When is a political statement not a political statement?
October 12, 2004 1:40 PM   Subscribe

Sinclair Broadcasting is demanding its 62 television stations air an anti-Kerry 'documentary' in prime-time, just before the november election. Does the name sound familiar? That's because Sinclair Broadcasting was the same media group that refused to air an episode of 'Nightline' where the names of the troops who died in iraq were read, on the basis that it was 'nothing more than a political statement'. Those upset with this unfairness can do something about it. Write the FCC, and get active. If that's not enough, you can join Sinclair Watch.
posted by FunkyHelix (31 comments total)
Mefi FPP about this here. Or click "back" and scroll down.
posted by callmejay at 1:45 PM on October 12, 2004

Well drat. I used the search on the sites and on Sinclair and nothing came up for the past year.
posted by FunkyHelix at 1:48 PM on October 12, 2004

posted by Outlawyr at 2:25 PM on October 12, 2004

OK, first of all, I just did the search on Sinclair for the past year and it worked fine.

But look, folks, and I'm not trying to single you out FunkyHelix, but really, it's just common sense: If a story's just breaking over the past few days - and especially if it's something that's sweeping the blogosphere like a tornado - it's probably worth it to scroll through the MeFi front page and check for it visually before deciding that only have had the fantastic idea of posting it.
posted by soyjoy at 2:30 PM on October 12, 2004


You said blogosphere out loud. Don't you feel silly now?
posted by cedar at 2:35 PM on October 12, 2004

"... you can join Sinclair Watch."

*Watches the Sinclair, realizes it does nothing*
posted by mr_crash_davis at 2:42 PM on October 12, 2004

I'll have you know I *bought* the Timex Sinclair 1000 and built it myself.

But you're right, It pretty much did nothing.
posted by Lokheed at 2:48 PM on October 12, 2004

cedar - I didn't say it out loud. But I will admit that while typing it I did think "I wonder who will call me out for this." Now I know. Heh.
posted by soyjoy at 2:56 PM on October 12, 2004

gosh soyjoy you're kinda bitchy aren't you? You the posting police?
posted by bas67 at 3:04 PM on October 12, 2004

Gosh, golly--I was told over and over that the liberals controlled the media...
posted by Postroad at 3:15 PM on October 12, 2004

Postroad, according the National Review, they still do.

Although I have to admit, I know a national Fox News producer who is a fervent Democrat.
posted by karmaville at 3:19 PM on October 12, 2004

Bas, see entry: self policing
posted by stefanie at 3:30 PM on October 12, 2004

I don't mean to single you out always seems to be followed by the person not only doing just that, but being rather rude about it. I mean it's just common sense that maybe the person's search was faulty, and they already feel bad for having missed it, so there's no reason to be snarky. But I could be wrong.
posted by FunkyHelix at 3:45 PM on October 12, 2004

Josh Marshall has done a good job on this story, and the mainstream press is picking it up (just saw a report on the CBS evening news; dunno if the story was blacked out on Sinclair CBS affiliates.) I'd expect them to fold pretty soon on this issue. But it largely won't matter: as with anything, it's the media fury over the ad that makes the impression on the voters, not the ad itself. The two campaigns produce "controversial" advertising mostly for the free exposure on CNN, not the actual commercial play.
posted by PrinceValium at 3:49 PM on October 12, 2004

"I don't mean to single you out" does usually seem to fall into the category of phrases like "For your convenience" and "Stop me if you've heard this one before".
posted by Sidhedevil at 3:50 PM on October 12, 2004

However, as I love both FunkyHelix and soyjoy with an unholy passion, this conflict is [jamesdean] tearing me apart! It's tearing me apart! [/jamesdean]
posted by Sidhedevil at 3:55 PM on October 12, 2004

soyjoy: "I didn't say it out loud."

But you thought it and we're all about policing that. Thought, speech, intent... all the same to me.
posted by cedar at 4:00 PM on October 12, 2004

In the 2003 State of the Union address, Prezznit Bush pitched hydrogen cars as the wave fo the future. Pretty forward-thinking for a Texas oilman, no? Except that a hydrogen energy company with ties to Enron and the Federal Energy Regulation Commission is owned by a subsidiary of Sinclair Broadcasting.

So, looks like rather than a principled stand against the horrors that Kerry wrought, this broadcast is just a payoff for a DOD contract.

I'm a little teapot, short and stout...
posted by solistrato at 4:02 PM on October 12, 2004

Look, the Republicans are the new Jews. They own everything.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:27 PM on October 12, 2004

Oh, come now.
posted by solistrato at 4:30 PM on October 12, 2004

the sinclair topic is currently being "discussed" on the o'reilly factor. of all the people that bill could've had on, he picked a represenative from the media research center? I can't believe the things that happen in this country.
posted by mcsweetie at 5:19 PM on October 12, 2004

Yeah, so well, how's it working out? Let's take this double post opp to assess how we're doing. Any progress?
posted by DenOfSizer at 5:25 PM on October 12, 2004

yup...Sylvan learning centers is pulling their ads from Sinclair stations, and email and calls are going to all their advertisers.
posted by amberglow at 5:34 PM on October 12, 2004

"The decision annoyed investors. Sinclair's shares, which have lost about half their value in 2004, closed Monday at $7.38, down 12 cents. That's about as low as they've been since 1995.

"I don't want my media companies that cover the news to be making news," says Barry Lucas of Gabelli & Co., which owns about 4% of Sinclair. "

"With its heavy concentration of Fox and WB affiliates, ranking in the middle of the pack in mostly midsize markets, Sinclair is barely profitable and laden with debt. It had a net profit of $14 million on revenue of $739 million in 2003.

Sinclair hopes to change that by solidifying its hold on local markets by controlling, for example, two stations in more cities and sharing operating and news-gathering costs. But it needs the federal government to relax several media ownership restrictions. "
posted by Feisty at 6:14 PM on October 12, 2004

Hey, I thought Jews were the new Republicans. At least, that's what Kalle Lasn says.
posted by Sidhedevil at 8:35 PM on October 12, 2004

It would be interesting to cross refrence the Board of Trustee's over at Sinclair (Hoover's Business Directory does this ) to see what other boards they're on. Any connections to Halliburton, The Carlyle group? Big Oil?
posted by Skygazer at 10:38 PM on October 12, 2004

Our local Sinclair affiliate here in Columbus has pulled several ads from it's front page that were there only yesterday. They have disabled a link to their "Gimmie the Mike" section, which was sponsored by companies like Pepsi and ITT. They have added a link to contact Sinclair headquarters (which now seems to be appearing on all affiliate web sites).

For any of you contacting Sinclair Broadcasting advertisers, I believe you'll have much more luck staying local. I've had civil and productive exchanges with several local advertisers here.
posted by Otis at 3:47 PM on October 13, 2004

Powell should be the second one fired when Kerry's inaugurated--right after Ashcroft.
posted by amberglow at 1:41 PM on October 14, 2004

« Older What you got, Will Vinton?   |   May cause slow agonising death Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments