This Guy Does Not Know The Difference

[Flanders]

between a one-sided press and news platforms:

Whether the Left is in the right or wrong (spoiler alert: they’re totally wrong), it is bad for the country to have a one-sided leftist press.

KLAVAN: One-Sided Journalism Is Bad For The Country
By Andrew Klavan
April 23, 2019

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46308...-andrew-klavan

Maybe somebody should remind Klavan the Fairness Doctrine turned journalism into a one-sided joke for 38 years:

The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the FCC's view—honest, equitable, and balanced. The FCC eliminated the policy in 1987 and removed the rule that implemented the policy from the Federal Register in August 2011.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

Having Socialist/Communist messages heard on TV was the sole purpose for the Fairness Doctrine when it was introduced in television’s infancy.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...58#post2958958

I should have said ‘38=plus years’ because FOX still enforces the Fairness Doctrine:

FOX executives always enforced their own version of the Fairness Doctrine by supplying more conservative ears to liberal talking points than does the alphabet networks combined.

FOX’s rating are high because liberals also watch FOX, while conservatives do not watch overtly liberal networks. FOX fools a substantial audience into believing it is the voice of conservative values. If you listen closely you will see that FOX’s conservative values always come down on the side of the New World Order’s agenda; big government, global government, the United Nations, and every other policy that true conservatives oppose.

TV viewing public offered a choice between conservative networks, and liberal networks is the last thing Democrat scum want. They know that TV networks promoting one or the other will go the way of talk radio where conservative shows thrive, while liberal talk radio tanks every time. Liberalism’s garbage would disappear altogether from the airwaves without tax deductible advertising support.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...06#post2802906

Better yet, Klavan should stick to writing crime novels —— he obviously does not know that news platforms tailored for specific audiences is good for the country.

[archives]

What in the hell are you taking about?

[Mason Michaels]

between a one-sided press and news platforms:

Whether the Left is in the right or wrong (spoiler alert: they’re totally wrong), it is bad for the country to have a one-sided leftist press.

KLAVAN: One-Sided Journalism Is Bad For The Country
By Andrew Klavan
April 23, 2019

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46308...-andrew-klavan

Maybe somebody should remind Klavan the Fairness Doctrine turned journalism into a one-sided joke for 38 years:

The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the FCC's view—honest, equitable, and balanced. The FCC eliminated the policy in 1987 and removed the rule that implemented the policy from the Federal Register in August 2011.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

Having Socialist/Communist messages heard on TV was the sole purpose for the Fairness Doctrine when it was introduced in television’s infancy.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...58#post2958958

I should have said ‘38=plus years’ because FOX still enforces the Fairness Doctrine:

FOX executives always enforced their own version of the Fairness Doctrine by supplying more conservative ears to liberal talking points than does the alphabet networks combined.

FOX’s rating are high because liberals also watch FOX, while conservatives do not watch overtly liberal networks. FOX fools a substantial audience into believing it is the voice of conservative values. If you listen closely you will see that FOX’s conservative values always come down on the side of the New World Order’s agenda; big government, global government, the United Nations, and every other policy that true conservatives oppose.

TV viewing public offered a choice between conservative networks, and liberal networks is the last thing Democrat scum want. They know that TV networks promoting one or the other will go the way of talk radio where conservative shows thrive, while liberal talk radio tanks every time. Liberalism’s garbage would disappear altogether from the airwaves without tax deductible advertising support.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...06#post2802906

Better yet, Klavan should stick to writing crime novels —— he obviously does not know that news platforms tailored for specific audiences is good for the country.

"I hope you catch a hockey puck right in your Klavan"

[jimmymccready]

Having to give both sides of an issue is a hallmark of a free democracy.

[Flanders]

What in the hell are you taking about?

To archives: Asshole:

news platforms tailored for specific audiences

Try to grasp this concept. Liberals, conservatives, etc do not get face time, or articles printed, or their views peddled in opposing news outlets.

Note that Communism would not be alive today had Communist/Socialists been restricted to their megaphones

The Daily Worker was a newspaper published in New York City by the Communist Party USA, a formerly Comintern-affiliated organization. Publication began in 1924. While it generally reflected the prevailing views of the party, attempts were made to reflect a broader spectrum of left-wing opinion. At its peak, the newspaper achieved a circulation of 35,000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Worker

Also note that wherever freedom of speech does not exist, the government controls the news. The defunct Soviet Union’s Pravda was a classic example. Basically, networks and print providing the megaphone for tyrannical economic policies nurtures oppression. The welfare state thrives on authoritarian economic policies.

authoritarian (adjective)

1. Characterized by or favoring absolute obedience to authority, as against individual freedom: an authoritarian regime.

2. Of, relating to, or expecting unquestioning obedience. See synonyms at dictatorial.

authoritarian (noun)
authoritarianism (noun)

Finally, freedom of the press omits more than it prints. Take a good look at how the MSM has been blocking conservative views since 1945, while promoting big government. It is television hawking the Democrat Party’s garbage 24-7 that keeps Socialism/Communism on life support.

Having to give both sides of an issue

To jimmymccready: Another asshole chimes in.

FORCING television to give both sides equal time is exactly what the Fairness Doctrine did and still does.

I should have said ‘38=plus years’ because FOX still enforces the Fairness Doctrine:

is a hallmark of a free democracy.

To jimmymccready: Free democracy is a contradiction in terms. A free people cannot have freedom and democracy at the same time.

Notice that it is filthy big government Democrat parasites who always whine “OUR” democracy is threatened.”

The best joke of the year was Nutso Nancy calling President Trump an authoritarian because he exercises his freedom of speech in tweets:

“He makes assaults on them and they strengthen him by just talking about that and that’s what an authoritarian wants you to be talking about him,” Pelosi added. “Even if they don’t like what you’re saying, if they’re talking about him, they’re not talking about us.”

Nutso is really pissed off because she cannot invoke the Fairness Doctrine and force President Trump to tweet about the parasite topics she wants him to talk about. Note that transparency was a dirty word when the Chicago sewer rat was president:

Pelosi said that time could’ve been better spent talking about health care, prescription drug prices, infrastructure, government transparency — or really, anything.

Nancy Pelosi says Trump’s tweets “cheapened the presidency” — and the media encourages him
By Eric Johnson
Apr 12, 2019, 12:50pm EDT

https://www.recode.net/2019/4/12/183...cast-interview

Question: How does Nutso’s media encourage Trump with all of their personal attacks?

And just for the record, you can take democracy and stick it where the sun never shines.