Stations told to air anti-Kerry film

[Lucern]

Magik, sorry didn't notice this. I gathered the time/content edit from a transcript of the News Hour with Jim Lehrer (which I actually saw - PBS). It was a little debate between the VP of Sinclair and a DNC representative. VP framed it as a program that would have to be under time/content edit by nature (not being filmed live). Furthermore, he was talking about the program being a proportion of Kerry, with a proportion of other material. I think that since he's responding to a documentary (nominally), the other portion would be brought in from the documentary. There's a lot of discretion in the hands of Sinclair with this, and it's their program. They weren't letting Kerry have a free say, at least not from that interview. That doesn't mean that they would necessarily abuse that, but it does give them the opportunity. It's all hypothetical since it's not happening though.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media...air_10-12.html

And thanks for the synopsis Groj. Let's get a counterpoint from the other side (not to say you were unfair mind you), and then bury this thread like investors buried Sinclair's stock market value [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Azred]

My advice right now would be to buy Sinclair stock before the price rises.

Not to disparage anything any Vietnam vet suffered, but Kerry's Vietnam activities are, at this point, merely a matter of curiousity and not anything important. He has had more impact on the nation as a Senator so any voter should decide to vote for him (or not) based on that record.
The same may be said for Bush. His Vietnam activities (or lack thereof) are irrelevant; his record as Governor and President should determine whether or not he receives someone's vote.

If the production value of feature in question is that low, then why would any sane programming manager decide to preempt regulargy scheduled broadcasts to air it? Political suicide is one thing, but economic suicide is something entirely different.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Azred: My advice right now would be to buy Sinclair stock before the price rises. Not to disparage anything any Vietnam vet suffered, but Kerry's Vietnam activities are, at this point, merely a matter of curiousity and not anything important. He has had more impact on the nation as a Senator so any voter should decide to vote for him (or not) based on that record. The same may be said for Bush. His Vietnam activities (or lack thereof) are irrelevant; his record as Governor and President should determine whether or not he receives someone's vote. If the production value of feature in question is that low, then why would any sane programming manager decide to preempt regulargy scheduled broadcasts to air it? Political suicide is one thing, but economic suicide is something entirely different.

Here Here Azred!!!!

[Cerek]

Originally posted by Lucern: And thanks for the synopsis Groj. Let's get a counterpoint from the other side (not to say you were unfair mind you), and then bury this thread like investors buried Sinclair's stock market value [img]smile.gif[/img]

Grojlach's synopsis sounded very fair and even-handed to me.

[ 10-25-2004, 03:52 AM: Message edited by: Cerek ]

[Lucern]

Agreed Cerek. I was interested in what they'd say in particular regarding Kerry's testimony prolonging the war. I'd still watch it if it was for free though, just to see it since I've heard so much background info.

Let the record show:

And with a splash of much-appreciated color, Cerek sealed it.