Media Meltdown and also Media Bias 101

[mtutiger]

4 hours ago, ewsieg said:

Even though you may argue ABC made the wrong decision (I agree in this case), it's tough to call this a f up.  If Trump/FCC don't say anything (which they shouldn't, it wasn't an issue the WH needed to be involved in, IMO) then ABC doesn't even have a decision to make which they know will piss off a subset of folks.  No way they wanted to do what they did, but for their shareholders, they can't be fighting the FCC.  

I certainly understand the logic that led them to do what they did, but the reality is that institutions that bend to this government also risk retaliation from the consumers as well. And there's a point where the cost outweighs whatever gain is made from giving in. No doubt this is what happened here.

The bigger lesson for institutions here is that giving into the demands of a tyrant doesn't make him go away... ABC settled a lawsuit they would have won for $15 million dollars, but ultimately that didn't make the threat go away. And in the process, they alienated wide swaths of the customer base.

Very few elites seem to understand this. Luckily for me, my Governor (Pritzker) is one of them. I hope they see what happened here and recalibrate and understand that this administration is there is much more to be gained by standing up to them versus folding like a cheap tent at the first sign of trouble

[mtutiger]

There ya go.

Make Sinclair the one to deprive the people of their entertainment choices.

Edited September 22 by mtutiger

[gehringer_2]

20 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

There ya go.

Make Sinclair the one to deprive the people of their entertainment choices.

yup - what they should have done in the first place.

[Screwball]

5 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

<snip>

We really need a nationwide initiative to improve and provide internet service for everyone. I think COVID made that clear, especially for rural areas and many inner cities. That's if we were serious about improving educational opportunities for everyone

 

I think it was March 2020, due to the COVID issue at the time, the school I taught at tried to go remote. High school age kids taking life courses, for a lack of a better word. We are in rural Ohio. Kids from 14 surrounding schools were bussed in daily. We couldn't go remote. Over half didn't have good enough internet, or none at all.

Another area of needs that has failed miserably. And FWIW, after spending the last 6 years teaching for a state college, our educational system is another epic cluster ****.

[romad1]

3 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Kimmel will be back Tuesday night.     This will be the highest rated show of his entire career.   The Standing O will be 10 minutes long.   

 

 

His show will be on record nightly on my DVR for the rest of this season.   I will linger luxuriantly over the stupid Liberty Mutual ads just to rub it in with the haters of free speech. 

[CMRivdogs]

18 minutes ago, Screwball said:

I think it was March 2020, due to the COVID issue at the time, the school I taught at tried to go remote. High school age kids taking life courses, for a lack of a better word. We are in rural Ohio. Kids from 14 surrounding schools were bussed in daily. We couldn't go remote. Over half didn't have good enough internet, or none at all.

Another area of needs that has failed miserably. And FWIW, after spending the last 6 years teaching for a state college, our educational system is another epic cluster ****.

My wife worked, still does some consulting for Detroit Public TV. In June of 2020 they got a call from one of the local school systems about using one of their channels for teaching. That led to a collaboration with the other Public Stations across the state (all but Detroit owned by Universities) to form the Michigan Learning Channel, offering basic reading, math and other programs on one of their over the air channels. They also hired coordinators to work with the local stations, schools, libraries with supplemental tools for teachers and parents. It's gotten rave reviews five years into the project (my wife is no longer involved), as well as receiving bipartisan funding from the Michigan Legislature. 
 

I agree the educational system is a mess. It's not just the system, a large portion the problem also lies with parents who expect teachers to be baby sitters as well.

[Screwball]

8 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

My wife worked, still does some consulting for Detroit Public TV. In June of 2020 they got a call from one of the local school systems about using one of their channels for teaching. That led to a collaboration with the other Public Stations across the state (all but Detroit owned by Universities) to form the Michigan Learning Channel, offering basic reading, math and other programs on one of their over the air channels. They also hired coordinators to work with the local stations, schools, libraries with supplemental tools for teachers and parents. It's gotten rave reviews five years into the project (my wife is no longer involved), as well as receiving bipartisan funding from the Michigan Legislature. 
 

