Dead Soldiers become Political Football + Creepy Orwellian stuff [Must Read News]

The story below demands a lot of comment: ABC's Nightline has decided to have a special episode where they will read the names of all the soldiers who've died in Iraq. A major Broadcast operator has refused to run it because they believe its intended to be a political message against Iraq.

This whole thing is troublesome. Nightline's Tribute doesn't sound overtly political, yet Sinclair Broadcast Group claims it is. By claiming its policital, SBG has in effect made it political regardless of Nightline's intention (no doubt = ratings over any secondary political desire).

It's turning into a proxy war of pro-Bush and anti-war (I hesitate to use "Republican" v. "Democrat" because I doubt its that clean cut -though SBC sure sounds like their very pro-Bush).

Obviously there was no problem reading the names of the Oklahoma City victims or the Sept. 11th victims or even the USS Cole victims... so the question becomes is there a difference between soldiers dying during war and those who haven't? I thought both sides agreed that, regardless of opinion of whether we should be there or not, that the soldiers were kept out of the right/wrong battle (a marked contrast to Vietnam Era treatment of soldiers).

It's also creepy considering SBC is essentially blocking programming to the public that it deems "bad" for purely political reasons (if political reasons even exist here). That opens up a whole can of worms I hope no one wants. Imagine if we allow companies like this to keep reports away from us.

Indeed, on a very relavent side note, due to some Bush appointees the FCC voted in a politically-divided 5-4 vote to allow media giants to expand even more, this is interesting since its companies like SBC that got to grow larger and dominate more households -only to impose their opinion of what's "right" politics on the people? Look out, everyone. Look out.

---------------------
Sinclair Stations to Boycott 'Nightline' Tribute
By Steve Gorman

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A major television chain, the Sinclair Broadcast Group, will bar its ABC-affiliated stations from airing a planned "Nightline" tribute to fallen U.S. troops in Iraq, saying the program is a political statement disguised as news.

ABC News plans to devote Friday's entire "Nightline" segment to the tribute, with anchor Ted Koppel reading aloud the names of hundreds of fallen American servicemen and women as their photographs are shown.

The network's intentions drew a denunciation from Sinclair, a Baltimore-based owner of 62 television stations in 39 markets reaching roughly 24 percent of U.S. television households.

Sinclair said the "Nightline" segment "appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq."

In a statement posted on its Web site, the broadcast group accused Koppel and his show of seeking to "highlight only one aspect of the war effort and in doing so to influence public opinion against the military action in Iraq."

An ABC News spokeswoman said Sinclair's decision to preempt Friday's "Nightline" on its stations would remove the program in at least seven markets -- St. Louis, Missouri; Columbus, Ohio; Charleston, West Virginia; Pensacola, Florida; Springfield, Massachusetts and Asheville and Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Sticking to its plans, ABC News issued its own statement defending the planned broadcast as "an expression of respect which simply seeks to honor those who have laid down their lives for this country."

In an interview with Internet media report Poynteronline, Koppel himself rejected the notion that he was out to make a political point.

"Just look at these people. Look at their names. And look at their ages. Consider what they've done for you. Honor them," Koppel said. "I truly believe that people will take away from this program the reflection of what they bring to it."

Sinclair's boycott drew a sharp rebuke from U.S. Rep. Maurice Hinchey, a New York Democrat and leading congressional critic of newly relaxed media ownership regulations adopted last year by the Federal Communications Commission.

"The decision by Sinclair ... to keep this program off its stations is being made by a corporation with a political agenda without regard to the wants or needs of its viewers," Hinchey said. "This move may be providing a chilling look into the future if we allow media ownership to be consolidated into fewer and fewer hands."

The Washington-based liberal think tank the Center for American Progress cited campaign contribution reports showing Sinclair executives have donated more than $130,000 to President Bush and his political allies since 2000.

The network initially said the 30-minute telecast would be limited acknowledging only the 523 U.S. troops killed in combat since the start of the war in March 3002. But on Thursday, ABC said it would expand the program to 40 minutes to include another 200 or more Americans who died as a result of accidents, friendly fire or suicide.

