the actions of a man with nothing to hide? Did you know that kerry wrote his own after-action combat report for the incident? Interesting, although I doubt we'll ever get the truth out.
'Broadcasters have no obligation to air every vitriol-spun allegation by every crackpot.'
But no doubt if they were to air f911 free of charge there'd be no condmenation from the left.
'Sinclair is *not* a news agency nor is it in charge of any News service. It is a flagrant political ploy'
Like the moveon.org ads? But nobody seemed to have a problem with those free attack ads for kerry.
'It would have been contemptible in the preceding weeks. Two weeks before the election ...? Please! I think more of your intelligence than to believe that *you* believe this is anything else.'
Their motivations are not at issue here, wether or not they should be punished is. And as near as I can see they have the freedom to broadcast whatever the company wants.
And with all the coverage on the 'bush awol' nonstory I'd say this is a good start towards equity in reporting.
Simply put...Fair ...
herzog: Please, man! Develop some consistent principles!
You berate the Democrats for myriad actions; but instead of holding firm that these are wrong no matter who does it, you shift your principles to accept when your favored side does it, or worse.
Most debates I have with you devolve into this ...
ME: What the R people done is wrong.
YOU: Well, what about wht the D have done?!?
Don't you see the problem with that?
there is no problem with that, in the case that most of the time the argument against the R's are pretty pathetic, e.g. this ballot. I back herzog here. You people were dancing in the streets because of celebs proclaiming Dems, but now you complain cause we get some showbiz? give me a break. That's like saying there isn't a liberal media.
'You berate the Democrats for myriad actions; but instead of holding firm that these are wrong no matter who does it, you shift your principles to accept when your favored side does it, or worse.'
I don't think showing biased works on television is wrong. It's the choice of the ceo, and mostly whoever stands to gain or lose money based on ratings, ie the sponsors. The government should not get involved. If there is a large enough protest, as there was against the reagan thing, then they'll pull the show, not for any altruistic reasons but because it'll lose them money. This is how these things should work. The only alternative is government censorship, and that tends to work out badly.
And the reason I point out what democrats have done, which is usually far worse, is to point out the blatant hypocrisy I've seen on this site. For instance:
libs: isn't it great how hollywood has come out to support kerry? What a great country we live in.
then . . .
libs: isn't it terrible how this one show is biased against us? Hollywood shouldn't be allowed to show political bias. What kind of country is this?
See the problem here?
I think the problem is that you are assuming I am defending all Liberal actions.
But I *am* consistent.
I haven't been inconsistent either. Nowhere did I say a station should be punished for showing politically biased works, as many on this thread have claimed.
"Wrong because it undermines Journalism's objectivity"
The above statement is one of funniest things I've read on this site. Objectivity in Journalism ha ha!