Pelosi Says Media Should Do Better Job Selling Dem Agenda

The media ARE the democrat party.

 

Fox News came about as a counter to what was called the "Mainstream Media" back in the early 1990's in part because the MSM was no reporting on the Clinton scandals and in fact trying to cover them up along with other slanted pro Democrat reporting. It presented the right/conservative side on an equal footing and drove the MSM batty along with the Dems/Left.

 

They are having no problem getting their message out, it's the message that is the problem and the question to her was how are they going to better SELL it so the people will BUY it.

 

OH BS !!!!

Fox News was the ORIGINAL fake news. Fox News originated the medium, thats not even negotiable. Stevie Wonder saw that.

The right in this country spent 15 years dismantling the fairness doctrine, and now claim that they were somehow trying to be "more fair" ? FFS ! The Fairness Doctrine was not only about having both sides of a discussion, but it was about truth in what was reported. You seem to forget that it was Fox News who fought in court, all the way to the Supreme Court for the right to lie and call it "News".

You are apparently not very old because I actually remember that the most trusted person in america for many years straight was one of the lead news anchors on the big three networks. Walter Cronkite got that award MANY times. You should also watch All the Presidents Men. If you watch it you will see that 90% of the time they spent on reporting anything was not to just get "corroboration" to the stories, but actual proof. Because back then, had they not had that proof, they could be fined, and in some case jailed. Libel and slander were actual laws

Today we have infotainment that calls itself "News". But to claim that Fox News was ever anything but a partisan network is beyond disingenuous. Rupert Murdoch has said many times that he hired Roger Ailes a republican strategist) because he wanted to have a conservative network

 

True, Fox came about because the MSM was covering up during the Whitewater/Castle Grande and Clinton investigations. And finally we could get BOTH sides of the story not just the slanted MSM which we sill witness today. I LIVED All the Presidents Men, read the book and have seen the movie several times having to swallow the self promotion contained in all of them. It was were the unnamed anonomous sourcing began which has devolved to ONE source UNCONFIRMED being reported as fact by the left wing media. Fox is the most serious of all the hard news reporting out there that has broken or reported the stories the MSM refused to report and when they did filled it with baseless misinformation, the Hunter Biden story is front and center. Yes Fox evening news stories feature left leaning commentators but it also fully features left wing commentators and left wing politicians and the FULL story. To claim the others do so of equal merit is the height of absurdity.

 

And sadly you actually believe that.

Fox is the most biased news source, and they are unapologetic about it.

You believe what your want to believe. Ill stick with facts

 

It doesn't seem like they are really even trying very hard to sell this anymore. I wonder what kind of crooked deal they will settle on to waste as much money as possible. No matter how much they get, they always want more and we get less and less for it.

MATH IS HARD: L.A. Leftists Lose Millions Writing Traffic Tickets. “Over the past five years, fines from parking tickets have brought in over $617 million to the city of Los Angeles,” said Crosstown. “But over that same time, the department in charge of writing those tickets ran up costs of more than $809 million in salaries, equipment and other expenses.”

It's all about making the money flow and skimming off the grift.

Enough is Enough! Let's Go Brandon!

 

I watched it happen in real time geezzzz............. Fox NEWS is some of the best reporting out there and reports ALL the news not selective news filtering it to protect one side. Their editorial and commentary while host primarily by conservatives bring full liberal and leftwing commentary and debate.

But back to this issue it is the MSM to whom Pelosi was chastising for not doing her job and she did so because the Dems now expect it.

 

Lectures From Limousine Liberals. "The same people who sat at home praising essential workers as heroes now repay them with exclusion and sneering condescension:"

Never forget that they hate you and hold you in total and complete disdain. The thoroughly American response is too heartily return their disdain.

Never forget who these bastards are and make your voice heard in the upcoming elections.

Let's Go Brandon!

 

Again, not sue what world you live in.

Fox News was started by Rupert Murdoch, and he literally said he wanted it to be a CONSERVATIVE network. He was very public on that, and hasn’t hidden from that statement. But hey, I would expect nothing less that you and many others who refuse to admit that because the truth hasn’t had a place on conservative circles in years.

Have a nice day

 

LOL ok
Russian Collusion
Afghanstan withdrawal success
Border is secure and not a crisis
Inflation is transitory
I will not have mask mandates
We will stay until all Americans are out
The drone strike was successful
I could go on and on and everyone of those were pushed by your MSM.
3.5 trillion won't cost anything but if we do 2 trillion we won't have a 1.5 trillion dollars extra. Uhh what mathematician figured that up.

Thank god Americans aren't as partisan as you and are overlooking the MSM because Biden's poll numbers are falling with gravity right now.