ABC is a unit of the Walt Disney Co.

Yep, this is thoroughly ridiculous. I really don't see how reading the names of dead soldiers is a political statement. Anyway, this just goes to show you how much bias there is in the news industry - as if we needed any more evidence.

Well, I don't put any value in ABC's statement on the reason for the program to begin with. It's a blatant ratings booster playing upon the sympathy and ignorance of the American people, who will watch more out of boredom or social desirability to "support the troops" than to actually demonstrate their true concern over the deaths of American soldiers. In all honesty, I believe the people who really care about the deaths of these soldiers have already or are currently venting their feelings in more appropriate and PERSONAL manner than to slap some names on a TV screen and play patriotic music for 40 minutes.

That being said, it's obviously a sign of the increasingly paranoid and restrictive times that we're allowing broadcasting companies call the shots about what it airs based on no more than simple personal (and flawed) opinion. It's pretty insulting for SBC to assume its vewiers aren't capable of judging for themselves whether or not the program is a valid salute to fallen soldiers or an anti-war political message in disguise (whether or not THEY ARE smart enough to do this is not the issue, they're not even being given the chance to do so).

Either way the whole situation reeks of bullshit and both sides are shoveling with two hands.

Buro Destruct said:

Well, I don't put any value in ABC's statement on the reason for the program to begin with. It's a blatant ratings booster playing upon the sympathy and ignorance of the American people, who will watch more out of boredom or social desirability to "support the troops" than to actually demonstrate their true concern over the deaths of American soldiers. In all honesty, I believe the people who really care about the deaths of these soldiers have already or are currently venting their feelings in more appropriate and PERSONAL manner than to slap some names on a TV screen and play patriotic music for 40 minutes.

That being said, it's obviously a sign of the increasingly paranoid and restrictive times that we're allowing broadcasting companies call the shots about what it airs based on no more than simple personal (and flawed) opinion. It's pretty insulting for SBC to assume its vewiers aren't capable of judging for themselves whether or not the program is a valid salute to fallen soldiers or an anti-war political message in disguise (whether or not THEY ARE smart enough to do this is not the issue, they're not even being given the chance to do so).

Either way the whole situation reeks of bullshit and both sides are shoveling with two hands.

Click to expand...

Well said. This is one of those " " moments

The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS has been having a moment of silence while showing the names and pictures of the dead servicemen as they've been confirmed since this war began.

Because of that, I see this as little more than a ratings grabber by ABC (perhaps latching onto the coat tails of the recent controversy over the photographs of flag-draped coffins). I also see it as Sinclair blowing out of proportion a non-issue. The saddest part is that these political pawns can't even speak up for themselves anymore.

Buro Destruct said:

Either way the whole situation reeks of bullshit and both sides are shoveling with two hands.

Click to expand...

I'll drink to that

The word Orwellian is overused to the point that it's lost meaning.

StickmanLoser said:

The word Orwellian is overused to the point that it's lost meaning.

Click to expand...

That's true too. Anytime you've got a big company running the show like that, they'll always filter out content as they see fit. That doesn't make it right, but after all, they're not a government supported agency, so in the end their free to do what they want. It's messed up, but it happens all the time I'm sure.

None of this surprises me in the slightest, though my "Stance" on things is still KILL when in doubt or given the order to ultimately WIN... my stance on the war in IRAQ and warfare overall are begining to change towards something of being a human being. Before all I saw was the bullshit, caught up in the whirlwind of the culture's myth now looking at things {as I'm always learning/reading/studying something} I see I have been more than wrong on a lot of issues and it sickens me. I will never be a pacifist, but I'm not so sure I condone nor see the point in all of it anymore either. If I ever get to meet the media reporter/guerrilla fighter/author Chris Hedges I'm going to buy that dude a round of beers.

