English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Considering that it was Reagan who ended the FAIRNESS DOCTORINE in TV and RADIO reporting. Then finally Bush 43 deregulated the media and it was all bought up by a handful of massive corporations that by law have to avoid waste when doing business. When this happened all the networks and paper cut loose loads of investigative reporters and started basically repeating government and business statements rather than researching the facts for themselves.

2007-05-31 03:43:31 · 16 answers · asked by ??? 3 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

If a company is found to be intentionally wasteful they can be held accountable under corporate law if they have shareholders and are not a private company.

2007-05-31 04:49:28 · update #1

Floating has a very good point but what happens when the media is consolidated by large corporations that have more interest in making money than having all points of veiw put in the public domain.

2007-05-31 04:56:04 · update #2

16 answers

Political appointees deciding what programming needs a counterbalance, drawing a line between "liberal" and "conservative" and placing a fulcrum there, it is all government dictated content. How can this be thought of as a good thing by anyone?

How about a socially liberal conservative? Who do you put on to counterbalance their opinion? Too many arbitrary labels; too much room for interpretation...

I believe strongly in balance, but not through legislation and politically motivated decree. Balance through education and merit.

Rational programming that attracts viewership will remain in production. Programs that are rejected by viewers will be abandoned...

Ideas should be allowed to compete based on their individual merit.

Your additional question:
<<>>

Corporations are indeed formed and operate with the intent to "make money". Corporations "make money" by providing a service or material that is in demand, that people want or need. If the service or material they provide suddenly becomes unprofitable due to lack of consumer interest, they stop producing it.

Sure, sometimes a corporation will continue for a time to produce unprofitable services or materials because they believe in their product, but eventually, if public opinion does not improve, the production will cease in favor of different more viable services or materials.

If an idea or way-of-thinking is viable, it will not need the government to stifle opposing view-points to gain favor.

2007-05-31 04:34:37 · answer #1 · answered by floatingbloatedcorpse 4 · 2 0

Inspite of lacking any real natural resource of value to the west, Afghanistan has repeatedly ended up as the stage for high stake battles between the Brits in the past and the Russians and later the US vs the USSR and now the US vs Al Qaeda/Taliban. This has made it the potential source of threats to Western political interests. IT was inevitable for someone to rise out of this turmoil and become a significant nuisance to established powers. The British more likely sowed the seeds of terrorism/freedom struggle which was later fuelled by the USSR and the US.

2016-04-01 06:59:37 · answer #2 · answered by Irene 4 · 0 0

Unwittingly he may have contributed to it. That being said, we can still save America. Just remember that Bush is in office and when that changes, regardless who wins the presidency, much of the lean toward totalitarianism will end.

We can take advantage of the time we have as a democracy and contact our representatives and insist that lobbying be illegal and that they pay attention to our needs not those of corporate donors. Be relentless! Pretend you are campaigning for Ron Paul and never give up even though all is lost and you know it. Maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel. Unlike the Ron Paul campaign this has merit and will work. Waddya say, people get those keyboards going and go to the websites of your legislators, use snail mail, make phone calls, bug 'em until they succumb?

2007-05-31 03:54:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

Reagan was a joke no wonder God took his brain away from him who knows what he could have remembered. Evil people have funny ways of being paid back! Remember he was the one that gave Iran and Iraq the WMD Bush was looking for! But Bush never cared they had none he just had to cash in on the 2 mill a day pay in the time of war bullcrap!

2007-05-31 04:47:04 · answer #4 · answered by sally sue 6 · 3 1

He had Alzheimer's,everything he did should be over turned,as he wasn't of sound mind.
What gets me is he headed up united actors guild,then while president does union busting throughout the country.Just another corporate goon.
Check out the mena incident,he couldn't get the money for the contras from our budget,so they imported military plane loads of coke to get the money.Bush Sr. was the head of the CIA for Reagan,who would know all the cartel,but the CIA.

2007-05-31 04:08:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Actually cutting education spending, increasing defense spending, funding the contras and cutting top bracket taxes is what did it. But every president since Nixon has done something similar on each of those items.

2007-05-31 04:53:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Gee, you've uncovered the Republican "take over their minds" campaign.

Better go deep undercover.

And work on explaining the massive left lean in mainstream media. And don't try to deny it. All you have to do is listen to the Today Show, 60 Minutes, CBS News, ABC News, NBC News, MSNBC News, Dateline, etc etc. You will be hard pressed to see any story supporting the government. But you will be flooded with stories about how bad everything is with strong innuendo it's all Bush's fault.

2007-05-31 03:51:07 · answer #7 · answered by Philip McCrevice 7 · 2 5

And lets not forget to thank him for the war on drugs.

2007-05-31 03:50:20 · answer #8 · answered by SKYDOG 3 · 4 0

If you think democracy is something fine and good, you have been brainwashed, programmed, and indoctrinated with ANTI-AMERICAN propaganda.

2007-05-31 07:05:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

no, but he watered them. You can go all the way back to Madison to lay the blame.

2007-05-31 03:48:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

fedest.com, questions and answers