While Fox News Racks Up Ratings Victories, MSNBC Primetime Show Hits Rock Bottom

[Embers84]

Dasien doesn't understand anything about the media, parroting his right wing myth of a "Liberal Media". He thinks just because the station says NBC, CBS, ABC it is left wing, since the right wingers he listens to tells him that.

NBC, CBS, ABC does NOT control all the content and programming on all it's stations. The Media groups that own the ABC, NBC, CBS affiliates control what is shown on their stations, and those owners are right wing conservatives. Just like the right wingers that own all the radio stations with conservative talk radio. The conservatives that own the radio stations aren't pushing "Liberal Talk Radio", just like the conservatives that own the TV media groups aren't pushing "Local Liberal News".

If they don't want to broadcast a certain NBC program, they will replace it with alternate programming for it's viewers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_affiliate

When right wing broadcast companies that own ABC, CBS, NBC stations are promoting right wing candidates for the presidency, that is NOT a "Liberal Media" when Democrat candidates are not featured on any ABC, CBS, NBC stations with the same privilege.

Sinclair has produced anti Obama and Kerry specials that ran on their ABC, NBC, CBS stations before the election to sway voter's minds. That is a clear right wing media bias that right wingers want to ignore, since they agree with it. ABC CBS, NBC never ran any anti Romney or McCain specials before the election. That is blatant conservative bias on NBC, CBS, ABC that right wingers like dasein and Stagger Lee claim are "liberal".

Also, if the media was so "liberal", the ABC, NBC, CBS networks wouldn't have refused to give President Obama the 10 minutes of air time he requested, to address the nation on his Immigration Executive Order. Why would they deny the President that air time if they are all so "Liberal"?

http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020756844_fishersinclairxml.html



Dasein can try to fight it all he wants. The fact is NBC, CBS, ABC is not "Liberal Media", when conservative broadcast groups own the affiliates, airing anti Democratic specials and pushing conservative local news on it's viewers. Dasein can throw out any link he wants, but he can't refute that Sinclair uses their stations to promote a conservative media bias. No Liberals are pushing Liberal commentaries on those stations, or preempting national programming, to air biased political programs as an attempt to sway voters in an election.

Absolutely, I happen to watch Sinclair programming Embers speaks of and the local news leave alone national never presents any conservative content at all and mostly sticks to a liberal narrative content. And I don't need to mention ABC, NBC and CBS non-news programming. OKay I'll concede that Fox/ABC does present Armstrong Williams-a moderate black commentator. Boo hoo hoo. One "conservative" black commentator program on one station versus a constant liberal narrative all the time on the rest.

Armstrong Williams owns NBC stations himself and is partners with Sinclair. He is not a moderate, and he is controlling the content on his stations he owns with a conservative view.

Producing right wing political programs to endorse a right wing candidate for president, on all their 160+ ABC, CBS, NBC stations is a clear bias for the airwaves. No Liberals are producing programs to feature a Liberal candidate nationwide for president.

Hillary Clinton is not given a free platform to speak on any ABC, NBC, CBS stations like Carson was. Why isn't she given several specials if the media is so "liberal"? If the media is so "Liberal", why isn't Hillary on any ABC, CBS, NBC stations across the country given a special with free publicity like Carson was? Wouldn't they jump at the chance to endorse Hillary for free if they are so "Liberal"? The media isn't so "liberal" when you actually see the right wingers who owns the broadcast groups.

Not one Democrat had the pleasure to have a free presidential endorsement from a media group owning network stations. Not one Democrat was allowed to have free special air time on NBC, ABC, CBS stations for president. If the media was so "Liberal" there would be free specials for Liberals all the time. Why are right wingers getting all the free specials if the media is so "Liberal"? Also, what Sinclair did is biased against Republican candidates, giving Carson clear preference over them in order to sway people's minds. That is not right, and it's a conservative media doing that, not "Liberal".

You are an idiot. Sinclair is giving free publicity to a right wing tea party candidate for president. They gave him free air time across the country on their ABC, NBC, CBS stations. They also aired biased documentaries against John Kerry and President Obama on their stations. Hyman gives his conservative commentaries against the President. Do you think after all of that, they are going to flip and show "Liberal Local News" to it's viewers? :crackup:

Don't be stupid.

http://www.mlive.com/news/saginaw/index.ssf/2013/03/report_conservative_columnist.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...b49ef6-a0e2-11e4-b146-577832eafcb4_story.html

Like I said embers, you see the ever growing pantload in your shorts as political. You think that media exists to push a political agenda. Well it doesn't. You have no idea what the purpose of media is, only what you wish it was.

You can't win in the media marketplace because not enough viewers/listeners pay attention to libdrivel. So you want DC to give you what libs cannot earn.

Old man is rambling again. Make yourself a glass of warm milk, take your pills, and go to bed.

When ABC, NBC, CBS affiliates are pushing right wing candidates, news, commentaries, and specials the media isn't so "liberal". And it looks like you're admittng to that as well.

