Comments for The Changing Media Policy in the Obama Administration »
Posted By JSilver 1 year ago in Political NewsPresident-elect Barack Obama will have a chance to dramatically remake the FCC. Robert McChesney discusses what's ahead.
Read Full Story at wbez.org »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 80
-
-
-
-
57%
tchef1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I read that they are planning to continue to use the direct e-mail system that they used during the campaign. That way people will get the whole message instead of just sound bites. In any event I think that the Obama white house will be much more transparent than what we have seen with the current administration
Reply -
-
Locky12Comment removed: Spammer, Abusive12 Replies
-
38%
4thchance1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama's first move will be to silence his opposition. He will start that process right away, by trying to shut down conservative talk radio. O'Reilly, Rush, Hannity, Levin etc...But, Obama will be proven to be the biggest hypocrite on the planet for doing so. After all, it's the liberal dems who are the out spoken fanatics for freedom of speech in this country. But, since the media has made Obama a rock star, then all of his followers will be very happy with Obama shutting down freedom of speech as longs as it's the "opposition" he shuts down. Good luck on that one Obama, go ahead and give it your best shot. It will destroy you. Obama will have some very powerful conservatives fighting him over it. Such as, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin etc. Those guys will publicly castrate Obama if he try's such a thing.
Reply
BTW..anyone who is not familiar with the Mark Levin show, his Radio broadcasts are nothing short of fantastic. He cuts through all the BS and isn't afraid to tell you how it REALLY IS!
Follow the link below to learn what radio station in your area carries the Mark Levin show. Mark will not disappoint you!
http://marklevinshow.com
You better hurry, because I beleive conservative talk radio days are about to come to a close in this country. Who hear is looking forward to a Cuba and Castro type Country!? I see it coming...-
67%
Lurch1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If by make Fox tell the truth and stop lying and calling it news you believe that will shut down O`Reilly, Rush, Hannity, Levin, etc, that is your opinion.
Reply
The fact is that you cons are just afraid of being forced to hear the truth in your own little fantasy world of shared ideology & party over country & humanity.
Fox News fought in court for the right to lie. The Fairness Doctrine is a legal fight to force the truth back into news. Gee, which side is American and which is communista? And which side is the Rabid Right on?-
33%
4thchance1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If fox news is all wrong, then please explain why Fox News receives the vast majority of cable news viewers. Are you saying that the vast majority of news viewers are dumb and stupid, while the vast minority (like you) are the smart ones. Ahahahahahhahahaah, you just proved yourself a idiot!
Reply
-
64%
Charlson1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've noticed the tread among the right wing that insist on the right to lie and only tell one side of an issue, the one that they think is right. They can't conceive that there might be more than one side to an issue and that not everything is black and white. Go ahead and live in your black and white world while the rest of us realizes that the world is in color and will pass you by.
Reply -
60%
simonsez1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Any attempt to control commentary will prove to be a slippery slope for this government to take on.
Reply
A better plan would be to do a good job of running the country, be honest when they say something, quit patronizing every segment of the population and neutralize criticism with positive actions.
The American people did not cause these problems ... 535 people in Washington DC are responsible.
We don't tax ... they do.
We don't run deficits ... they do.
We don't take money from lobbyists ... they do.
We don't make companies do stupid things ... they do.
Now they want to shut off criticism of the damage they have done. We (at least) should maintain the right to complain about the bastards. We are certainly having to pay for it ....-
78%
Lurch1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Any attempt to control commentary will prove to be a slippery slope for this government to take on.
Reply
We`ve been on that slope for eight years. Thank God that is over!
Now, we`re heading for what appears to be a time of intellectual debate by critical thinkers on both sides. In other words, we are finally going to hear some real debate and both sides of the argument if the Obama admin and the Congress and the FCC pass the Fairness Doctrine and enforce it.
Why any American would be afraid of hearing the truth is beyond me.-
Locky12Comment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
38%
simonsez1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Certainly since 2005, the left has continuously criticized Bush and Cheney, not only for their handling of the war, but for other efforts on their part to attempt to anticipate new attacks on our soil. The attacks against them have been continuous and merciless.
Reply
They have been demonized, hung in effigy, accused of profiteering, ignoring the Constitution, on and on and on ...
Would you have wanted the "fairness" doctrine in place during that period that would cause ALL commentary to present both sides?
