Trump threatens to target licenses of 'NBC and the Networks' after nuclear arsenal report

[DiogenesLamp]

As it would be for just about everything in life.

And do you buy your gas from Standard Oil? 

[Cyber Liberty]

I've been down this thread for a while, and nobody answered my question, and it's a pretty obvious one for anybody who knows the first thing about broadcasting: 

What licenses? 

Broadcast networks don't have licenses.  Cable news networks don't have licenses.  Broadcast nets like NBC and CBS only have a handful of stations they actually own, so other than those O&O stations, what licenses are being referred to??  All this folderol is over a half-hour news broadcast on 12-15 TV stations.

[DiogenesLamp]

@mystery-ak
So you mean they might pick a guy who made a video and put all the blame on him.  Putting him in jail to hide their actions.

yeah I'd hate for that to happen

This is what they don't get.  The thing they claim to fear is already here.   Instead of official government control over the media,   the "Deep State"  uses agents to create the illusion of distance. 


I learned something very alarming in 1995.   We had created a Republican majority in Congress,  and I thought we could finally do something about balancing the budget and reducing the National debt. 

I was shocked to see every single media outlet mocking the idea,  and opposing ever effort to slow the growth of government spending.    They were actively HOSTILE to the idea of making the government live within it's means.   

Who could be against the idea of balancing the budget? 


When bits and pieces of the government shut down because of a Bill Clinton veto,  they blamed the Republicans in Congress.  When the government was shut down because of a Reagan veto,  they blamed Reagan.   

It finally dawned on me that every media effort to support the excessive spending of government could be explained by the possibility that the people holding their leash are somehow actually making money from excessive government spending.   

Could it be that the media pushes liberal policies because liberal policies are in the best interest of the people who own and run the media corporations?  Could the hostility to restraining the spending of government be because powerful people are intercepting portions of these money streams?   


I dunno,   but ever since then i've been considering it as a reasonable possibility.   It would certainly explain a lot of their behavior if this were the case. 

[roamer_1]

I have written countless essays on George HW Bush's stupidest blunder in political history,   but this does not change the fact that the Media carried Bill Clinton over the finish line with their lies and omissions.   

George HW could have survived that blunder,  though he did not deserve to survive it,  however Bill Clinton could not have won without the media putting their thumb on the scale with their lies about the economy,  and their lies about George HW Bush.  (grocery store scanner)


Also I will point  out that George HW Bush did not make a mistake when he said "read my lips... no new taxes."   His blunder was breaking that promise in an effort to make a deal with the Democrats.

If there had been no 'read my lips' betrayal, there wouldn't have been a Perot.

[Bigun]

I've been down this thread for a while, and nobody answered my question, and it's a pretty obvious one for anybody who knows the first thing about broadcasting: 

What licenses? 

Broadcast networks don't have licenses.  Cable news networks don't have licenses.  Broadcast nets like NBC and CBS only have a handful of stations they actually own, so other than those O&O stations, what licenses are being referred to??  All this folderol is over a half-hour news broadcast on 12-15 TV stations.

The networks themselves are not licensed but every single one of the stations they own or are affiliated with are licensed. And the networks tightly control the content  on ALL of them!

The answer to all of this is to spread those licenses around to some non network companies in all markets.

[roamer_1]

Nor should they be.  That is just asking for trouble.   But in the manner that they can say people are discriminating against blacks because they do not have any blacks in their employ,  is it so difficult to say "The media discriminates against conservatives because they do not have 50% conservatives on their staff in decision making positions."   


The liberals like affirmative action?  Shove it up their @$$ and break it off!    Force them to hire their political enemies and force them to give them as much air time and control over the stories as they already do to their army of Liberal employees. 




Depending how you use it,  maybe,   but what is also a dire mistake is leaving our nation with a one sided political propaganda system manipulating elections.

 

[DiogenesLamp]

Freedom of speech applies to and restricts the government.  It was not put into the Constitution so "that the public can hear both sides without suppression".