Don't forget with all the hate and lies in the right wing media, Obama won the election twice in an Electoral landslide. So, I guess people did listen to that "drivel".

 

[Tictac]

Like I said embers, you see the ever growing pantload in your shorts as political. You think that media exists to push a political agenda. Well it doesn't. You have no idea what the purpose of media is, only what you wish it was.

You can't win in the media marketplace because not enough viewers/listeners pay attention to libdrivel. So you want DC to give you what libs cannot earn.

Barring that, you'll just whinge, whine and wheedle like most of your perennially indignant and arrested development kin.

 

[Embers84]

Think Again: Sinclair and the Conservative Media’s True Colors

By Eric Alterman | October 28, 2004


Conservatives rarely tire of driving home their message of the media’s alleged leftward slant, as they deploy this same media’s sympathetic coverage of their argument to make their case. While the conservative bias of Fox and company is no longer news, few were aware of its kissin’ conservative cousin, Sinclair Broadcasting, owner of some 62 stations with a reach of roughly a quarter of American households. Its owners recently created a metaphorical firestorm when they announced that it was forcing its affiliates to pre-empt prime time broadcasting in order to air an anti-Kerry documentary.

Faced with widespread public protest, the beginnings of shareholder revolt, and a worrisome tumble in its stock price, Sinclair soon relented and ran instead a quickly cobbled-together hodgepodge that included part of the documentary as well as discussions with its critics. Much of the credit for their change of heart goes to liberal groups such as Mediamatters.org, which underwrote the costs of a shareholder action, demanding that Sinclair provide equal time to those "with views opposed to the allegations" in the anti-Kerry film. The liberal blogosphere also proved its worth once again, with a call to arms.

The flap over the film has caused a few inside the media to take a closer look at Sinclair, and what it has uncovered is an operation that makes Fox look almost shy about using its media properties to pursue a conservative agenda. While the efforts of Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes and John Moody to control the content of Fox’s news have been the subject of considerable controversy—as well as the subject of the successful documentary "Outfoxed"—Sinclair’s bias is, if anything, even more pronounced. In a nightly segment broadcast on all of its local news programs, company spokesman and Vice President Mark Hyman provides "The Point," a one-minute commentary in which he has labeled critics of the Iraq war as "whack-jobs," the French as "cheese-eating surrender monkeys," progressives as the "loony left," and members of Congress who have spoken out against administration policies as "unpatriotic politicians who hate our military," according to Salon’s Eric Boehlert. Borrowing a page from Clear Channel, Sinclair has also eliminated local broadcasts from many markets in favor of its "News Central" program, which airs centralized news programming from corporate headquarters in Baltimore for its regional stations. In other words, they’ve quietly created a national news program in which they disseminate their right-wing propaganda dressed up with local sports and weather segments—all of which was, until recently, under the radar of the mainstream media.

Six months ago, when a special edition of "Nightline" featured Ted Koppel reading the names of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq, Sinclair banned its ABC affiliates from carrying the program, saying, "We do not believe political statements should be disguised as news content." Similarly, in the Oct. 5 edition of Hyman’s "The Point," in which he criticized CBS’s recent "Memogate" scandal, he accused CBS of pushing "their political views in what was supposed to be an honest newscast" and providing "the latest episode in the trend of major news organizations abandoning their pact with the public of providing truthful, unbiased, and balanced news." Again, this statement was apparently meant to be free of irony. So too, the fact that when, in 1996, Sinclair chairman and CEO David Smith found himself arrested during a police sting operation in the company of a prostitute, he was able, as part of a plea agreement reported in Salon, to perform community service by ordering his newsroom employees to produce a series of reports on a local drug counseling program.

Although the company isn’t likely to face any fines or punitive measures from Michael Powell’s monopoly-friendly Federal Communications Commission, according to the Baltimore Sun, "Media analysts said the flap could lead regulators to re-examine rules that govern how many stations a company can own in one market and that deal with the political content of newscasts." Reed Hundt, who led the FCC from 1993 to 1997, told the paper that Sinclair jeopardized a longstanding relationship the federal government had with broadcasters in which they receive free access to public airwaves in exchange for fair and responsible coverage. "Since it’s one universal medium, they’ve been given very special privileges to sustain that universality," Hundt said. "If broadcasters start to behave to the degree the way Sinclair is uniquely behaving, the whole industry will find that they’ll be on the short end of the political stick." FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps told the Washington Post that Sinclair’s actions were "proof positive of media consolidation run amok when one owner can use the public airwaves to blanket the country with its political ideology." (Neither did the station do its reputation any good when it fired Jon Leiberman, its Washington bureau chief, for publicly opposing its decision to air the anti-Kerry film. He termed it "biased political propaganda.")

