• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Unreal: Anti-Kerry Propaganda film to air commercial free on network television

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm speechless over this. Unfuckingbelievable

Anti-Kerry film to air in prime-time
Nation's largest TV chain orders all 62 stations to show movie without commercials next week.
October 11, 2004: 1:24 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner of the largest chain of television stations in the nation, plans to air a documentary that accuses Sen. John Kerry of betraying American prisoners during the Vietnam War, a newspaper reported Monday.

The network has ordered all 62 of its stations to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" without commercials in prime-time next week, the Washington Post said, just two weeks before the Nov. 2 election.

Sinclair's television group, which includes affiliates of all the major networks, reaches nearly a quarter of all U.S. television households, according to the company's Web site. But the affiliates owned by the major television networks reach a larger percentage of U.S. homes because they are in the largest markets.

A dozen of Sinclair's stations are in the critical swing states of Ohio, Florida, Iowa and Wisconsin.

The company made news in April when it ordered seven of its ABC-affiliated stations not to air a "Nightline" segment that featured a reading of the names of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq; a Sinclair executive called that broadcast "contrary to the public interest."

Calls to Sinclair by CNN/Money were not immediately returned Monday.

Media Matters for America, a liberal watchdog group, has written a letter to Sinclair asking the company to cancel reported plans to air the film between now and the Nov. 2 election, the group said in a statement.

"Sinclair's plan to air anti-Kerry propaganda before the election is an abuse of the public airwaves for what appears to be partisan political purposes," Media Matters CEO David Brock said in the letter.

The letter warned Sinclair that its plan could constitute a violation of broadcast regulations requiring equal time for political candidates, as well as the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, the group said.

Sinclair's top executives include members of the controlling Smith family, who have been strong financial supporters of President Bush's campaign, the Post said in its report.

Sinclair executives have given nearly $68,000 in political contributions, 97 percent of it going to Republicans, since the beginning of the year, according to the Los Angeles Times.

According to the report, "Stolen Honor" focuses on Kerry's antiwar testimony to Congress in 1971 and its effect on American POWs in Vietnam, and was produced independently of Sinclair.

The anti-Kerry film states that the senator's testimony hurt the American war effort and undercut morale among the troops.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/11/news/newsmakers/sinclair_kerry/index.htm?cnn=yes
 

Phoenix

Member
68K, that's it? Man they need to dig a little deeper in their pockets. Most major companies are giving hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. :D
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Mercury Fred said:
Sinclair executives have given nearly $68,000 in political contributions, 97 percent of it going to Republicans, since the beginning of the year, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Seriously, that's completely chump change. That might just be enough to air one political ad once on CNN.
 
I kept reading snippets about this thinking that it was something that was just getting over hyped by Media Matters. But damn.. they are actually gonna do that?

Sad.

Any idea on how factual this movie even is? I mean is it just straight propaganda? I don't out hope that it is fair and balanced because most everything related to Kerry's war time record has been horribly distorted to make it seem like a man who actually did serve is somehow not to be taken seriously against a guy who fucking dodged Vietnam left and right.

Plus almost all of Kerry's anti-war protest after he came, including the speech he gave to congress have all been taken out of context to spin in a way that puts him as some guy who comitted treason. Jesus christ....

And really.. why the fuck are we still talking about VIETNAM... I'd much rather talk about our current quagmire..

I need to vent.. CS:S let me touch you...
 

shoplifter

Member
Sinclair is the same company that pulled the Nightline name reading several months ago.

I'm lucky enough to have two Sinclair stations here in Columbus, and their nationally syndicated op-eds are so right leaning they'd make Limbaugh blush.

And yes, I already called. Just like last time, "This is an order on high, and we're just doing what we're told here at the station."
 

xsarien

daedsiluap
Misleading headline, it might air on a FOX affiliate in one area, an NBC affiliate in another, and ABC in yet another area. They also won't reach any of the larger markets, as those stations are owned by the actual networks.

But, you know, whatever. Hopefully this will set the "liberal media" strawman on fire, with no chance of it being swept into a dust pan to be rebuilt.
 

SKluck

Banned
Who the fuck cares? 25% of televisions my ass, you see the coverage map? That isn't shit.

I do find it weird this is going to air on many different types of channels like UPN/FOX/ABC/etc. I thought affiliates were controlled by the network.
 

ge-man

Member
scola said:
an argument in the case against media consolidation.

Quoted for emphasis. It's too bad this subject doesn't get more attention--the media executives have a lot room to distort or ignore certain viewpoints these days.
 

Goreomedy

Console Market Analyst
KingGondo said:
Nice, there's one in Oklahoma City. I guess they'll be receiving a phone call shortly...

Yup, Fox and WB. I might call for shits and giggles, but really, will it make a difference in our state? :D
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
while im no supporter of bush.. if Fahrenheit 9/11 aired(s) the night before elections.. like Moore wants... would any of you be pissed off ???
 

shoplifter

Member
^^^ if it was on broadcast TV, then I likely would.