Yes it was,  for that is the only way that it can serve the benefit of the people.    The assumption in 1787 was that the people would only need to fear suppression of speech from the government because the idea that private people could do such a thing was unimaginable.   

So long as the technology consisted of speeches at public gatherings or printed material,   no one could have an advantage at reaching the public that other people couldn't match.   

But this television thing is different.   Not only do visual images bypass the more rational persons of the brain to directly impact the more emotional sections,   so too can this medium be controlled in such a way that other people cannot use it's power to convey their messages. 

It is a very good brainwashing tool.  The multi billion dollar advertising industry is proof that it influences people to do what the advertisers want them to do.   

You've got to look at it in context:

Yes you do.   You have to look at it's purpose and intent,  and make sure that purpose and intent is protected. 

[aligncare]

In my opinion,   the most serious point in this discussion is the fact that the media do lie routinely,
(Hands up,  Don't shoot!)  and can do so whenever they wish,  and even more seriously,  they can censor information (Imran Awan?  Who's that?)  which the American people need to hear to make the right decisions. 



They are tampering with our nation's control system by blinding us.   


That they may have or may not have bungled this particular one is irrelevant to the larger point here.   

Allowing them to lie and censor is damaging to the nation.

And let’s not forget too how the media is presenting the Russia Russia Russia story in the top of the hour news for the last 12 months, always as if there were something there. When, in fact, we know there is no there there. Mueller’s got nothing but some 3,000 facebook ads purchased by Russians.

That’s 3000 out of 3 billion Facebook ads in a year. Yeah, Russia stole the election for Trump. Give me a break.

[DiogenesLamp]

You fight it or counter it.. you too can use freedom of the press..

No you can't.  That's why that guy went to jail,  and nobody could stop it.  Give me a trillion dollar broadcasting system informing everyone that Obama is lying about Benghazi,  and that this man is a scape goat being used by a powerful man to cover up his blunder,  and I guarantee you that man would not have gone to jail,  and Obama may very well have gone to jail for pulling such a stunt. 


You can't fight this power without something of equal power.  They've put a trillion dollars into their broadcasting system,  and it remains the most powerful means of influencing Americans in existence today. 

you don't start pulling license's because you don't like what they say...this is what dictators do...

You start pulling licenses because the interests of the nation are not being served through their misuse of the public airwaves.   That's what rational and responsible people do. 

[Cyber Liberty]

The networks themselves are not licensed but every single one of the stations they own or are affiliated with are licensed. And the networks tightly control the content  on ALL of them!

The answer to all of this is to spread those licenses around to some non network companies in all markets.

The networks were barred from owning any more than a few stations many decades ago.  Ownership is already distributed.

[Bigun]

And let’s not forget too how the media is presenting the Russia Russia Russia story in the top of the hour news for the last 12 months, always as if there were something there. When, in fact, we know there is no there there. Mueller’s got nothing but some 3,000 facebook ads purchased by Russians.

That’s 3000 out of 3 billion Facebook ads in a year. Yeah, Russia stole the election for Trump. Give me a break.

Much like " there is no voter fraud"  in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary!

[Bigun]

The networks were barred from owning any more than a few stations many decades ago.  Ownership is already distributed.

It really doesn’t make much difference if they own them outright or simply control who does now does it?

And they still control 100% of the network programing regardless of who owns the locals.

[aligncare]

Trump is giving us possibly our last opportunity to get this thing done, to turn the tables, expose the media lies. If not now, when? If not Trump, then who?

[roamer_1]

Trump is giving us possibly our last opportunity to get this thing done, to turn the tables, expose the media lies. If not now, when? If not Trump, then who?

ROTFLMAO!!!
 :odrama:

[IsailedawayfromFR]

No national rag has even a fraction of boots on the ground and fact-checkers that your average forum has at it's disposal.