Imagine for a moment if Mark Hyman’s nightly "The Point" commentary were devoted to tearing down and mocking conservative politicians and causes. Conservative talk radio hosts and the Sunday morning talkfests would light up in righteous indignation over yet another example of the media’s left-wing bias – yet Hyman’s O’Reilly-like ranting requires a national scandal even to inspire any attention on the part of the mainstream media. Just one more nail in the coffin of the "so-called liberal media."

https://www.americanprogress.org/is...lair-and-the-conservative-medias-true-colors/

 

[Embers84]

Local TV Affiliate News Reputation Displaced With Conservative Propaganda Makeover


Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI) and related companies have been buying up local non-Fox affiliated stations and pushing conservative biased news stories into the local news programs.

Since September of 2011, Sinclair Broadcast Group or their affiliated companies (Cunningham Broadcasting, Deerfield Media) have acquired or obtained a Local Marketing Agreement (LMA) for almost one hundred local television stations. According to its website, Sinclair now operates or owns 29 ABC, 26 CBS, and 17 NBC local affiliated stations in addition to 41 Fox and 54 other affiliated stations.


Fox News Masquerading As Reputable Journalism

By snatching up ABC, NBC, and CBS affiliates, Sinclair masks itself under the traditions of reputable journalism of the three historic broadcast giants. The public trust of news anchors built over decades is used to distract viewers from news stories slanted to provoke outrage at the United States government and policies opposed by conservatives. News stories for Sinclair stations are manufactured by the parent organization and inserted into the local news. The stories employ interviews with conservative sources, often with no interview with the agency or organization being accused of fraud, waste, or corruption.

In Reno, Nevada, the NBC affiliate, KRNV, has run stories on almost a daily basis from the parent organization that suggested and/or accuse waste or government conspiracy. In some cases, clips from Fox News are used, rather than from the NBC parent organization. Recently KRNV 6 PM broadcast ran ‘A’ Block stories (headline news) regarding the Affordable Care Act (e.g.; March 26, April 1) and gun laws (e.g.; March 28) that used people with a known conservative bias as their sources.

The LMA Loophole

Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules do not allow licensing of more than one television station in a market to a person or company; however, during the first George Bush administration (1991) Sinclair Broadcast Group convinced the FCC to allow Local Marketing Agreements (LMA’s) that would allow a person or company to own one station and “operate” another station providing the latter station was licensed to a different person or corporation.

This has allowed Sinclair to go on a buying binge of television stations in the same market as their Fox stations. Sinclair uses Deerfield Media and Cunningham Broadcasting to own the licenses of stations where Sinclair already owns a television license. All Deerfield and Cunningham licensed stations are operated by Sinclair, and the family that owns Sinclair controls 90% of the stock in Cunningham Broadcasting.

In Reno, Nevada, the Sinclair Broadcast Group owns the license for Fox affiliate, KRXI, and operates the MyNetworkTV affiliate, KAME (licensed to Deerfield Media,) as well as the NBC affiliate, KRNV (recently licensed to Cunningham Broadcasting.)

This allows Sinclair to effectively control three stations in one market and supplant reputable journalism with conservative propaganda.

The Lingering Question

There is ample evidence that Sinclair Broadcast Group is using loopholes in the FCC regulations to control multiple stations in a single market. It is also apparent that news stories manufactured by Sinclair are shoddy and biased. The question is whether or not the people behind Sinclair are trying to pander to conservatives in order to increase profits or if they are perverting journalism for a conservative agenda. In one case it is a matter of greed, in the other, a matter of a betrayal to the American citizen.

An audit of all of the communications, finances and contributions of the companies, vendors, Board of Directors, and owners involved is the only way we will know.



https://paulkiser.wordpress.com/201...placed-with-conservative-propaganda-makeover/

 

[Embers84]

Embers seems to take the stance that just because corporations own news stations, that they then must be conservative.

His posts all have this implicit assumption with no facts to back up that such a relationship is a prerequisite for the conservative viewpoint.

When confronted with facts, Embers then just reposts his assertions without ever addressing the counterpoints.

This is propaganda 101, and Embers employs it as his only tool as opposed to actual logic and reasoning.

I've provided tons of facts, from various sources, all showing that conservative media groups own the networks and are pushing right wing propaganda on it. You are refusing to believe it like the others are doing. It's all there for you to read, even Fox and the Wall Street Journal reported it. Are you going to claim Sinclair never showed an anti Obama special on their ABC, NBC, CBS stations, when they did before the election to sway voter's minds? Even Fox didn't do that. That is clear right wing media bias on ABC, NBC, CBS stations no matter what you argue. No Liberals ever produced an anti GOP Prime Time Special on NBC, ABC, CBS stations, preepmting national programming like Sinclair did against Kerry and Obama before the elections.

Are you stupid? What do you call this? These are the facts. Watch a Sinclair station and you can see free advertising for Carson on Sinclair's ABC, CBS, NBC stations. No Liberal is being showcased for free on specials nationwide.

Going to argue against that this didn't happen and aren't facts?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...b49ef6-a0e2-11e4-b146-577832eafcb4_story.html



Sinclair Broadcast Group gives a possible presidential contender a microphone

Despite signs that he is considering a run for president, retired pediatric surgeon Ben Carson continues to be showcased on TV stations owned by the conservative-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group., including Washington’s WJLA ABC Affiliate.


