2006-10-30 12:19:53 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Wow!! A little defensive aren't we? I didn't say republican hate radio.. Just political, from both sides.. sheesh
Guess you do know where your side stands.. hahaha
2006-10-30 12:26:35 · update #1
notme- This is not the same as freedom of the press..
2006-10-30 12:28:01 · update #2
Not monitored for hate just flat out lies..
ex.. shouldn't be able to say "George Bush wants to start the draft" or "John Kerry eats babies" blah blah blah..
2006-10-30 12:32:16 · update #3
talk radio, the regular media, political ads.....everything is self -monitored. This is what a free press means.
We don't want a government controlled media telling us what the news really is.
Debating, discussing, disagreeing is the democratic process....even though it does get disgusting at times with all the lies on both sides.
2006-10-30 12:49:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Monitored by whom? It it was monitored for honesty they would have to go off the air. On second thought, perhaps Rumsfeld could monitor it, I understand the pentagon wants to get into the media business so they make sure the "right story" about the war gets out. I guess that is one way to try to make the war popular.
2006-10-30 20:27:31 · answer #2 · answered by rec 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
1) Who decides what is hate?
2) Who decides if an opinion is honest?
3) Who would do the monitoring?
If you can give satisfactory answers to these questions, I can answer yours in the affirmative. I strongly doubt that there are answers that I would consider acceptable.
2006-10-30 20:27:41 · answer #3 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All that may be unpleasant, but trying to monitor them will cause greater problems with free speech issue. Lying may be mean and nasty, but trying to force people to be correct all the time is going to restrict free speech in some ways and that may be worse.
2006-10-30 20:39:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
that depends on what kind of 'monitoring' you're talking about...if you mean exposing the hyperbole, character assassination, and outright lies in some forum or another, then i have no problem with that...it's kinda fun to watch 'em squirm when the rock gets flipped over...but if you're talking about censoring or regulating content, then forget it...you'll lose me every time...i don't want any viewpoint silenced...mine could be next...besides, hate radio (michael savage, for instance) gives morons something to occupy their time...otherwise they might be pestering the rest of us...
2006-10-30 20:27:28 · answer #5 · answered by spike missing debra m 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No just a ratings number for the children.
Maybe RP13
Redpublican Propaganda 13
Go big Red Go
2006-10-30 20:38:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course not. Freedom of the press is a basic and necessary function in any free society.
Add: Yes it is. CNN is the press, Air America is the press, Rush Limbaugh is the press, so is Hannity and O'Reilly. Didn't pay attention in class did you?
2006-10-30 20:23:07 · answer #7 · answered by notme 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
We should spending our money monitoring the pentagon finances
who stole all the money.
2006-10-30 20:28:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why, politicians aren't monitored for "honesty".
2006-10-30 20:22:35 · answer #9 · answered by jack w 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I have not heard any.I do think Leftist media "news" broadcasters should be though.
2006-10-30 20:59:14 · answer #10 · answered by Tommy G. 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