Seems like the people upset at the FCC for ABC's actions were awful quiet during The Twitter Files.
The Twitter Files revealed actual politically motivated government action against individuals. Should some of you revisit it?
Replies to: Seems like the people upset at the FCC for ABC's actions were awful quiet during The Twitter Files.
Of course they were. But public airways have specific rules & ABC knows it
(no message)
Name those rules
(no message)
What "specific rule" was violated? I'd hate to think you were spewing bullshit.
(no message)
Generally speaking
The broadcast by a station of false information concerning a crime or catastrophe violates the FCC’s rules if:
The station licensee knew that the information was false;
Broadcasting the false information directly causes substantial public harm; and
It was foreseeable that broadcasting the false information would cause such harm
You can argue "substantial public harm" either way.
I still say it was a business decision.
Also, to use publicly owned airwaves requires that you not act against the public’s interest, and
spreading false propaganda on public airwaves about the victim and mourners after a brutal assassination is clearly acting against the publics best interest
94 is unaware of this because his tribe has been allowed toabuse public airwaves for so long..
Chris you are extremely under-informed and are in no position to cast aspersions
This is where Baron runs away then post another thread using some right wing X handle as his answer
(no message)
Do you support the 1st Amendment right to free speech or not?
(no message)
I do, please explain how you think this is a 1A issue.
(no message)
He'll have to check on the podcasts he watches first, and they'll tell him what he believes in.
(no message)
Why do you twits always have to whatabout everything, and pretend that these cases are the same?
Oh right. Because cognitive dissonance is a bitch.
You don't think people can see through your avoidance strategy, you are wrong.
Yes, the dissonance is a problem for you.
Irony!
(no message)
Whataboutism countered with Totally Differentism, Another typical day on The OF.
(no message)
Do you support the 1st Amendment right to free speech or not?
(no message)
I do. Kimmel is not prohibited from speaking his mind.
The companies carrying his show are NOT REQUIRED to provide him with a platform.
It was a business decision based on viewership and canceled subscriptions to Disney Plus and Hulu.
He is free to proclaim his thoughts elsewhere.
If the FCC Chair didn't push his weight around do you think Disney would've suspended him?
(no message)
I think they were looking for an excuse to unmoor from the sinking ship
(no message)
It sure beats dealing with the issue at hand, eh?
(no message)
I’ll leave this here.
(no message)
Link: https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1968666205348106626/photo/1
And this.
(no message)
Link: https://x.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1968697694404116733
Fox News Corp terminated Tucker, the government weighed in on Jimmy Kimmel.
(no message)
And this.
(no message)
Link: https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1968701204172599644/photo/1