I think everyone should track down and read his non-fiction IN YOUR FACE novel about the cold hard facts of War itself, a read that is neither pro-war or anti-war... but rather a mind dive into the psychology behind it, and it's a humbling experience none the less. The book is: WAR ~Is a force that gives us meaning by: Chris Hedges. Published by Public Affairs ISBN # 1-58648-049-9. Some may state it's common knowledge, but I'd care to differ on that note. With as broad as my own studies and "Storm Rides" have been, and being a student of THE ART OF WAR, I needed this personally to level out an out of control fixation on "Death"... maybe it'll help others to. Thus I pass on along the information. I never before would have thought I'd actually see THE ENEMY as someone to feel sorry for or even relate to.

StickmanLoser said:

The word Orwellian is overused to the point that it's lost meaning.

Click to expand...

No it hasn't... it's just that most people who read it at some point in their life did so for a class they had to pass, but never heeded what was being said. If they did then half the problems of the world {or at least within the USA} wouldn't be where they are because people would overall be more INVOLVED and VIGILANTE all the time instead of when it was convenient to them. *The Mustashioed B.B. might not be looking over you in "Victory Mansions" over a tele-screen, but it's the people themselves that have allowed Orewell's... Huxley's... and many others voices go unheeded. They were not prophets, but men with visions that spoke of an inherent truth about principalities of man and the destruction of WORDS that a single WORD within itself is a literal "reality" onto itself that once taken away, changed or used out of it's original context because the meaning is taken away or forgotten... then you've destroyed the very impetus behind CHANGE itself. *But what if one were to take away the word CHANGE, but only you remembered that word, but everyone else agreed there was no such word? ~Then what? And don't say it's me being a conspiracy theorist because THAT is exactly what we are allowing to take place. Not neccessarily at a government level, but overall indeed because we don't look at the importance of a SINGLE WORD, thus how much easier it will be for regimes in the future to have control over people when the people gave away the very things they heeded not! *The book I mentioned by Chris Hedges PROVES that numerous times throughout history, and he's lived through a shit load of it too. Thus I'd say ORWELL is more on the money than ever, only it's worse.

MERCENARY X99

Everyone should look at Sinclair's contribution records to the republican party.
Welcome to America 2004.

64,000$ in employee donations alone to the R party.
1,500$ to the D party.
2,000$ personal contribution, the largest allowed, by the CEO [i believe it was the CEO...]

Maybe we should ease more restrictions on big business in the broadcast industry, until EVERY station is under the influence of the same political party.

Man, the media is controlled by liberals!

Kid Aphex said:

Everyone should look at Sinclair's contribution records to the republican party.
Welcome to America 2004.

64,000$ in employee donations alone to the R party.
1,500$ to the D party.
2,000$ personal contribution, the largest allowed, by the CEO [i believe it was the CEO...]

Maybe we should ease more restrictions on big business in the broadcast industry, until EVERY station is under the influence of the same political party.

Man, the media is controlled by liberals!

Click to expand...

I don't even know how you get some of these facts that you do

Sen. McCain has also jumped on the "WTF was SBC thinking?!" bandwagon:

---------------
'Nightline' War Dead List Causes Uproar
By LYNN ELBER, AP Television Writer

LOS ANGELES - Criticism of a TV station group's refusal to air a "Nightline" recitation of America's war dead in Iraq swelled Friday with Sen. John McCain, soldiers' relatives and media watchdogs speaking out.

McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam, sent a strongly worded letter to Sinclair Broadcast Group about its decision to pull Friday's "Nightline" from seven stations throughout the country.

"There is no valid reason for Sinclair to shirk its responsibility in what I assume is a very misguided attempt to prevent your viewers from completely appreciating the extraordinary sacrifices made on their behalf by Americans serving in Iraq," the Arizona Republican said in the letter Friday.

In a 40-minute broadcast, ABC News anchorman Ted Koppel was to read aloud the name of a U.S. service man or woman killed in the Iraq war as their photo appeared on the screen along with their name, military branch, rank and age. "Nightline" planned to include more than 500 killed in action in Iraq since March 19, 2003, as well as more than 200 non-combat deaths.

Military Families Speak Out, whose anti-war members have relatives or loved ones in the military, condemned Sinclair's decision, saying it was "dishonoring our troops and their families."