That is a pearl of wisdom and why places like Facebook and Google are so dangerous, especially as they are run by liberals who manipulate what you see or read.  See @DiogenesLamp 's commentary  http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,285511.msg1479594.html#msg1479594

[aligncare]

ROTFLMAO!!!
 :odrama:

Feel better now? Why don’t you just answer the questions?

Because a mocking Emoji is all you’ve got, is my guess.

[roamer_1]

That is a pearl of wisdom and why places like Facebook and Google are so dangerous, especially as they are run by liberals who manipulate what you see or read.  See @DiogenesLamp 's commentary  http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,285511.msg1479594.html#msg1479594

Except in the method of retaliation, I agree with @DiogenesLamp . What I would see is Conservatives rising to meet their own needs. That's what Conservatives do.

You want to compete with Google abd Facebook, it just takes startup money.

[roamer_1]

Feel better now? Why don’t you just answer the questions?

Because a mocking Emoji is all you’ve got, is my guess.

It's always the 'last chance'. If we are that far gone, you're beating a dead horse.

And your gleaming-eyed statement about Tump - Noted serial liar - being 'TheWON' to expose the liars just made me giggle out loud. Too funny.

[Cyber Liberty]

It really doesn’t make much difference if they own them outright or simply control who does now does it?

And they still control 100% of the network programing regardless of who owns the locals.

I totally agree with that, the nets call the shots for the most part, but individual stations have been known to refuse to air some episodes of some programs, and they are in their rights to do so. 

It still rubbishes this notion that Trump can simply yank NBC's license.  He can't because there isn't one.

[Bigun]

Except in the method of retaliation, I agree with @DiogenesLamp . What I would see is Conservatives rising to meet their own needs. That's what Conservatives do.

You want to compete with Google abd Facebook, it just takes startup money.

In my little under 50k population hometown some enterprising and well healed local folks attempted to start a newspaper to compete with the corporate owned rag which claims to be " your hometown newspaper" .  The corporate rag sold advertising at below cost for as long as it took (two years) to run them out of business.  Same thing happened to most of our local mom and pop stores when Wal-Mart showed up.

[Silver Pines]

@kevindavis
Here's the problem, our enemies have copies of our Constitution and they are more than willing to use it against us.  What would you propose as a solution to the abuse and lies perpetrated by folks like NBC & CBS under the guise of free speech?

@driftdiver

Apparently we should tear up the Constitution and put a lock on free speech.  Yay! 

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Which is exactly why we need to drop a nuclear powered sledge hammer on the propaganda monopoly controlled out of Washington  DC and New York. 


Monopoly suppresses *OUR*  freedom of speech.   


Monopoly:  Do you speak it?

I do.  What monopoly have you been referring to?  OTA broadcasting is the only aspect I can think of that meets even one of the criteria.

[Silver Pines]

When I see someone post "you're under Trump's spell"  I know he's trolling.

[Concerned]

I've been down this thread for a while, and nobody answered my question, and it's a pretty obvious one for anybody who knows the first thing about broadcasting: 

What licenses? 

Broadcast networks don't have licenses.  Cable news networks don't have licenses.  Broadcast nets like NBC and CBS only have a handful of stations they actually own, so other than those O&O stations, what licenses are being referred to??  All this folderol is over a half-hour news broadcast on 12-15 TV stations.

The networks were barred from owning any more than a few stations many decades ago.  Ownership is already distributed.

@Cyber Liberty

Thanks for bringing some facts into the discussion.

[Silver Pines]

@mystery-ak that's what they want...a dictator of their own that they can be proud of.  Someone who doesn't care about the Constitution or rule of law...just someone who will extract payback and collect some revenge for them against the Left.

Never mind that the person they would be cheering while this is happening would be taking pages directly from the Liberal playbook they supposedly despise.

As long as he can get them the pound of flesh they demand...

@txradioguy

I still remember the TOS thread from 2016, when multiple Trump supporters came right out and admitted that yes, we do need our own dictator---at least for now, and then we can put him back in the box.