Should Sinclair media lose all media licensing for this?

#51
#51
BowlBrother85 said:
Sure... and quite honestly using the same buzzwords and themes is a lot smarter and much less obvious than reading a paragraph-long script word for word across dozens of affiliates nationwide. What Sinclair did was too easy to detect and actually really dumb.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that, just pointing out that this is nothing new or unusual.
 
#52
#52
BowlBrother85 said:
An edict of "must run, word for word commentary" by a station owner across all affiliates is something you would expect to see of state run media. This shouldn't happen in the United States. Viewers should feel their intelligence has been offended by such an obvious attempt at manipulation. However, whatever the station owner was trying to accomplish has fallen flat. It was too carefully scripted and transparent of an agenda.
Click to expand...

"This shouldn't happen in the US". So do you propose the government do something about it??
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#53
#53
So right now I’m less concerned with the fact they did it and wondering more why they felt they needed to.

Put your own bias aside and just read the statement. This part resonated with me.

A) But we’re concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country. The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media.

(B) More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories… stories that just aren’t true, without checking facts first.
Click to expand...

My guess is they’re calling out the runaway trend of reposting original articles based on unverifiable data, “anonymous sources”.

Both sides do it. But I’ve never seen it this bad that I can remember.

If you can’t verify the original story why post it and attach your name to it? I would think fundamental journalism principles would call that blatantly reckless frankly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#55
#55
NorthDallas40 said:
So right now I’m less concerned with the fact they did it and wondering more why they felt they needed to.

Put your own bias aside and just read the statement. This part resonated with me.



My guess is they’re calling out the runaway trend of reposting original articles based on unverifiable data, “anonymous sources”.

Both sides do it. But I’ve never seen it this bad that I can remember.

If you can’t verify the original story why post it and attach your name to it? I would think fundamental journalism principles would call that blatantly reckless frankly.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like the old media is trying to discredit and control the new media.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#57
#57
McDad said:
Looks to me like the old media is trying to discredit and control the new media.
Click to expand...

Look thru the videos Ras posted. Mass scripting is nothing new. And all the conglomerates do it.

The fact that the majority of left leaning MSM is screaming about this particular case tells me Sinclair, who they admit are conservative and donate to Repliblican candidates, has struck a cord.

They didn’t do it without a specific message in mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#62
#62
McDad said:
I think it is silly. Dont have a problem with them doing it or the content.
Click to expand...

I don't either. I don't see how it's any different than the publisher of the NYT making a statement.

To Our Readers, From the Publisher and Executive Editor - The New York Times

It's like the TV equivalent - instead of having the statement printed in every copy of the NY Times, it's read on every broadcast.

I didn't have a problem with the NYT making a statement that way I don't have a problem with Sinclair making a statement via it's anchors. This seems like drummed up outrage only because the left thinks it's part of some kind of Trump conspiracy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#66
#66
DancingOutlaw said:
I think Trump should create a Press Czar position to decide what media outlets can produce news for public consumption.
Click to expand...

I think Trump should do away with the WH press corps - remove access and simply issue press releases from time to time. Might just do wonders for their little temper tantrums and drive the press further into insanity and inanity. Nothing like telling a hypocrite you aren't as important as you thought you were.
 
#67
#67
lawgator1 said:
When an owner forces stations to read propaganda, word for word, we are in uncharted waters. Some sort of action is necessary to prevent it. Right or left.
Click to expand...

What are we talking about here? A business owner can't control the message of his business?

The government isn't the solution for every flaw in society. Not sure how having Trump's government regulate what news stations say is going to fix Trump's influence over the media.
 
#68
#68
AM64 said:
Gotta love this quote "Inside every Progressive is a Totalitarian screaming to get out."
Click to expand...

Here's a great John Derbyshire quote

"Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy".
 
#69
#69
n_huffhines said:
What are we talking about here? A business owner can't control the message of his business?

The government isn't the solution for every flaw in society. Not sure how having Trump's government regulate what news stations say is going to fix Trump's influence over the media.
Click to expand...