The group's Web site posted one member's letter of opposition.

"The Sinclair Broadcast group is trying to undermine the lives of our soldiers killed in Iraq. By censoring `Nightline' they want to hide the toll the war on Iraq is having on thousands of soldiers and their families, like mine," wrote Jane Bright of West Hills, Calif. (Her son, Sgt. Evan Ashcraft, was killed in July near Mosul, Iraq.)

"We should be honoring all the men and women who have served," said Ivan Medina, 22, of Hinesville, Ga., who was with the Army in Iraq and whose twin brother, Irving, died there. "My hat goes off to `Nightline.'"

Free Press, which describes itself as a national media reform group, sent its own letter to Sinclair questioning whether the company's actions violated federal rules governing "stewardship of the public airwaves."

The letter, signed by Free Press managing director Josh Silver, said the group intended to encourage viewers served by Sinclair stations to weigh in when TV license renewal hearings are held.

Robert McChesney, the organization's president, called Sinclair's motives into question.

"No one thinks for a second this decision has anything to do with journalism," McChesney said. "It's a politics-slash-business decision that Sinclair made because they don't want to (anger) the White House."

Sinclair, a political supporter of the Bush administration, is trying to curry favor with the White House to bolster chances of gaining changes in station ownership rules, McChesney alleged.

"The stench of corruption here is extraordinary," he said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Friday: "I don't think we decide you all's coverage. I think we should always remember and honor all those who have made the ultimate sacrifice defending our freedoms."

Maryland-based Sinclair, whose holdings include 62 TV stations, made $65,434 in 2004 political donations — 98 percent of that to Republicans and 2 percent to Democrats — according to the Web site opensecrets.org, which tracks contributions.

Sinclair announced Thursday it would pre-empt "Nightline" on its ABC affiliates, including stations in Columbus, Ohio, and St. Louis, Mo. It said the program "appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq."

Calling the broadcast a political statement "disguised as news content," Sinclair pointed to the producers' omission of "the names of thousands of private citizens killed in terrorist attacks" since 9-11.

WTXL-TV, the Tallahassee, Fla., ABC affiliate that has an agreement to share resources with Sinclair but controls its own programming, planned to air Friday's "Nightline."

Early reports had wrongly included the Media Venture Management-owned station among those dropping the show. That prompted a flood of correspondence, said WTXL station manager Mike Plummer.

"The overwhelming response has been people want it," he said Friday.

ABC noted its news division had reported "hundreds of stories on 9-11" while adding that, on the first anniversary of that tragedy, it aired the victims' names.

Still, some observers questioned ABC's motives.

Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, derided what he called the program's "partisan nature," saying it's one goal was "to turn public opinion against the war."

Bobak said:

The network initially said the 30-minute telecast would be limited acknowledging only the 523 U.S. troops killed in combat since the start of the war in March 3002. But on Thursday, ABC said it would expand the program to 40 minutes to include another 200 or more Americans who died as a result of accidents, friendly fire or suicide.

Click to expand...

Holy crap, I must have overslept...

-Nick

Is it too late to vote for McCain for President?

I wish free speach and independance of the press was part of America's constitution and laws... Looks to me like its turning into some weird state where a few control the information feeds and can chose what the public should see or not see (just like in countries where they censor Tv and Internet, the same country America wants to free from its dictators).

Howdoin said:

I wish free speach and independance of the press was part of America's constitution and laws... Looks to me like its turning into some weird state where a few control the information feeds and can chose what the public should see or not see (just like in countries where they censor Tv and Internet, the same country America wants to free from its dictators).

Click to expand...

Well, as far as the press goes ... it has never really been about unbiased opinions and being balanced. There's free speech alright .... you're allowed to speak your mind if you're a media big tymer - or one of these Hollywood nutjobs. Anyway, the news media has never and will never be objective - as long as private corporations are involved there will be bias and slant from both sides.

And technically, they're under no legal obligation to be perfectly objective. From an ethical standpoint, they should at least make an attempt, but you know how that goes.