SKluck said:
Who the fuck cares? 25% of televisions my ass, you see the coverage map? That isn't shit.


I think it's more important to look -where- much of their coverage is.

Swing states.
 
List of Companies that advertise with Sinclair Broadcasting
(courtesy nutmeg/Dailykos.com)

Halls Fruit Breezers
Sylvan Learning Centers
Kentucky Fried Chicken
ITT Tech *
Ford Motor Company
Yahoo DSL
Isuzu
Hardees
Taco Bell
Toyota
Warner Brothers *
Century 21
Prudential
Zigzagzone.com *
Cnn.com *
General Motors
Geico
Pepsi
Mountain Dew
Titan TV *
Iams
Miller Lite
Ringling Brothers
Oak Express
ABC Solutions
Kentucky Lottery
Florida Lottery
NFL
Lincoln Mercury
H&R Block
Pontiac

*indicates company has ads on several Sinclair websites
TOP TEN MUTUAL FUNDS HOLDING SINCLAIR STOCK

Morgan Stanley Special Value Fund,
Franklin Mutual Ser Fd-Mutual Shares
Janus Special Equity Fund
Harbor Small Cap Growth Fund
Invesco Sector Funds Inc-Invesco Leisure Funds
Morgan Stanley Inst Fd Tr-U.S. Small Cap Value Port
Van Kampen Small Cap Value Fund
FMI Focus Fd
American Skandia Tr-Gabelli Small-Cap Value Port
Harbor Small Cap Value Fund

http://www.boycottsinclairbroadcasting.com/pages/1/index.htm
http://www.sinclairwatch.org/

As someone on CNN said, "they don't even try to be fair and balanced"!
 

Catalyst

Banned
I don't really care for Kerry or Bush (although Bush gets my vote due to his morality...), no one should go out of their way to make someone else look soooo bad. It's so bad. Isn't Bush kind of going back on his own moral gauge if he supports this?
 

KingGondo

Banned
Goreomedy said:
Yup, Fox and WB. I might call for shits and giggles, but really, will it make a difference in our state? :D

Bush: ~65%

Kerry: ~30%

Our state is pathetic.

Seriously though, it won't matter in the Pres. election, but Coburn has a good chance of riding in on Bush's coattails. The less uninformed, partisan bullshit (from both sides) that gets through between now and the election increases Brad Carson's chances of getting elected.
 

KingGondo

Banned
Catalyst said:
I don't really care for Kerry or Bush (although Bush gets my vote due to his morality...), no one should go out of their way to make someone else look soooo bad. It's so bad. Isn't Bush kind of going back on his own moral gauge if he supports this?

Oh, don't worry. Bush won't "support it", just like he didn't "support" the Swifties or the expiration of the gun ban.
 

xsarien

daedsiluap
Catalyst said:
I don't really care for Kerry or Bush (although Bush gets my vote due to his morality...),

What morality? The one that started a war of choice, and garnered support by lying straight into the faces of the world? Or is it, perhaps, his view on stem cell research? Oh. oh, I know...it's his archaic view that global warming doesn't exist, and his evasion of the Kyoto treaty on the grounds that the bottom lines of major polluters is more important than saving the planet.

Or was it him wanting a law that has zero exceptions for abortions, no, no that's not it....

He's got all of the moral fiber of a cactus, but at least he didn't get a blowjob, right?
 

Phoenix

Member
ge-man said:
Quoted for emphasis. It's too bad this subject doesn't get more attention--the media executives have a lot room to distort or ignore certain viewpoints these days.

He who controls the media controls the people...

- Greg 1994 :)
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
SKluck said:
I do find it weird this is going to air on many different types of channels like UPN/FOX/ABC/etc. I thought affiliates were controlled by the network.
Umm, there's a reason they're called affiliates. Networks own and operate some stations, but most are affiliates that are independently owned. It's been that way since the dawn of commercial television when it took the same model from commercial radio.
 

Catalyst

Banned
xsarien said:
What morality? The one that started a war of choice, and garnered support by lying straight into the faces of the world? Or is it, perhaps, his view on stem cell research? Oh. oh, I know...it's his archaic view that global warming doesn't exist, and his evasion of the Kyoto treaty on the grounds that the bottom lines of major polluters is more important than saving the planet.

Or was it him wanting a law that has zero exceptions for abortions, no, no that's not it....

He's got all of the moral fiber of a cactus, but at least he didn't get a blowjob, right?
No need to stereotype, guy....so I'll just get to the point: I'm pro-family, and that matters to me above all else.

Although the Iraqi war doesn't concern me very much, I do believe in this war, I believe Bush's plans were just, although a bit misinforumed and misguided. I'll never say I believe in murder of innocent children and the killing of our troops either, but if you want to make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs. Ridding a few countries of terrorists is okay by me.

Also, you have to understand, as vague as this sounds, that there are compromises that come into play being president. That's why ALL presidents were hypocrites, or seemed to be.

If I had a choice, and if it were up to me, I would choose a different candidate for the job because neither Bush or Kerry are best suited. I'm just anti-abortion and pro-family.