Sure they can, subject to FCC regulations, of course. The problem with Sinclair is their ownership is becoming too widespread in viewership since their purchase of Tribune Media and their 42 stations in such major markets as L.A. and New York. This major acquisition of local affiliates exceeds current FCC ownership limits. Sinclair has said that it's considering selling some of their stations to meet the FCC's national audience limit - but they haven't yet. Sinclair's increased (and very obvious) number of must read commentary pieces to their affiliates emphasizes the need for the enforcement of these regulations.

Trump and Republicans can complain about bias on cable and national news all they want... but that bias is currently being more than counter-balanced by the right wing bias we are seeing from local affiliates owned by Sinclair. In short, the accusation of MSM bias is a myth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#70
#70
BowlBrother85 said:
Sure they can, subject to FCC regulations, of course. The problem with Sinclair is their ownership is becoming too widespread in viewership since their purchase of Tribune Media and their 42 stations in such major markets as L.A. and New York. This major acquisition of local affiliates exceeds current FCC ownership limits. Sinclair has said that it's considering selling some of their stations to meet the FCC's national audience limit - but they haven't yet. Sinclair's increased (and very obvious) number of must read commentary pieces to their affiliates emphasizes the need for the enforcement of these regulations.

Trump and Republicans can complain about bias on cable and national news all they want... but that bias is currently being more than counter-balanced by the right wing bias we are seeing from local affiliates owned by Sinclair. In short, the accusation of MSM bias is a myth.
Click to expand...

Huh? Do you have some evidence of that?
 
#71
#71
BowlBrother85 said:
Sure they can, subject to FCC regulations, of course. The problem with Sinclair is their ownership is becoming too widespread in viewership since their purchase of Tribune Media and their 42 stations in such major markets as L.A. and New York. This major acquisition of local affiliates exceeds current FCC ownership limits. Sinclair has said that it's considering selling some of their stations to meet the FCC's national audience limit - but they haven't yet. Sinclair's increased (and very obvious) number of must read commentary pieces to their affiliates emphasizes the need for the enforcement of these regulations.

Trump and Republicans can complain about bias on cable and national news all they want... but that bias is currently being more than counter-balanced by the right wing bias we are seeing from local affiliates owned by Sinclair. In short, the accusation of MSM bias is a myth.
Click to expand...

Bias is totally real and it's everywhere.
 
#72
#72
n_huffhines said:
Bias is totally real and it's everywhere.
Click to expand...

...and it goes both ways. Currently, if you are watching a local news broadcast in the United States, you are much more likely to observe instances of right wing bias than you are left wing bias... thanks to Sinclair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#73
#73
BowlBrother85 said:
...and it goes both ways. Currently, if you are watching a local news broadcast in the United States, you are much more likely to observe instances of right wing bias than you are left wing bias... thanks to Sinclair.
Click to expand...

Care so share some evidence of that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#75
#75
Sinclair responds. Apparently this statement is tied to results from a research initiative they have been conducting. The memo is below. It begins with “For the record” so this obviously isn’t intended to be an internal memo.

Memo from Sinclair SVP Scott Livingston to Sinclair newsrooms on Monday:

"I know many of you and your stations are now in the media spotlight after the launch of our corporate news journalistic responsibility promotional campaign. There is a lot of noise out there about our company right now, and what is lacking in that analysis is something we constantly preach; context and perspective.

The critics are now upset about our well-researched journalistic initiative focused on fair and objective reporting. For the record, the stories we are referencing in this campaign are the unsubstantiated ones (i.e. fake/false) like "Pope Endorses Trump" which move quickly across social media and result in an ill-informed public. Some other false stories, like the false "Pizzagate" story, can result in dangerous consequences. We are focused on fact-based reporting. That's our commitment to our communities. That's the goal of these announcements: to reiterate our commitment to reporting facts in a pursuit of truth. A new Monmouth University Poll out today says Americans are concerned, in fact, 77 percent of the respondents believe "fake news" is reported at least occasionally in mainstream media. This is a concern that is shared by Democrats, Republicans and Independents. This poll underscores the importance of our journalistic responsibility effort. We hold ourselves to the highest standards of accuracy and fact checking.
Here's some context that our critics don't mention in their misleading, often defamatory stories about our thriving news operations:

· The critics don't talk about *your* journalism awards. They seem disinterested that in 2017 *YOU won* more than 400 awards, including 8 national awards for journalistic excellence.