 

I live in the same one as you where were you when it was happening. Yes he wanted a more balance hard news and a conservative avenue for commentary which did not exist at the time. So that the public would know the truth and not the lies the MSM was spouting then and continues now.

Have and even better day, maybe watch Fox News or read the WSJ or National Review so you'll have a better perspective as to what is REALLY going on.

 

ummmmm, OK. Thanks again for proving my point

 

FS man, It absolutely existed. In fact it was LAW.

It was called the fairness doctrine.

 

Ahhhhhhh The Fairness Doctrine had nothing to do with FoxNews. It only applied to Broadcast licensing and only to "editorial" content, the news reporting could still be slanted. It was CNN and the newly started MSNBC where Rupert saw the market for a more balanced channel giving BOTH sides in a fair and balanced presentation. He was ROUNDLY successful. Perhaps if you watched FoxNews you would have known that.

 

OH FFS. The Fairness Doctrine was for ALL content called “news” that used broadcast airwaves. It required truth in what was broadcast. Why in the world were the anchors of the evening news on the big three networks always voted the most trusted man almost every year ?

You go ahead and keep making things up to help yourself sleep at night………..

 

I wonder why the Dems do not run ads on what the Infrastructure package is all about ?

Get the people involved

 

Yes radio and BROADCAST TV. It did not apply to cable news shows. And it require an OPPOSING VIEWPOINT in it's editorial/news content, that's all. It was first put in place because at the time there was just AM and there were still LOTS of places with limited stations, and being public airwaves any controversial especially political had to have balanced viewpoints and people could demand and get air time on the station. Well stations didn't want to have to put controversial people on instead of THEIR host and guest so they didn't have political or news oriented shows. You had entertainment shows. Then along came FM and LOTS of stations and TFD was no longer needed. It is NOT what you are claiming it was.

And yes at one time those anchors got 15 minutes to report hard news copy and that's what they did that's all they had time for.

As I said perhaps watch more FoxNews and get the facts.

 

you are clearly arguing something you know nothing about

The fairness doctrine required "honesty" in broadcasting also.

 

It was about equal access and why stations did not have issue oriented discussions and after it was no longer necessary with the abundance of available stations it was properly dispensed with. And it had NOTHING to do with FoxNews.



Fairness doctrine, U.S. communications policy (1949–87) formulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that required licensed radio and television broadcasters to present fair and balanced coverage of controversial issues of interest to their communities, including by granting equal airtime to opposing candidates for public office.

The origins of the fairness doctrine lay in the Radio Act (1927), which limited radio broadcasting to licensed broadcasters but mandated that the licensees serve the public interest. The Federal Communications Act (1934) supplanted the Radio Act and created the FCC, the chief regulatory body governing the U.S. airwaves, with a mission to “encourage the larger and more effective use of radio in the public interest.” In 1949 the commission promulgated a report, In the Matter of Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees, that interpreted the public interest provisions of the Radio Act and the Communications Act as a mandate to promote “a basic standard of fairness” in broadcasting. Licensees had the duty to devote airtime to fair and balanced coverage of controversial issues that were of interest to their home communities. Individuals who were the subject of editorials or who perceived themselves to be the subject of unfair attacks in news programming were to be granted an opportunity to reply. Also, candidates for public office were entitled to equal airtime.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fairness-Doctrine


Fact check: Fairness Doctrine only applied to broadcast licenses, not cable TV like Fox News

In 1949, the FCC issued a report that established the duty of broadcast licensees to cover controversial issues in a fair and balanced manner. That obligation was termed the Fairness Doctrine.

Its basic requirements were that broadcasters "devote a reasonable portion of broadcast time to the discussion and consideration of controversial issues of public importance" and "affirmatively endeavor to make ... facilities available for the expression of contrasting viewpoints held by responsible elements with respect to the controversial issues," per a report by the Congressional Research Service.

"In practice, it required broadcasters to identify issues of public importance, decide to cover those issues, and then to afford the best representatives of the opposing views on the issue the opportunity to present their case to the community," the report explains.

t also required broadcasters to allow individuals who were the subject of editorials or personal attacks to be granted an opportunity to respond, and established that candidates for public office are entitled to equal airtime, according to the Encyclopedia Brittanica.

(The mandate of equal airtime for office seekers became federal law in 1959, when Congress amended the Communications Act.)

Most broadcasters complained that the Fairness Doctrine was overly burdensome and an inhibition to their coverage and free speech. They also argued that growth in the media industry rendered it obsolete.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...lied-broadcast-licenses-not-cable/6439197002/

 

Or the numerous 'Infrastructure Weeks'?