I agree the educational system is a mess. It's not just the system, a large portion the problem also lies with parents who expect teachers to be baby sitters as well.

To the first paragraph; so cool, and good on all them. We don't have the ability to do that. Our local TV stations are at least 50 miles away. You can get some over the air, but not all. 

Part of the problem with getting internet to everyone is it changes all the time. I'm on my third supplier in the last 25 years. I just went fiber optic this spring. I waited over a year, and I'm in town. It replaced the old coax type stuff. It can only grow so fast, and then there is the cost. Are you going to run 5 miles of line or cable to supply 10 people? Probably not. All about numbers.

The bad part of teaching is the kids they send us. It all starts at home. 

[gehringer_2]

3 minutes ago, Screwball said:

It replaced the old coax type stuff. It can only grow so fast, and then there is the cost. Are you going to run 5 miles of line or cable to supply 10 people? Probably not. All about numbers.

If they have electricity that means the road and the poles are already there so it's not that expensive. It's just the political will to admit that not everything paid for by taxes is bad.

[Screwball]

  

56 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

If they have electricity that means the road and the poles are already there so it's not that expensive. It's just the political will to admit that not everything paid for by taxes is bad.

I don't think so.

It goes back to the "last mile" stuff. Who owns the infrastructure. In our case, the old coax lines used the power poles, but that doesn't happen all the time around here anymore (and a lot of other places). As the fiber people started to compete against the old coax people, they ran most of the cable underground. Not only long runs down streets, but from the street to the house. The digging/boring machines are pretty neat.

One guy I know who worked in the industry told me they couldn't get fiber to me (few years ago) is because of rivers, creeks, and railroads. Which means no power poles are used to cross them. Don't know, but guessing, regulations to keep the big players in control. Or cost. Maybe more accurate; want to run your cable - bend over.

As this technology progresses, it will change once again. They know that, the next big thing is coming. I remember the days when there was a wire coming into your house, to a phone with a wire hooked to a handset so you could talk on a phone. Once the technology gets good enough, we won't need the wires or fiber for our internet either. I know, you can do that now, but it's not common.

But, even if you go WW (trademark; worldwide wireless) someone and something are connecting everyone, so it goes back to the first mile. Who designed it - who built it - and who paid for it. After that, everyone else are poachers.

Edited September 23 by Screwball

[Motor City Sonics]

2 hours ago, mtutiger said:

There ya go.

Make Sinclair the one to deprive the people of their entertainment choices.

Oh, so the old farts that watch Sinclair won't get their Kimmel.       The people who want to find it will find it.  

[gehringer_2]

5 hours ago, Screwball said:

  

I don't think so.

It goes back to the "last mile" stuff. Who owns the infrastructure. In our case, the old coax lines used the power poles, but that doesn't happen all the time around here anymore (and a lot of other places). As the fiber people started to compete against the old coax people, they ran most of the cable underground. Not only long runs down streets, but from the street to the house. The digging/boring machines are pretty neat.

One guy I know who worked in the industry told me they couldn't get fiber to me (few years ago) is because of rivers, creeks, and railroads. Which means no power poles are used to cross them. Don't know, but guessing, regulations to keep the big players in control. Or cost. Maybe more accurate; want to run your cable - bend over.

As this technology progresses, it will change once again. They know that, the next big thing is coming. I remember the days when there was a wire coming into your house, to a phone with a wire hooked to a handset so you could talk on a phone. Once the technology gets good enough, we won't need the wires or fiber for our internet either. I know, you can do that now, but it's not common.

But, even if you go WW (trademark; worldwide wireless) someone and something are connecting everyone, so it goes back to the first mile. Who designed it - who built it - and who paid for it. After that, everyone else are poachers.