· The critics don't talk about *your audience growth*: many of your news operations have gained audience consistently and steadily in recent years. We are very proud of this accomplishment and it's a story our critics ignore. The February 2018 ratings period was a good one for us with more than a third of our stations gaining market share vs. the previous year.

· The critics don't talk about the capital investments and the staffing additions Sinclair has made in its newsrooms: we have expanded news by 92 hours in 16 markets in the last two years and we have added 78 news positions since 2015 date.

· Recent critics never mention our innovations -- like Project Baltimore, Full Measure or Circa or other forward-thinking projects that could help us expand our audiences for decades to come.

· One thing the critics DO seem obsessed with is the roughly 8 minutes a week of clearly labelled commentary that Boris Epshteyn offers in our newscasts each week. The critics continue to say that his former affiliation with Republicans makes him a propagandist. But they never offer any perspective on Boris' appearances. They never mention that ABC News Anchor George Stephanopoulos ran Bill Clinton's Presidential campaign and served as a Senior Advisor to President Clinton for 4 years. Stephanopoulos now hosts an ABC political talk shows and co-anchors 10 hours of news a week for ABC. That is 10 hours of 'must run' content that all ABC affiliates must carry each week hosted by a former advisor to President Clinton. We have no problem with Mr. Stephanopoulos anchoring these newscasts, but think it is odd that Sinclair critics seem to express zero outrage over this. Critics never talk about Chris Matthews, who worked for prominent Washington Democrats, including President Carter, before becoming an NBC show host. Why don't the critics of Boris' at least offer this context? Why are they obsessed with the 8 minutes a week that Boris gets to offer clearly labelled commentary? Remember, no one is trying to hide Boris' past political affiliations. We label him as a former Trump advisor. We are fully transparent about Boris.

· Regarding 2016 Presidential Campaign Coverage: Media reports have mischaracterized Sinclair's coverage of the Clinton and Trump 2016 campaign saying that, "(the) Trump campaign made a deal with Sinclair for favorable coverage."

-- Three years ago, our national bureau in Washington D.C. began a weekly project called "Connect to Congress". Each week, when Congress is in session, we set up a camera in the Capitol Hill Rotundas and offer lawmakers a chance to speak directly to constituents in their districts, through our local stations. On many weeks, more than two dozen Democratic and Republican lawmakers participate in these direct interchanges with our stations in their respective districts. Some lawmakers choose not to participate—which is their option—but all lawmakers, regardless of party, are invited. In the spirit of this highly successful Sinclair project, we reached out to both the Trump and Clinton campaigns in the summer of 2016, offering both candidates—and their surrogates--- the chance to speak repeatedly, and directly, to local news viewers, in our Sinclair markets. The Trump campaign responded favorably to the opportunity and, as such, received more direct interaction with our viewers. The Clinton campaign, despite our repeated, documented attempts to arrange such interviews, participated at a much lower level; never once providing the candidate herself for an appearance on a Sinclair station.

-- The Chairman of the Ethics Committee for the Society of Professional Journalists reviewed the Sinclair outreach to both campaigns and stated, in part, in December 2016, "After hearing from Sinclair's representatives and viewing emails between the company and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's campaign, I don't believe the interview arrangements fell outside what would be considered ethical journalism."

Honestly, most of the Sinclair critics don't seem to do their own original reporting. Do you ever notice that a story written about Sinclair from a west coast publication will include a lot of the same talking points—often the same wording--- as a story written a week earlier on the east coast? These reporters aren't producing original journalism; they are aggregating often-flawed-reporting-content published by other media outlets, without fact checking it—or calling us to confirm any of it. By contrast, we have hundreds and hundreds of journalists in Sinclair, who go into the field each day, conduct their own original interviews --face-to-face---and create truly original content for our their local audiences. Your original reporting is our core strength. It's why we are growing and our critics are increasingly becoming obsolete. It's why surveys show news consumers trust you more than they trust the bloggers.

Local news is at the heart of Sinclair. Our agenda is to serve our communities by sharing relevant information to alert, protect and empower our audiences. That's our daily commitment. We live it and breathe it --- each and every day. Thanks for all of the hard work and commitment to our viewers. Our viewers appreciate it---and I do too!

Please make sure to share this message with your staff."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top