Okay, get this --
Oct. 15th, 2004 03:19 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
capri0mniWB33, my local Sinclair Broadcasting Group syndicate, does not show a single lick of news -- not local news, not national news, not world news, no special coverage of important events (not even in the days following 9/11/01) -- is preempting its regular programming with "Stolen Honor" (an 90 minute-long bashing of Kerry for his protest of the Vietnam War because doing so aided the enemy) because they deem it "Newsworthy."
Several Democratic senators filed a compaint with the FCC, who has refused to block the airing of thefree political commercial documentary, because it would be a blatant violation of SBG's First Amendment Rights... Meanwhile, if you try to attend a Bush rally wearing a Kerry button or tee-shirt, your ticket will be torn up, and you'll be threatened with arrest... oh, yeah -- way to "...preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States," there, George!
I'm in the process of composing a letter of protest to the FCC right now. I'm just wondering, are there FCC regulations covering the minimum amountof time stations should spend on news and public information?
Edit: Hello, my name is Ann Magill, and I have been a regular viewer of my local Sinclair Broadcasting Group station (WVTZ in Norfolk, Virginia) for many years, and have been a patron of many companies who advertise there, including yours.
However, I've become dismayed in recent months over the choices SBG has made during this highly charged political year.
WTVZ has no news coverage service. It did not even report on current events in the days immediately following 9/11. At the time, I saw the station as a place of refuge from the horror. But I learned today that WTVZ *will* be airing "Stolen Honor" on Thursday, October 21, under the pretext of "newsworthiness." This program is a one-sided attack on a candidate for the presidency of the United States, at a time when our Capital and major cities are still in a heightened state of alert against a terrorist attack.
The airwaves which Sinclair Broadcasting Group uses are provided to them free of charge with taxpayer money. I cannot, in good conscience, furthur reward their dangerous and partisan choices by adding my own discretionary money to their bottom line. Regrettably, this means I cannot be a patron of your company as long as you advertise on Sinclair stations. Since your company has a direct financial relationship with them, I hope that you will be better able to convince Sinclair that than members of the general public have been. If you have the courage to act on our behalf, I will happily return to being your patron. If not, I will not hesitate to speak out against you.
Stand up with Americans against Sinclair's abuse.
Sincerely, Ann Magill
Several Democratic senators filed a compaint with the FCC, who has refused to block the airing of the
I'm in the process of composing a letter of protest to the FCC right now. I'm just wondering, are there FCC regulations covering the minimum amountof time stations should spend on news and public information?
Edit: Hello, my name is Ann Magill, and I have been a regular viewer of my local Sinclair Broadcasting Group station (WVTZ in Norfolk, Virginia) for many years, and have been a patron of many companies who advertise there, including yours.
However, I've become dismayed in recent months over the choices SBG has made during this highly charged political year.
WTVZ has no news coverage service. It did not even report on current events in the days immediately following 9/11. At the time, I saw the station as a place of refuge from the horror. But I learned today that WTVZ *will* be airing "Stolen Honor" on Thursday, October 21, under the pretext of "newsworthiness." This program is a one-sided attack on a candidate for the presidency of the United States, at a time when our Capital and major cities are still in a heightened state of alert against a terrorist attack.
The airwaves which Sinclair Broadcasting Group uses are provided to them free of charge with taxpayer money. I cannot, in good conscience, furthur reward their dangerous and partisan choices by adding my own discretionary money to their bottom line. Regrettably, this means I cannot be a patron of your company as long as you advertise on Sinclair stations. Since your company has a direct financial relationship with them, I hope that you will be better able to convince Sinclair that than members of the general public have been. If you have the courage to act on our behalf, I will happily return to being your patron. If not, I will not hesitate to speak out against you.
Stand up with Americans against Sinclair's abuse.
Sincerely, Ann Magill