Fiber in town here is mixed underground/above ground. These hurdles are not technical or even cost. Last mile/first mile,  it goes back to the lack of a mandate to operate as a public utility or in the public interest - again - all bad politics and screwed up government. Somebody once wrote: "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Someone did that for us once. Everyday it's more obvious that that once new gov has pretty much lost any connection to its original charter.

It's incredible really that we sit here in the most technically advanced and richest country in the history of the world and we can't even do the simplest **** for ourselves anymore.

Edited September 23 by gehringer_2

[romad1]

Why is this coming out now?  

Elon Musk’s Father, Errol Musk, Accused of Child Sexual Abuse - The New York Times

[chasfh]

12 hours ago, Screwball said:

Part of the problem with getting internet to everyone is it changes all the time. I'm on my third supplier in the last 25 years. I just went fiber optic this spring. I waited over a year, and I'm in town. It replaced the old coax type stuff. It can only grow so fast, and then there is the cost. Are you going to run 5 miles of line or cable to supply 10 people? Probably not. All about numbers.

I assume this is an exaggeration, but it does contain a pretty solid argument for the position that government, not the marketplace, should manage the distribution of essential utilities. That's a big part of what tax money, especially on the state and local side, should be used for. Consider how long it took to get electrification to the Appalachians. 

[Archie]

17 hours ago, mtutiger said:

There ya go.

Make Sinclair the one to deprive the people of their entertainment choices.

Were you guys in the same uproar when Rosanne Barr was removed from her TV show for her views?  How about when Donald Trump when he was removed from Social Media over his views?  Kimmel has been wronged because you agree with what he said?

[oblong]

Welcome to last week's discussions.

[romad1]

Amazing to describe insurrection as 'views'

[CMRivdogs]

By the time Roseanne was pulled off her show she had become a certified nut case. Anyone remember her disrespectful version of the National Anthem (convince me that wasn't planned in advance.) Did the obscene ball grabbing bit in public. I'm pretty sure she also made life difficult for show producers and the network.

Prove me wrong 

[romad1]

Just now, CMRivdogs said:

By the time Roseanne was pulled off her show she had become a certified nut case. Anyone remember her disrespectful version of the National Anthem (convince me that wasn't planned in advance.) Did the obscene ball grabbing bit in public. I'm pretty sure she also made life difficult for show producers and the network.

Prove me wrong 

Surprisingly anti-semitic for a person whose grandparents died in the holocaust.  

[gehringer_2]

33 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

By the time Roseanne was pulled off her show she had become a certified nut case. Anyone remember her disrespectful version of the National Anthem (convince me that wasn't planned in advance.) Did the obscene ball grabbing bit in public. I'm pretty sure she also made life difficult for show producers and the network.

Prove me wrong 

A lot of the time she was trying to be funny or satirical but she had really lost the handle on where the edge of the cliff was. 

[pfife]

1 hour ago, Archie said:

Were you guys in the same uproar when Rosanne Barr was removed from her TV show for her views?  How about when Donald Trump when he was removed from Social Media over his views?  Kimmel has been wronged because you agree with what he said?

Archief did you miss the point as much then as you do now?

[Mr.TaterSalad]

26 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Did Biden or his appointees pressure the companies to do any of that?

THAT'S the difference.

Carr and Trump have been behind this, with enough plausible deniability for you to come back and say "nuh uh."

The other key difference between Jimmy Kimmel and Donald Trump is that to my knowledge, Jimmy Kimmel did not insight violence. Nor did Jimmy Kimmel attempt a violent coup d'etat to stay in power in an elected, public office on January 6th. Nor did Jimmy Kimmel violet any oath of office to uphold the Constitution. Nor did Jimmy Kimmel attempt to appoint or support appointing fake Electors in a scheme to thwart the Electoral Count Act. Nor did Jimmy Kimmel encourage people to go to the US Capitol building to physically try and stop the electoral vote process from occurring.
 

