• news
  • SUNDAY OCTOBER 24 2004 11:42 PM

Sinclair Airs Anti-Kerry News Special

Submitted by jake_lex

Edited by legionnaire

Sinclair Broadcasting aired their anti-Kerry "news special" on Friday night. Scrapping their original plan to simply run a documentary claiming that John Kerry's anti-war activism after returning from Vietnam lengthened the war, they instead showed segments of both that documentary and segments of a pro-Kerry documentary on his military service. However, it soon became clear watching it that though the tone had been softened somewhat, the deck was still stacked against Kerry.

Some basic TV production tricks were used. For example, after showing about four minutes of Stolen Honor, including the harshest condemnations of Kerry by former POWs, four veterans were brought on-camera. The two sitting in the studio were anti-Kerry, while the Kerry supporters were in Washington.

"John Kerry is probably the first person in 200 years of American history to make Benedict Arnold look good," said vet Kevin McManus.

Barnd then called to the two "down in Washington" as if they were on another planet. They were visually confined in a box on-screen, their words heavily edited. TV imagery and technology were used to minimize them and their point of view.

The report was edited so that anti-Kerry voices almost always had the last word.

But Sinclair did labor to create the superficial appearance of balance by including Kerry supporters, like George Butler, who produced the pro-Kerry film Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry. And while the report appeared to include as much of Going Upriver as Stolen Honor, the images and words were in no way equally as hot and emotionally loaded.


The report was still biased enough to enrage supporters of Kerry, of course, but it didn't satisfy hardcore Kerry haters either.

The prevailing theme of conservative viewers, as expressed on Internet Weblogs and chat rooms last night, was that Sinclair, the nation's largest local television station owner, had backed down as it saw its stock price plummet and came under intense heat from shareholder groups and advertisers for putting the company's political views ahead of its business interests.

"Sinclair has caved to pressure," wrote a poster listed as Kaferhaus on the Free Republic site, one of the largest conservative discussion forums on the Internet. "Very obviously they're running scared."

On another conservative site, Little Green Footballs, a poster identified as "mas" wrote: "Sinclair wimped out. This is more pro-Kerry than anti." The poster added, "I gave up 'Joan of Arcadia' for this?"


Which brings up the obvious question for Sinclair: was it worth it? Was it worth exposing yourself completely as pro-Bush hacks, firing your Washington bureau chief, and seeing your stock plunge to run a report still biased enough to only enrage Kerry supporters, but not biased enough to satisfy the right?

I'm beginning to think Sinclair isn't so much partisan as simply incompetent.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Comments
HellboundLiberal

HellboundLiberal

Nashville, TN
August 2004

OCT 24, 2004 11:48 PM

they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.

Koenigsegg

Koenigsegg

I'm lost
July 2004

OCT 24, 2004 11:51 PM

lowrie said:
they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.



that'll teach them not to express their filthy opinion in a public forum ever again.

whatever

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 2:50AM]

hell

hell

Austin, TX
February 2003

OCT 24, 2004 11:54 PM

Any information on how to boycott Sinclair would be greatly appreciated.

Keith

Keith

Oklahoma City, OK
August 2002

OCT 24, 2004 11:56 PM

Koenigsegg said:

lowrie said:
they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.



that'll teach them not to express their filthy opinion in a public forum ever again.

whatever

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 2:50AM]



How many times do we have to explain why Sinclair was wrong, as in criminal, in this, and how different it is than what, say, Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore does?

Aaron

Aaron

Shakopee, MN
July 2004

OCT 24, 2004 11:57 PM

Koenigsegg said:

lowrie said:
they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.



that'll teach them not to express their filthy opinion in a public forum ever again.

whatever

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 2:50AM]


...And pass it off as news

Zundapp1

Zundapp1

Seattle, WA
November 2003

OCT 25, 2004 12:09 AM

I heard the ex-Washington editor on NPR the other day. He said he saw fired for ultimately voicing his objection to this "news special." He said that this was partisan campaigning masquerading as news, and that is was violating the spirit of journalistic objectiveness. He said it would have been less of an issue if Sinclair had called it what it was, but it didn't. He also pointed out that this was the first "news special" Sinclair had ever produced.
Is it just coincidence that Sinclair's first "news special" is about an anti-Kerry film? Will we be expecting similar "news specials" focusing on anti-Bush films, or what? Come on.

TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

OCT 25, 2004 12:16 AM

Keith said:
How many times do we have to explain why Sinclair was wrong, as in criminal, in this, and how different it is than what, say, Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore does?


Given the likes of the person you are responding to, the answer is either (i) an infinite number of times, or (ii) until the election's over.

Then, you'll have to explain OTHER things an infinite number of times.

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

OCT 25, 2004 12:19 AM

Koenigsegg said:

lowrie said:
they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.



that'll teach them not to express their filthy opinion in a public forum ever again.

whatever

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 2:50AM]



I'm sorry did you mean to say something substantive or cogent? If so, you failed.

comrade

comrade

Portland, OR
April 2004

OCT 25, 2004 12:30 AM

I actually watched "Stolen Honor," and I think it made me like Kerry more. They claim over and over again that his accusations of war crimes were lies, but support these accusations with nothing more than anecdotal evidence from people who say they didn't see war crimes. Not very convincing, I'm afraid. If there were evidence that Kerry was lying, he'd be in jail.

Koenigsegg

Koenigsegg

I'm lost
July 2004

OCT 25, 2004 12:33 AM

Keith said:

Koenigsegg said:

lowrie said:
they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.



that'll teach them not to express their filthy opinion in a public forum ever again.

whatever

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 2:50AM]



How many times do we have to explain why Sinclair was wrong, as in criminal, in this, and how different it is than what, say, Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore does?



i'm not going to sit here and say 'well blah blah, i know what you would have done if...', but my gut tells me that if this were some other media group using similarly deceptive tactics in order to get across a pro-kerry message (or better yet, an anti-bush message), you wouldn't have been as critical about it. i'm not saying you wouldn't have, maybe, called them on it. but come on, you've made it clear who your candidate is

allegations of deception here are all smoke and mirrors; i think it is shitty to celebrate the quelling of anyone's voice, even if they're a part of Big Evil Capitalist Corporate America ( whatever ), and even if their opinion is different than yours

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 by Koenigsegg]

Ecto_Cooler

Ecto_Cooler

Bronx, NY
April 2004

OCT 25, 2004 12:37 AM

Whoah, I haven't followed this story in about a week, last I heard they weren't gonna air it.

Not that I particularly care what Sinclair Broadcasting does anyway. There has been so much dirty shit done by both sides that this is a drop in the bucket.

abracadabra

abracadabra

Seattle, WA
April 2004

OCT 25, 2004 12:43 AM

the simple FACTS are that Kerry went to Vietnam, completing his military service while GW did not...Mission Accomplished ???...I think the spin put forth by the media is appalling considering the FACTS ...The sad part is that we , the taxpayers in this country , have to pay for a war that has no credible evidence to back up the reasons for going to war ...a vote for Bush this time around = the fall of "empire"...

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

OCT 25, 2004 12:48 AM

Koenigsegg said:

Keith said:

Koenigsegg said:

lowrie said:
they're stock is worthless now.... ha ha ha. I hope they all choke on vomit.



that'll teach them not to express their filthy opinion in a public forum ever again.

whatever

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 2:50AM]



How many times do we have to explain why Sinclair was wrong, as in criminal, in this, and how different it is than what, say, Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore does?



i'm not going to sit here and say 'well blah blah, i know what you would have done if...', but my gut tells me that if this were some other media group using similarly deceptive tactics in order to get across a pro-kerry message (or better yet, an anti-bush message), you wouldn't have been as critical about it. i'm not saying you wouldn't have, maybe, called them on it. but come on, you've made it clear who your candidate is

allegations of deception here are all smoke and mirrors; i think it is shitty to celebrate the quelling of anyone's voice, even if they're a part of Big Evil Capitalist Corporate America ( whatever ), and even if their opinion is different than yours

[Edited on Oct 25, 2004 by Koenigsegg]



Why is it that when pushed to the wall, you guys always fall back on the well, this is what would happen if things were completely different? There's a reason that this shit always comes up on your side.

As for silencing anyone, thats not what's at issue, the executives of Sinclair can say whatever they want, but when they are abusing a public resource and a private trust as their own personal bullhorn criticizing them for it is perfectly valid. If I go into work tomorrow and start rolling calls for Kerry/Edwards and calling the press using my organizations name and use our Kinko's account to print up posters and T Shirts, guess what? I get fired. They don't own the company, they manage it for their shareholders. Its not their TV station and they're pretending it is to advance their personal agenda. Thats why their stock price is in the toilet.

RallyB

RallyB

Rockville, MD
September 2004

OCT 25, 2004 02:17 AM

hell said:
Any information on how to boycott Sinclair would be greatly appreciated.



Here

I say we finish them off so they can't bother us again. There'll be other immoral Republicans to pick up the slack, but let's slay this dragon while we've got the chance.

Yeah, is it a coincidence that the gerrymandering in swing states, the airing of this "documentary", and the ripping up of voting registration forms are all being done by Republicans? I think not. And there's a simple reason: if everyone understood what they really stood for, they would never win nationwide, and their zone of influence would shrink until it pops. They survive on dirty tricks and misuse of language. Case and point:
Koenigsegg's first response was mock offense that free speech was being violated when that wasn't the reality of the situation at all. They always frame it as your rights or family value or American way of life is under attack.

I know I'm mostly preaching to the choir. Just had to add my 43 cents.

fenris23

fenris23

Vancouver, BC
February 2003

OCT 25, 2004 02:28 AM

RallyB said:
Just had to add my 43 cents.



Adjusted for inflation?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

featured interviews