Fox News cut its ties with famed surgeon and conservative political commentator Ben Carson in November, when it appeared that Carson would soon declare his candidacy for president. But the still undeclared Carson continues to have a TV home thanks to another conservative media company, Sinclair Broadcast Group.

On Monday, Carson was a panelist on a televised “town hall” about race relations. The one-hour discussion program was produced by Arlington, Va.-based WJLA, the largest of Sinclair’s chain of TV stations, and aired onNewsChannel 8, the regional cable news channel. But the program’s reach was much wider than the Washington area: Sinclair streamed or broadcast the program on stations it owns in 78 markets, giving Carson a national presence.

Carson appeared on another Sinclair-produced town hall in October, this one about the national response to the Ebola outbreak. The program was produced by WJLA and also carried across the country on Sinclair stations.


The two appearances bookended Carson’s splashiest TV appearance to date — an hour-long autobiographical promotional film that aired in early November and touched off speculation that Carson would soon declare his candidacy. The program, called “A Breath of Fresh Air, A New Prescription for America,” was also carried by Sinclair’s stations. WJLA even ran a commercial announcing Carson’s infomercial, in effect airing an ad promoting a program-length ad.

Scott Livingston, Sinclair’s vice president of news, said that Carson was invited to be on the two panels because he “offers a unique, fresh perspective on the issues. He has always been on panels with multiple viewpoints. Our goal is to offer a wide range of views.”

Carson, a favorite among some tea party activists, is politically in step with Sinclair’s chief executive,David D. Smith, and Smith’s extended family, which controls Sinclair, the largest owner of TV stations in the nation. The Smith family has been a major contributor to Republican candidates. Democrats have charged that the company has used its stations to boost Republican candidates at the expense of Democrats.

Carson retired as the world-renowned head of pediatric surgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore in 2013. Sinclair is headquartered in the Baltimore suburb of Hunt Valley.

Although he has made no formal declaration, Carson has begun adding staff in Iowa, the first state in the Republican nominating contest next year, an indication that he is moving closer to announcing a campaign.

The Carson infomercial was produced by a company run by conservative media personality Armstrong Williams, which paid Sinclair an undisclosed fee for the airtime. Williams is Carson’s business manager.

Williams and Sinclair, meanwhile, are longtime business partners. In December, Sinclair completed the sale of three TV stations in South Carolina and Alabama to a company owned by Williams. He purchased two other stations from Sinclair in 2013 and has produced and hosted public-affairs discussion programs that have aired on Sinclair’s stations for nearly two decades.

Williams, too, has appeared in Sinclair’s nationally distributed town halls, most recently in early December, in another discussion about race relationsin the wake of the shooting of a young African American man by a white police officer in Ferguson, Mo.

Before the racial relations and Ebola town hall broadcasts, Carson appeared on two other panels hosted by Sinclair stations.

WBFF in Baltimore produced one in April 2013 about “the proper role of government.” At another in Florida hosted by Williams in April, Carson tore into liberals and their attempt to “divide and control” people. “If you are pro-life, then [they label you] anti-woman,” he said. “If you’re pro-traditional marriage, then you’re homophobic. If you’re a white person and you say something against a progressive black person, you’re a racist.” He blamed “neo-Marxist literature” for fomenting class warfare and “the destruction of the family.”

Carson and Williams did not respond to requests for comment.

Since taking over WJLA and other stations owned by Allbritton Communications of Arlington in August, Sinclair has gradually added conservative features to the station’s newscasts, such as commentary by Sinclair executive Mark Hyman and a weekly segment produced in conjunction with the editorially conservative Washington Times. It has also replaced most of the station’s top managers and news executives.

The company has been on an extraordinary growth binge in recent years. Over the past three years, it has announced or closed acquisitions that have nearly tripled its TV station holdings. It now owns or manages 162 stations.

It has also drawn criticism from Democrats about news programs that were critical of Democrats but went easier on Republicans.

Sinclair stations in several battleground states aired a ­corporate-produced half-hour news “special” on the eve of the 2012 election that faulted President Obama for his handling of the economy, his signature health-care law and the administration’s management of the terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Republican candidate Mitt Romney was not similarly criticized.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...b49ef6-a0e2-11e4-b146-577832eafcb4_story.html



This is a clear conservative media bias against Liberals pushing right wing news on ABC, CBS, NBC Sincliar stations. Showcasing a right wing candidate for free on ABC, CBS, NBC Sinclair stations. Why aren't Liberals given the same air time to speak? It is also biased against other GOP candidates that aren't given the same air time as Carson. But you right wingers can't see that claiming I'm not providing facts. :crackup:

 

[dasein]

When right wing broadcast companies that own ABC, CBS, NBC stations are promoting right wing candidates for the presidency, that is NOT a "Liberal Media" when Democrat candidates are not featured on any ABC, CBS, NBC stations with the same privilege.