Gotta love these discussions.

I love political discussions.
 

Lyte Edge

All I got for the Vernal Equinox was this stupid tag
I'm not the biggest fan of Kerry either, but there's no way in hell I'd vote for the other moron that's currently screwing up things in the White House. :p I'll take my chances with the guy that can potentially screw up less.
 

Ristamar

Member
Dan said:
Seriously, that's completely chump change. That might just be enough to air one political ad once on CNN.


True, it is chump change. But hey, the networks in Cali couldn't even air Ah-nuld's movies during his run for office. It's the principle of the matter.
 

Catalyst

Banned
xsarien said:
And what's so "pro-family" about Bush?
I see where this is going, so you'd better ready your defenses. He's against gay marriage. What does pro-family mean to YOU? I realize I'm on a mostly liberal messageboard, so I'm trying to watch myself here :). I like the gaming board, so don't pound me too hard, please, or I'll get myself a ban, lol.
 
Catalyst said:
I see where this is going, so you'd better ready your defenses. He's against gay marriage. What does pro-family mean to YOU? I realize I'm on a mostly liberal messageboard, so I'm trying to watch myself here :). I like the gaming board, so don't pound me too hard, please, or I'll get myself a ban, lol.

So, what is wrong with gay marriage? Denying us the right to form our own families?
 

shoplifter

Member
Ok...would you support extending the same benefits as married couples get to gay couples under a different name? Lots of folks have no problem with that so long as it's not called 'marriage'.

Why are so many people unable to see the difference between secular and religious marriage (not directed at you!)? To solve the problem you just remove every instance of 'marriage' from the lawbooks and replace it with civil unions.


There, problem solved. The fundies get to keep their 'sacred union of marriage' and everyone gets the benefits since 'marriages' are no longer recognized by the government. This is even better since there's a clear delineation between religious marriage and secular 'marriage'.
 
Catalyst said:
I see where this is going, so you'd better ready your defenses. He's against gay marriage. What does pro-family mean to YOU? I realize I'm on a mostly liberal messageboard, so I'm trying to watch myself here :). I like the gaming board, so don't pound me too hard, please, or I'll get myself a ban, lol.
I'm sorry, but I think you're confused. Wouldn't anti-gay marriage= anti-family? Two people want to commit to each other and form a household (read:family). Aren't efforts to stop this anti-family? Just curious.
 
Catalyst said:
I see where this is going, so you'd better ready your defenses. He's against gay marriage. What does pro-family mean to YOU? I realize I'm on a mostly liberal messageboard, so I'm trying to watch myself here :). I like the gaming board, so don't pound me too hard, please, or I'll get myself a ban, lol.

Yeah, because we know allowing gay marriage is going to threaten and attack the Heterosexual, Christian family. I mean, if gay people were allowed to get married, everyone would turn gay, and get a divorce, right? Why don't we make pregancey out of wedlock, divorce, and being a single parent crimes while we're at it. If anything, these all threaten the perfect Christian family more than gay marriage ever could.
 

xsarien

daedsiluap
Catalyst said:
I see where this is going, so you'd better ready your defenses. He's against gay marriage.

And what's wrong with gay marriage? Your answer must include explicit examples - that don't involve religion in any way, shape or form - that state in no uncertain terms why gay marriage should be banned at the federal level (in the Constitution); why a loving, caring, nurturing home made by two people of the same sex is worse than a two-gender home; how what two people do in the privacy of their own home affects your family.

For bonus points, explain observed homosexual behavior in animals, historical evidence of gay marriages that contradict Bush's claims that "it's always been this way," and how a judge is being an "activist" for striking down a law that, in their view, conflicts with state or federal constitutional statutes.

You have one hour. Please use a number two pencil, and no cheating (e.g., instapundit.com, newsmax.com, foxnews.com.)
 

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
shoplifter said:
Ok...would you support extending the same benefits as married couples get to gay couples under a different name? Lots of folks have no problem with that so long as it's not called 'marriage'.

Why are so many people unable to see the difference between secular and religious marriage (not directed at you!)? To solve the problem you just removed every instance of 'marriage' from the lawbooks and replace it with civil unions.

There, problem solved. The fundies get to keep their 'sacred union of marriage' and everyone gets the benefits.
B'b'b'b'b'but......the bible! Moral fabric of society! Sanctity of marriage! And other shit!

Just exactly how it always turns into. It's not up for discussion.
Typical republican response when asked to justify their reasoning. If you can even call it reasoning.
 

shoplifter

Member
Shit, while we're at it, why not make polygamy legal again? I have no problem with it, so long as only ONE partner is the official government recognized 'spouse' and they give up all rights to welfare, etc.

If someone has the means to support that kind of family, why not?
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Ristamar said:
True, it is chump change. But hey, the networks in Cali couldn't even air Ah-nuld's movies during his run for office. It's the principle of the matter.
I know, but because of how little those donations were, I don't think it was worthy of being bolded in the original post. Those donations are one of the least important details about this news.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom