This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

ABCs Nightline Program 'The Fallen' not to be aired in several markets

Discussion in 'Open Discussion (Work-safe)' started by FCollinsBuckeye, Apr 30, 2004.

  1. FCollinsBuckeye

    FCollinsBuckeye Senior Former Game Champion

    What do you guys think of this?
    [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
    Not sure what to make of it myself. Seems like the consorship is more politically motivated than the program itself. Is the Vietnam Memorial a political statement?​
  2. Nixon

    Nixon Wears Scarlet-colored glasses

    It is not censorship. Censorship is an action of the government.
  3. FCollinsBuckeye

    FCollinsBuckeye Senior Former Game Champion

    Okay, so what do you think of Sinclair's choice not to broadcast the program, Nixon? Just curious.
  4. Nixon

    Nixon Wears Scarlet-colored glasses

    1. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
    2. An official, as in the armed forces, who examines personal mail and official dis
    patches to remove information considered secret or a risk to security.

    "Censorship" is a loaded word. Sinclair can choose to broadcast whatever they please.

    I haven't seen the program, so I don't know what it is like. It is possible that it will be presented in an anti-war light, and it is possible that it will not be. These folks have their opinion and have chosen to act on it.
  5. BuckeyeInTheBoro

    BuckeyeInTheBoro This space left intentionally blank

    I am disturbed by the media owner's pulling the show based on political beliefs (either his or the shows). He's well within his rights as a business owner to determine what the stations he controls will or won't show, but where does that leave the consumer if there was no other choice? I think this is a good arguement for those saying that one media corporation should not have ownership of too many stations. I'm all for allowing many voices in order to prevent one person from controlling what I do and don't hear.
  6. FCollinsBuckeye

    FCollinsBuckeye Senior Former Game Champion

    From ABCs website:

    I guess I got in trouble with Nixon for calling it censorship. And no, Sinclair cannot broadcast what they please. Just ask Janet Jackson :p

    <edit> yuck, sorry 'bout the badly pasted article
  7. daddyphatsacs

    daddyphatsacs Let the cards fall...

    I think that this is a very valid argument on behalf of ABC. Why should soldiers who have died for the United States.....willing and unwilling be swept under the radar? Tillman did a very noble thing by stepping out of the NFL and entering a tough battle, but what makes his death any more noble than others? Yesterday I saw news on his bodies' arrival to the United States, yet they censor the arrival of "normal" fallen soldiers? It just seems like total bullshit in my book. In my mind they are all heroes and they deserve to be recognized by those that they are fighting for. Political motivation????? I think that it is politically motivated to keep this off the air.

    I guess that we should keep the death and names of American soldiers private, God knows we wouldn't want any Americans to question the ordeal in Iraq.......They would be considered politically motivated.........this is total and complete Bullshit.
  8. MililaniBuckeye

    MililaniBuckeye The satanic soulless freight train that is Ohio St Staff Member Tech Admin

    It is not censorship. Censorship is an action of the government.

    Bullshit. They are choosing to not broadcast a show that they otherwise normally would, solely becuase they disagree with the content. In fact, their actions completely match your first definition of censorship, which is:

    1. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.

    They are suppressing (in this case, not broadcasting) what they "considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable."
  9. Nixon

    Nixon Wears Scarlet-colored glasses

    "A person authorized"

    The only thing that authorizes them to do this is their right as a business owner.

    Technically, it may be censorship. But censorship in and of itself is not an inherently evil thing. If that college paper would have refused to print that Tillman-bashing piece, that would have been censorship too.

    Usually, when people use the word "censorship", they want to make it out to be a negative, or imply that the government is doing it. You may or may not think this company is making the right decision, but they have every right in the world to do it, and just because it is "censorship" does not automatically make it a bad thing.
  10. BuckeyeSoldier

    BuckeyeSoldier 2 time Reigning BuckeyePlanet Poker Champion

    so now we agree this IS censorship even if its not being done BY the government it does have political motivation. and granted it IS this businesses right to censor it. but as many of you said about the pepsi can, it is also our right not to subscribe to their product. personally unless the information being censored would in some way cause physical harm so someone i dont see how ANY censorship IS a good thing nixon.. like boro said, regardless of whether i agree with what is said i do believe i should at least have access to all view points and perspectives to make my decision..
    similarly i am equally upset with the administrations refusal to let pictures be taken of coffins returning from iraq, so what if it hurts war sentiment? isnt refusing to let us see what is happening in order to persuade us just another way to control our thoughts?
  11. Nixon

    Nixon Wears Scarlet-colored glasses

    So the TV station should be compelled to play whatever anybody wants them too?
  12. Buckeyehead

    Buckeyehead Banned

    Bad analogy.

    The Vietnam Memorial was NOT constructed DURING the conflict.

    Those who have died trying to complete the mission could only be insulted more by not completing the mission.

    Want to honor the dead? Finish the job.

    As for the "censorship" issue, Sinclair has as much right to pre-empt the broadcast as ABC has to run it. The First Amendment guarantees a right to free speech, but it does NOT grant the right to use the airwaves to do it. Sinclair isn't preventing ABC from saying what they want, they simply refuse to provide ABC a forum, and they have every right to make that decision.

    Calling Sinclair's decision a violation of ABC's right to free speech is a red herring.
  13. FCollinsBuckeye

    FCollinsBuckeye Senior Former Game Champion

    Good point, Buckeyehead. You're absolutely right. It just popped into my head as nearly the same thing, i.e. a list of those killed in the conflict. But the timing was quite different.

    Another point that has been brought up is the restriction of public display of photographs of coffins returning from the Middle East. The administration has frequently cited the 'long standing' official government policy not to allow photographing or publication of these images. However, I saw the other day that this 'long standing' policy was begun in 1991 by George H.W. Bush during Operation Desert Storm. It is clearly 'bad press' for the war effort if images of rows of coffins returning from overseas is available to the public week after week. But is this policy truly motivated as a way to honor the fallen? Or are they merely stiffling these images to avoid anti-war sentiments? Some times I wonder...
  14. daddyphatsacs

    daddyphatsacs Let the cards fall...

    I agree 100%.
  15. BuckeyeSoldier

    BuckeyeSoldier 2 time Reigning BuckeyePlanet Poker Champion

    actually nixon i wasnt even argueing that, i dont think the tv station has any obligation to do that, i just dont like it.. :wink: the government isnt saying no so im not actually saying something is wrong here, just saying that i dont like censorship. although as a capatalist country it does seem to be in a tv stations best intrest to play what the people want to see.. unless of course the owners of said station are benefitting from their political support in some way or another... hmm i wonder..

Share This Page