The Big Three, CNN, Hollywood, the big left newspapers and the other leftosphere sucked Obama off day in and day out for the entirety of the 2008 and 2012 campaigns and all points in between. Anyone with eyes and a brain knows this, examples are in my links, and the Attkisson video I linked goes into great detail. The GOP candidates OTOH got nothing but scorn daily from MSM. The difference between that and whatever Sinclair broadcast is that the latter wasn't done under window dressing of objective news coverage the way the MSM does it.

Also, if the media was so "liberal", the ABC, NBC, CBS networks wouldn't have refused to give President Obama the 10 minutes of air time he requested, to address the nation on his Immigration Executive Order. Why would they deny the President that air time if they are all so "Liberal"?

Because they knew it was massively unpopular and in all likelihood interfered with their most expensive programming. Whereas there is a pronounced LW bias, as the DOZENS of examples in my link detail, the media is mostly about money.

Hillary Clinton is not given a free platform to speak on any ABC, NBC, CBS stations like Carson was. Why isn't she given several specials if the media is so "liberal"?

No, they just gave her two fictional TV shows with sexy powerful actresses, Madam Secretary and the other one, State of Affairs or somesuch, the one with the black female President, to get the beach shelling going in advance. THAT'S how the MSM rolls, and a child could see it. Moreover, Clinton is not declared. They are waiting to pull out the big guns until later in the year and all through 2016, there are too many Clinton scandals atm to start the pssy eating contest just yet, but rest assured it will start, and will continue throughout 2016 and her entire presidency if she wins.

There never was a candidate in any US election in the TV age that was vetted and scrutinized less than Barack Obama, never been an administration as soft-balled as this one. Deny that and lose whatever shred of credibility you have left here. If it weren't for the few RW sources and the net adding -some- degree of honesty to MSM coverage, we wouldn't have heard half of all the many Obama scandals and criticism that we have heard. Obama is the most incompetent foreign policy president in history, his executive departments like State, IRS, Secret Service, ATF are clownshoe JOKES of epic proportion, economic policy a failure. Yet the Leftomedia has bent over backwards c-cksucking him and avoiding all these things until they become literally too big too ignore any more. Again, this is stuff a child can see. Oh, btw, I'm not a Republican.

...and you are grounding your claims on CARSON? Coverage given to CARSON? Someone who has no shot of becoming Pres? Spare us all.

Oh, and though I asked three times for SPECIFIC examples, the type I posted, all you do is make some nebulous references to an anti Kerry show and some Carson airtime. What a joke.

 

[comic_relief]

I'll miss the comic relief.

I'M STILL HERE!!! You don't have to miss me too much!

- comic_relief

P.S. I have been waiting a long time to use that comment.

 

[Tictac]

Longer and longer posts embers

Logic and reason tortured and strangled embers

'Independent' sources - AmericanProgress.org, Paul Kiser - LOL embers.

And embers with no clue what the purpose of media is (other than the laughable 'push a conservative agenda').

The 'vast right-wing conspiracy'.

The truth is far simpler baby boy - fewer and fewer people are buying liberal crap other than the national popularity contest that is the election of the President and Vice President

The results are in - liberalism is a bankrupting, catastrophic cluster f*ck.

 

[Embers84]

Embers,

You have only shown that specific corporations own the news networks. You have not demonstrated their right wing bias, but merely highlighted a routine "oppositional" piece.

A routine oppositional piece is a right wing bias, since no Liberals have broadcasted a routine oppositional piece against conservatives on any of the networks. Conservative corporations are spending billions of dollars to buy TV network affiliates, to program their local news, and turn a profit. They aren't going to broadcast "Liberal Local News" to their viewers, just as the same conservatives that own the radio stations aren't broadcasting "Liberal Talk Radio" to their listeners.

Sinclair runs conservative propaganda documentaries, gives daily conservative commentaries with right slanted news, and showcases right wing hand picked candidates on it's ABC, CBS, NBC stations. That is blatant clear conservative media bias going on at network affiliates. No Liberals have never done that on ABC, NBC, CBS stations. To claim all those networks are "left wing", is a crock, since Sinclair and other conservative broadcast companies show conservative slanted local news.

One item being broadcast does not a position make. If you claim it is right-wing, you must demonstrate it performs that way consistently and to a greater degree than it pushes liberal narratives.

There’s a new owner and a new approach to the news at WJLA-TV, Washington’s ABC affiliate. Under the direction of its ambitious corporate parent, the station’s news operations have taken a subtle but noticeable turn to the right.

Last week, for example, WJLA viewers woke up to a new face on the morning news: Mark Hyman, a veteran conservative pundit, who offered some criticism of President Obama.

In his video commentary, Hyman railed against the inconsistent enforcement of a ban on travel to Cuba by Americans. Noting that the music stars Jay Z and Beyoncé had “partied up” in Havana last year without penalty, Hyman insinuated that Obama had protected the couple from prosecution.

WJLA is one of 64 stations now owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, which recently completed its purchased of ABC affiliate KATV in Little Rock. Sinclair's right-wing tilt is old news in the media business. In Washington, WJLA is also partnering with the conservative Washington Times on a weekly report on government waste. It is featuring reports, too, from the Sinclair Washington bureau, peppered with critical reporting on President Obama and information from conservative D.C. think tanks.

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlo...atvs-new-owner-takes-dc-station-on-right-turn

Not consistent and conservative enough for you?

Moreover, assuming you were able to prove the dubious claim that sinclair networks were absolutely conservative, they still own well less than 20% of the broadcast tv stations in the continental US AND still must broadcast specific items as mandated by corporate

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc.

Company Profile

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. is one of the largest and most diversified television broadcasting companies in the country today. Sinclair owns and operates, programs or provides sales services to 162 television stations in 79 markets. Sinclair's television group reaches approximately 37.5% of US television households and includes FOX, ABC, MyTV, CW, CBS, NBC, Univision and Azteca affiliates. In addition, Sinclair owns four radio stations. Sinclair, either directly or through its Ventures subsidiary, makes equity investments in strategic companies. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. was founded in 1986, went public in 1995 and is traded on the Nasdaq Exchange under the ticker symbol SBGI.

http://www.sbgi.net/about/profile.shtml

http://www.sbgi.net/business/television.shtml

You're clearly demonstrating that you don't know the difference between Corporate and Affiliate. Affiliate stations are owned by Broadcast Companies, most of them are conservative, and they do NOT have to broadcast what the corporate networks broadcast. It is at the discretion of the Affiliates, to show what content should be broadcasted on it's station. Affiliates can show alternate programming in place of a Corporate broadcasted program on their station if they want to.

Affiliates can decide if they want renew the networks license, reject it, or switch affiliates completely. The claim of a network "left wing" media is a joke, when right wingers who own the affiliates, control the local news and programming at it's discretion. Right Wingers are paying the big bucks to buy network affiliates for that reason, to control the local news broadcasts for their advantage, since most people get their news from local TV stations.

A perfect example of Affiliate controlled content at it's discretion over corporate programming, is the "Nightline incident" when Sinclair refused to broadcast a corporate program at it's discretion.

Political programming

Sinclair had experimented with using a centralized news organization called News Central that provided prepackaged news segments for distribution to several of the group's stations. These segments were integrated into programming during local news broadcasts. Mark E. Hyman, a high-ranking executive at Sinclair, also created "The Point", a series of conservative editorial segments that were broadcast on stations operated by the group that maintain news departments

Sinclair has been known for making several politically motivated programming decisions across its stations, some of which have proven controversial.

In April 2004, Sinclair's ABC affiliates refused to air an episode of Nightline that featured a reading of the names of soldiers killed in the 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. In response, Sinclair argued that the broadcast "[appeared] to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq." ABC responded, saying that the program was meant to be "an expression of respect which seeks to honor those who have laid down their lives for this country." Afterward, the company's political slant was scrutinized by critics when it was publicized that nearly all of Sinclair's recent campaign contributions were to the Republican Party. In particular, the Center for Public Integrity showed concern that the Republican slant of Sinclair's news programming, along with Mark Hyman's past history of government lobbying (particularly calling on the FCC to loosen rules regarding concentration of media ownership), made its stations provide "anything but fair and balanced news programming."

Later in October 2004, just two weeks prior to the 2004 presidential election, it was reported that all 62 of Sinclair's stations would preemptprime time programming to air Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal, a documentary critical of U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry's anti-Vietnam War activism.

On November 5, 2012, six Sinclair stations in swing states aired a special focusing on issues surrounding the presidential election occurring the next day, such as the Libyan civil war and health care reform; the special consisted of a series of segments which were presented by the local anchors at each station. While scheduling of the special was at the discretion of each station, Columbus, Ohio ABC affiliate WSYX pre-empted both ABC World News and Nightline to air it. The special was met with controversy for showing a bias against Obama.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group

Can't be anymore blatant than that, biased right wing news and programming on network affiliates that the right claims is all "left wing". Nothing but a damn lie, and these gullible idiots eat it up and believe it.

Sinclair preempted corporate programming to broadcast biased conservative propaganda at it's discretion on it's stations. Local anchors were involved in the propaganda program specials. They're spinning biased right wing news daily, with their conservative editorial segments slanted to the right. This is a biased conservative media on ABC, NBC, CBS, not "Liberal Media" as the right tries to claim. :crackup:

The right says that people don't want to listen to Liberal talk radio or watch Liberal TV since it doesn't make any money or produce any ratings. So, why would they broadcast Local Liberal News when nobody is going to watch it? They are going to slant the local news to the right, so it gets ratings like FOX in order to turn a profit. Right wingers aren't going to spend billions to show "liberal news" when they make money off right wing news promoting their agenda.

 

[( . )( . )]

If you claim it is right-wing, you must demonstrate it performs that way consistently and to a greater degree than it pushes liberal narratives.

You mean this clown continually posting the same thing over and over punctuated with smiley faces to seal it's non-point is not really convincing you?

Check out it's other sh!t when it takes a break from blowing smoke up obongo's ass. It's the usual anti-White, anti-Western, pro-feminist drivel you'd expect from someone who pretends (paid) we're not swamped in sh!tlib faggotry from the MSM.

 

[Embers84]

Yeah. No. Here is a compilation of studies over 40 years on how the media leans in political support. Read it and get back to us:

http://archive.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp

The Media Research Center (MRC) is a politically conservative content analysis organization based in Reston, Virginia, founded in 1987 by activist L. Brent Bozell III. Its stated mission is to "prove—through sound scientific research—that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values" and to neutralize the perceived liberal bias of the mainstream media

On December 22, 2011, Media Research Center president Bozell appeared on Fox News and suggested U.S. President Barack Obama looks like a "skinny ghetto crackhead."

On June 31, 2013, Media Research Center president Bozell appeared on Fox News to defend a scandalous Fox interview in which Fox journalists made almost no research about the interviewee Reza Aslan's background and its hypothetical biases.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Research_Center

Get a better source than a right wing hack propaganda organization like the MRC. :crackup:

The Big Three, CNN, Hollywood, the big left newspapers and the other leftosphere sucked Obama off day in and day out for the entirety of the 2008 and 2012 campaigns and all points in between.

The Big 3's affiliates have been bought up by right wing conservative broadcasting companies, broadcasting right slanted local news to it's viewers. Sinclair broadcasts right wing slanted news daily with conservative commentaries on it's Big 3 affiliates. No Liberals do that on any of it's affiliates or corporate stations.

If the Big 3 was so "Liberal", why did they refuse President Obama's request to broadcast his 10 minute address to the nation on his Immigration Executive Order? They claimed it was "too political" . If the big 3 were so "Liberal", why would they be worried that it would be too political?

If "The Big 3" were so "Liberal", why do they constantly have right wingers like Ted Cruz, McConnell, Walker, etc, on the Sunday Morning political shows to attack President Obama and the Democrats? Wouldn't they have Liberals praising Obama all the time if they were so "Liberal"?

If the "Big 3" were so "Liberal", why weren't they critical of Bush for lying about WMD's? Why did they all support the lead up to his war?

Yeah, "The Big 3" never uttered a bad word against the President, or shown him in a negative light ever. Give me a fvcking break. :crackup:

...and you are grounding your claims on CARSON? Coverage given to CARSON? Someone who has no shot of becoming Pres? Spare us all.

Oh, and though I asked three times for SPECIFIC examples, the type I posted, all you do is make some nebulous references to an anti Kerry show and some Carson airtime. What a joke.

Sinclair is giving special air time, preempting corporate programming, endorsing a right wing candidate to attack President Obama and Democrats on network affiliates. That is a clear conservative media bias on ABC, NBC, CBS stations that you right wingers claim is all "left wing". No Democratic candidates are given free special air time across the country on network affiliates to attack the GOP.

I've posted links from several sources that shows their conservative bias. Are you unable to read them? Turn on a Sinclair station, and you can see the biased daily conservative commentaries and right slanted news. You should be happy your right wing message is being broadcasted on "The Big 3" affiliates. Why are you getting so upset about it?

KATV's new owner takes D.C. station on right turn

A Washington Post article brings news about a new media player in Little Rock that will bear watching in the days ahead. By Paul Fahri:

There’s a new owner and a new approach to the news at WJLA-TV, Washington’s ABC affiliate. Under the direction of its ambitious corporate parent, the station’s news operations have taken a subtle but noticeable turn to the right.

Last week, for example, WJLA viewers woke up to a new face on the morning news: Mark Hyman, a veteran conservative pundit, who offered some criticism of President Obama.

In his video commentary, Hyman railed against the inconsistent enforcement of a ban on travel to Cuba by Americans. Noting that the music stars Jay Z and Beyoncé had “partied up” in Havana last year without penalty, Hyman insinuated that Obama had protected the couple from prosecution.

WJLA is one of 64 stations now owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, which recently completed its purchased of ABC affiliate KATV in Little Rock. Sinclair's right-wing tilt is old news in the media business.

In Washington, WJLA is also partnering with the conservative Washington Times on a weekly report on government waste. It is featuring reports, too, from the Sinclair Washington bureau, peppered with critical reporting on President Obama and information from conservative D.C. think tanks.

Sinclair purchased KATV and other stations from Allbritton, an ownership that featured a bit of political involvement of its own when the station general manager did an on-air endorsement of George W. Bush in the 2000 general election.

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlo...atvs-new-owner-takes-dc-station-on-right-turn

Sinclair known for conservative political tilt

Sinclair Broadcast Group, which is buying Seattle-based Fisher Communications, has a history of using its television stations to support its political views

Sinclair Broadcast Group executives said they will bring resources and stability to KOMO TV and 19 other television stations they’ll get by acquiring Seattle-based Fisher Communications.