Have we reached the point where we have to control criticism? Be careful what you wish for.-
-
TFLComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
-
-
38%
4thchance1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ACTUALLY THOUGH...
Reply
If the fairness doctrine is re-instated and it is actually worded to be FAIR...that would mean news sources such as CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, MSLSD and all their hundreds of affiliates around the country would then be forced to present both sides of the issues in their broadcast. I have to laugh here. NO WAY are CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS MSLSD and the likes of them going to agree to be fair in their one sided bias broadcasts. So, this entire thing is going to be very interesting to see how it all plays out. Seems the discussion right now is looking at conservative talk radio only, but a fairness doctrine would include ALL sources of Media, not just talk radio. I think this entire thing is going to go NO WHERE! -
-
0%
sanyi_oradea1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama is forming it's cabinet. Mistake NR 1 : Selection of a woman for secretary of state.
Reply
There is a war going on against a group of nations that are called Arabic nations.The only way out is, through negotiations, otherwise the USA will bleed to death economically just like the Soviet Union did in the war of Afghanistan. Those who maintain that a war is necessary to revitalize the economy are a bunch of idiots, but it was they who "ordered" the new president to select a woman. The Arabs, just like the Hasidic Jews, regard women unreliable, incompetent compared to man, untrustworthy, etc. etc. etc.
whose main work is home, clean, and children. Obama will not have a negotiator like Kissinger, Hillary Clinton will become a laughing joke in the Arab nations.
It is no time to fight for women's rights now, a president needs all the tools he can get to fight a political negotiations war against a group of nations whose way of life and believes are either still not understood by Americans, or deliberately "not understood" in order to "get the spoils of war", oil. Whoever ordered him to select Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, is America's worst enemy, a habitual gambler on the stack market,a cynical power monger, I suspect, a Jew.
There is someone, anyone noticed Ralph Nader ? But of course, he is just a subclass with Lebanese parents origins, who gave so much trouble to corporations when he was younger, Right ? How would the Arabs think of him ? Wasn't it him, the first to start a fight against pollution, and his work brought on the catalytic converters and other technologies for cars ? Wasn't it him that fought against nursing home abuses, some looked like Nazi concentration camps this time run by Jewish owners ? Why would he be a bad negotiator ? Because he is not part of the "mega millionaire's" establishment ?
This is all I had to say for now, I'm counting the mistakes, and if I am lucky, I might expose the one that "orders" the "house pet" around, if you know what I mean.-
80%
CRYMTYPHON1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That was fun .
Reply
Most of the people who hate Obama on Propeller, are from the U.S.
The expatriates and true foreigners think Obama is the best thing to happen for the US in years.
But you give us a refreshing exported blast of hate!
Let's take a look at it.
First off, Obama's a 'he', not an 'it', - but I am sure that was a language slip and not a deliberate insult.
Second, Americans know Hillary Clinton is tough, and even her domestic enemies would feel confident that she could wrap the various sheiks and warlords of the Mid-east around their sexist little x-chromosones.
Third, - Henry Kissinger is not an example of competence and toughness.
History shows him leaving too many fires for others to put out.
Fourth, - Ralph Nader is one of a set of clowns who keep jumping on stage and trying to grab the mike. Like Jesse Jackson or Steven Colbert, - that they run for president doesn't give them any gravity; it just makes them annoying.
Also, Nader is an idiot. That you would post him to a position of power merely because he is off mid-east decent and a man, instead of Hillary Clinton, - says what we thought:
They are kinda crazy over there.
All the more reason to get some tough sane lady to deal with them.-
0%
sanyi_oradea1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was a fan of Ralph Nader when you probably were not even born. Out of his own money, he set up undercover girls into nursing homes, to expose them. At the time in Brooklyn for example, there were the Bergman nursing homes, real horror stories, where the "inmates" were sleeping on the floor in their own "dirt", etc, etc,etc. It was Ralph Nader who forced the laws to be introduced for regular inspections, qualified aids, etc. Fighting against the Jewish powers at the time was not easy, but he won.
Reply
The second big fight as I remember, was against the corporate giants, the car manufacturers, who pulled every trick in their bags to stop him, and just like now you are saying things about him, so did they then, called him Don Qihote (I wish I knew how to spell it), that is trying to stop the wind mills... but he continued and won. Today cars have anti pollution devices on them, by government regulations. He did a couple of other things too. The only thing Hillary Clinton did... was to catch her husband in bed
with Monica you know whom, de facto... (which the media never disclosed). Good detective work, I guess.....-
100%
CRYMTYPHON1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ok, I will acknowledge you are sincere in your praise of Nader.