Trump's attempts to insight violence and his attempts at a coup d'etat to stay in power were primary reasons he was canceled off of social media I do believe. I believe his bans on Facebook and Twitter came after January 6th's attempted insurrection and coup d'etat, did they not?

Edited September 23 by Mr.TaterSalad

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, Archie said:

Were you guys in the same uproar when Rosanne Barr was removed from her TV show for her views?  How about when Donald Trump when he was removed from Social Media over his views?  Kimmel has been wronged because you agree with what he said?

I forget—which FCC commissioner was it who publicly called for ABC to remove Roseanne from the show?

[chasfh]

20 hours ago, mtutiger said:

There ya go.

Make Sinclair the one to deprive the people of their entertainment choices.

It's worth remembering that Sinclair and Nexstar cover only small fraction of ABC's potential nationwide audience, and that most of that audience reside in small markets. They have 56 of ABC affiliates in the 210 markets, but only 14 of them are in Top 50 markets, covering 8.6% of US TV households; while 14 more are in markets 51-100 covering 3.4% of US TV HH; and the remaining 28 are in markets 101-210 covering 1.2% of US TV HH.

So, 56 of 210 markets sounds like a lot, and it's not nothing, but grand total, the "ban" covers only about 13.3% of US TV HHs, which is fewer than the number of TV households in the New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago DMAs combined.

It's because Sinclair and Nexstar focus on affiliates in small markets, many of those in deep ruby red areas, populated by people who probably didn't watch much Kimmel—or other late night talk shows—in the first place.

So in the final analysis, all this posturing by the companies is for the benefit of an audience of one, and by extension, for both the minions who work for him and the red hats who idolize him.

[romad1]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

It's worth remembering that Sinclair and Nexstar cover only small fraction of ABC's potential nationwide audience, and that most of that audience reside in small markets. They have 56 of ABC affiliates in the 210 markets, but only 14 of them are in Top 50 markets, covering 8.6% of US TV households; while 14 more are in markets 51-100 covering 3.4% of US TV HH; and the remaining 28 are in markets 101-210 covering 1.2% of US TV HH.

So, 56 of 210 markets sounds like a lot, and it's not nothing, but grand total, the "ban" covers only about 13.3% of US TV HHs, which is fewer than the number of TV households in the New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago DMAs combined.

It's because Sinclair and Nexstar focus on affiliates in small markets, many of those in deep ruby red areas, populated by people who probably didn't watch much Kimmel—or other late night talk shows—in the first place.

So in the final analysis, all this posturing by the companies is for the benefit of an audience of one, and by extension, for both the minions who work for him and the red hats who idolize him.

Sinclair has the Washington DC ABC station which means they are serving their very angry customers by denying them the 1st Amendment.  

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

It's worth remembering that Sinclair and Nexstar cover only small fraction of ABC's potential nationwide audience, and that most of that audience reside in small markets. They have 56 of ABC affiliates in the 210 markets, but only 14 of them are in Top 50 markets, covering 8.6% of US TV households; while 14 more are in markets 51-100 covering 3.4% of US TV HH; and the remaining 28 are in markets 101-210 covering 1.2% of US TV HH.

So, 56 of 210 markets sounds like a lot, and it's not nothing, but grand total, the "ban" covers only about 13.3% of US TV HHs, which is fewer than the number of TV households in the New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago DMAs combined.

It's because Sinclair and Nexstar focus on affiliates in small markets, many of those in deep ruby red areas, populated by people who probably didn't watch much Kimmel—or other late night talk shows—in the first place.

So in the final analysis, all this posturing by the companies is for the benefit of an audience of one, and by extension, for both the minions who work for him and the red hats who idolize him.

Nexstar is in the process of purchasing another 56 or so stations from TENGA Broadcasting many of them ABC affiliates. 
Flood the FCC with letters requesting they do not approve this merger as it waters down the competition in the market