If Sinclair’s past is any indicator, they may also bring their conservative political leanings, even to one of the most liberal cities in the country.

“The track record of Sinclair suggests that Seattle is about to get a Fox News equivalent in a local television channel,” said David Domke, chair of the University of Washington’s Department of Communication.

Sinclair, which is based in the Baltimore suburbs, has seen huge growth over the past two decades as it has bought dozens of small television stations. As executives have made money, they have often given to conservative political causes.

The company has made that political agenda clear on the air, as well.

In 2012, on the Monday before the election, viewers in some swing states found their nightly news or other programs replaced on Sinclair channels by an “election special” produced by Sinclair that was biased against Democrats.

Kirby Wilbur, chairman of the Washington state Republican Party and a longtime radio personality on Fisher station KVI, said a conservative bent could build loyalty among viewers who want their news through a right-leaning lens.

“If they think the numbers tell them that a news station on TV that is a little more slanted to the right would make it more profitable, then they should do that,” he said. “It’s their TV station. We live in a new media world, and TV stations have to innovate to survive.”

http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020756844_fishersinclairxml.html

Replacing network corporate programming on ABC, CBS, NBC affiliates, for biased right wing propaganda on Election Eve, shows Sinclair's clear conservative media bias to sway voter's minds. No Liberals ever produced propaganda election specials against conservatives on it's affiliates or corporate owned stations.

So Kirby Wilbur, the chairman of the Washington State Republican Party even said Sinclair is slanting it's news to the right to make it more profitable. And so are the other conservative owned broadcasting companies that own ABC, CBS, NBC affiliates. They all want to make money with right wing local news, like they do with right wing radio. There is no "Liberal media", but gullible sheep like you believe in it, because your right wing hacks tell you that each day you listen.

 

[Tictac]

The left-wing parrot squawks the same tired memes while calling anyone that doesn't think like it that they are sheep.

The very definition of irony embers.

Want a cracker?

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Embers is so 'smart' about media that the cannot distinguish between a network and an affiliate.

LOL.

STOP CONFOUNDING THE THREAD WITH FACTS!!!! :woo:

 

[FairShake]

TV is also know as the idiot box and it's an increasingly old and outdated medium, idiotic and old will always win. You wouldn't catch me watching Fox OR MSNBC.

That said I prefer NPR which is even older. But the brilliant retired chemistry professor at the coffee shop kind of old.

 

[FairShake]

Thirdly, If they are so right wing, why did those networks constantly blare the "horrors" of Mike Brown and Trayvon and presume that the "lighter skinned folk" were guilty?

You ask me it is a horror what happened to Trayvon still. Any fair accounting of the story would show that at least.

Other guy not so much.

 

[( . )( . )]

You ask me it is a horror what happened to Trayvon still. Any fair accounting of the story would show that at least.

The mere fact we even know the true name of Saint Skittles of Purpa Drank and still ponder the intricacies of his thugdom yet these 407 "enriched" souls from last year alone seem to escape us shows we are living the cuck life of an e-preener all hopped up on sh!tlib media bias.

CUCK LYFE!

 

[FairShake]

Without derailing the thread, Trayvons mistake was in confronting Zimmerman (which is what greatly increases the odds he was the initial attacker).

If there was proof or probability that Zimmerman threw the first punch, I would alter my position.

We don't know who confronted whom.

We do know who was following the other one in the dark with a gun and who was minding his own business on his way home.

Personally I think Zimmerman was waving his gun at him regardless of who threw the first punch. I would take that as a threat and would respond.

 

[FairShake]

The mere fact we even know the true name of Saint Skittles of Purpa Drank and still ponder the intricacies of his thugdom yet these 407 "enriched" souls from last year alone seem to escape us for some wacky reason shows we are living the cuck life of an e-preener all hopped up on sh!tlib media bias.

Lucky for us white folks killing white folks still gets more time than killing a black folk. Somebody out there still loves us.

PS: sh!tlib, etard, goyim, cuck, POZ.

 

[( . )( . )]

We don't know who confronted whom.

We do know who was following the other one in the dark with a gun and who was minding his own business on his way home.

Personally I think Zimmerman was waving his gun at him regardless of who threw the first punch. I would take that as a threat and would respond.

Hmmm ponder ponder cuck cuck. Watch me e-preen and air my sh!tlib credentials.

lol @ the irony of "responding to a threat". Not exactly the modus operandi of an e-preening SWPL

 

[Stagger Lee]

We don't know who confronted whom.

Yes we do because there was even an unnecessary court trial.

We do know who was following the other one in the dark with a gun and who was minding his own business on his way home.

We do? Trayvon should've minded his business and went home then.

Personally I think Zimmerman was waving his gun at him regardless of who threw the first punch. I would take that as a threat and would respond.

Hahaha that's not what the evidence in the trial suggested. Why would you believe that? It doesn't even make sense. Because black trumps "white" hispanic perhaps?