Reply
I will also grant, his ancient history is admirable .
But the last 8 years of American foreign policy disasters are too closely tied to Nadir.
His 'quixotic' 3rd party run in 2000 gave Bush the election.
Not only was he not apologetic, but did it again in 2008 . He is a
a hollow shell of ego; there is nothing left inside him but the tatters of his old resume.
He would never work with Obama; he would work against him.
As for Hillary Clinton, - she has been in politics all her life;
she has endured the hell of total conservative focus, - and won out.
She is not just a Senator; she is the symbol to this country of a leader who takes what is thrown at them and keeps on coming.
And Obama can work with her.
No one in the US trusts Nadir anymore. -
-
-
-
-
40%
Hhussk1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'll be more critical of Obama when he's actually in office. What surprises me at the moment is that he hasn't spoken to the press and detailed how he is going to turn things around. He's been strangely silent.
Reply
The people he is appointing to his cabinet are largely ex-clinton workers -- Hell, Hillary Clinton will be his Secretary of State -- I find this entirely strange because he stated that he didn't want to continue the politics of the last 20 years.
Anyhow, I'm amused to watch what happens, but slow to complain until he actually says something with substance. So far, I get the impression he's removing himself from the crisis.
Unfortunately Bush is now a lame duck. He has little to no power. Obama, has more clout with Congress at this point. It would help our country if he would talk to us.-
100%
CRYMTYPHON1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama held his first offical press conference after the election, on Nov 7th.
Reply
He has done other interviews; the longest was a long sit-down interview with 60 minutes.
A few months of this and he will have given more interviews than Bush did his whole 2 terms.
Granted, Obama is not yet president, and is being careful not to step on Bush's toes in the last few weeks. -
0%
sanyi_oradea1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As he said it, (and probably has better eyes then I thought), "The white house is going to have a new pet".... Him !
Reply
Unless this is exposed and stopped, (I wonder what hold they have on him), there are not going to be changes that should be. A president should not be a pet, not to the CIA, and not to the Jewish Mafia/ Israeli espionage services, no one should threaten him using the secret service to whisper to him when he is passing by, (or other opportune moments).etc. etc. etc. A president should not be afraid of his surroundings, should not be afraid of the white house doctors, should not be afraid of his own secret service, because if he is, he is going to became a second Ceausescu, who allowed everything and anything to be taken out of a country called Romania, in fact, ruining the country. Period. If that's the case, the United States has no president, and is under a secret occupation.-
agellerComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
60%
antibrainwasher1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Once again, the following is a bio of the dipgrunt Locky listens to every day, worships in fact. And you wonder why he posts such blithering crap, day after day
Reply
After using his pilonidal cyst - a congenital birth defect - to
avoid military service in the Vietnam War, Rush Limbaugh briefly worked for radio stations in Pittsburgh, PA and Kansas City, MO. Fired from both jobs, he worked as a wiener salesman for the KC Royals baseball franchise, eventually slithering back into the radio business.
In 1971 Limbaugh attended Southeastern Missouri University,
where, according to reports, he had a brief but heated affair
with Elliot Sanders. So gay is Limbaugh, guarantees Sanders,
that, "none of his marriages was ever consummated."
Many of Limbaugh's fans staunchly deny the man's alleged
homosexuality, and Limbaugh himself says the rumors are
politically motivated lies. However, one is forced to doubt
Limbaugh, who has a history of denying and balking at rumors
that are later revealed to be true. His pilonidal cyst, his
pseudonymous career in Pittsburgh radio, and his addiction to
Oxycontin are all facts which Limbaugh initially denied or
concealed. -
-
-
Locky12Comment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
-
Neutral
LumFan1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'll have to listen to this tomorrow. But I have the fortune of being able to listen to Robert McChesney on my local NPR station out of the University of Illinois, and he is very committed to media reform, especially the concentration of media in the hands of the likes of Clear Channel. I really think that the "Fairness Doctrine" is not coming back. But if real media reform is the likes of getting back to localism (local ownership of stations instead of allowing the conglomerates to dominate), then I am all for that. I'd prefer my local radio stations be able to service my local area with more local news (as opposed to what we have now).
Reply
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.