For years may cable bill has included CNN that advertises as a "News" organization. I never watched them but each month I have been Forced to pay a portion of my Cable bill to support them!
There in a mounting pile of evidence that they are not as they advertise!
I suggest a class action lawsuit for the re imbursement of all funds they have received by their false advertisement! This could be fun forcing them in open court to prove the accuracy in their reporting! Of course they would claim their first amendment rights as a news organization but the argument against that is --That is what we are in court to determine!
How much evidence of fake news and false reporting is there as related to their organization? I'll bet Accuracy in media has enough on hand to start the ball rolling. Can you imagine their national news reports having to stand for depositions? The best thing about a class action is that it is done by a group of people and not the Government!
It CNN was to lose and forced to pay back subscription fees to every cable and every other subscriber This could be out of business or it could start a share holder revolt.
Could be a fun thing! Any other constructive suggestions?
I love the passion and sincerity, but if you read the Federalist papers, you'll find even inaccurate fake news is covered under the First Amendment.
Quote from: Solar on April 06, 2017, 06:15:53 PM
I love the passion and sincerity, but if you read the Federalist papers, you'll find even inaccurate fake news is covered under the First Amendment.
But not making a profit through misrepresentation of Their product! That is not a first amendment Right! They can say whatever they want but I want the money back taken from me from a Fraud that continues to mis-advertise what they are!
Quote from: redbeard on April 06, 2017, 06:31:32 PM
But not making a profit through misrepresentation of Their product! That is not a first amendment Right! They can say whatever they want but I want the money back taken from me from a Fraud that continues to mis-advertise what they are!
"We paid for news, but all we got was a sitcom about a liberal new service."
Quote from: redbeard on April 06, 2017, 06:31:32 PM
But not making a profit through misrepresentation of Their product! That is not a first amendment Right! They can say whatever they want but I want the money back taken from me from a Fraud that continues to mis-advertise what they are!
News papers sell the same crap.
Quote from: Solar on April 06, 2017, 06:15:53 PM
I love the passion and sincerity, but if you read the Federalist papers, you'll find even inaccurate fake news is covered under the First Amendment.
I believe he's talking more about separating unwanted TV channels from whatever package is arranged from a given carrier. That doesn't limit free speech, but expands freedom of choice.
I don't see the big-name players bowing down to just any one country, even ours. We may win choices but not minimum amounts. They'll fleece users anyway, it's what they do.
My choice about ten years ago was to stop paying for TV altogether. The money went to better more enduring things.
Quote from: quiller on April 07, 2017, 04:21:54 AM
I believe he's talking more about separating unwanted TV channels from whatever package is arranged from a given carrier. That doesn't limit free speech, but expands freedom of choice.
I don't see the big-name players bowing down to just any one country, even ours. We may win choices but not minimum amounts. They'll fleece users anyway, it's what they do.
My choice about ten years ago was to stop paying for TV altogether. The money went to better more enduring things.
Oh, like entertainment instead of classifying them as news channels?
The left is already in the process. I tuned into CNN the other day and they were running...damn, I think it was an infomercial or a fakeumentary, didn't really matter, both are snakeoil.
If that was really the point though, suing CNN does nothing, but switch to Dish and they let you create your own packages now.
Quote from: quiller on April 07, 2017, 04:21:54 AM
I believe he's talking more about separating unwanted TV channels from whatever package is arranged from a given carrier. That doesn't limit free speech, but expands freedom of choice.
I don't see the big-name players bowing down to just any one country, even ours. We may win choices but not minimum amounts. They'll fleece users anyway, it's what they do.
My choice about ten years ago was to stop paying for TV altogether. The money went to better more enduring things.
I have an outdoor HD antenna for my ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox. I get over 100 channels for free with this HD antenna. It's only about a foot and a half tall and a foot wide. Awesome antenna. It's called the ClearStream™ 2V UHF/VHF Indoor/Outdoor HDTV Antenna. I have it attached to my deck.
https://www.antennasdirect.com/store/ClearStream_2V_UHF_VHF_Indoor_Outdoor_DTV_Antenna_With_Mount.html
My wife loves her cooking shows, Food Network, HGTV, TBS, TNT, etc. All them type of shows so we got SlingTV the blue package and it cost us $20 a month for about twenty channels. The Blue package has Fox Sports One. No liberal ESPN. It's on their Orange package. They have many add-ons you can choose from like HBO, Showtime, etc. We choice not to have these paid channels.
https://www.sling.com/
Just throwing these options out there. These works best for us.
Quote from: Bronx on April 07, 2017, 08:33:09 AM
I have an outdoor HD antenna for my ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox. I get over 100 channels for free with this HD antenna. It's only about a foot and a half tall and a foot wide. Awesome antenna. It's called the ClearStream™ 2V UHF/VHF Indoor/Outdoor HDTV Antenna. I have it attached to my deck.
https://www.antennasdirect.com/store/ClearStream_2V_UHF_VHF_Indoor_Outdoor_DTV_Antenna_With_Mount.html
My wife loves her cooking shows, Food Network, HGTV, TBS, TNT, etc. All them type of shows so we got SlingTV the blue package and it cost us $20 a month for about twenty channels. The Blue package has Fox Sports One. No liberal ESPN. It's on their Orange package. They have many add-ons you can choose from like HBO, Showtime, etc. We choice not to have these paid channels.
https://www.sling.com/
Just throwing these options out there. These works best for us.
This explains why Dish made the offer they made us, they're afraid people might switch.
God I love capitalism and competition.
Quote from: Solar on April 07, 2017, 08:44:47 AM
This explains why Dish made the offer they made us, they're afraid people might switch.
God I love capitalism and competition.
I was at Best Buy a couple of years ago and was looking at some TVs. As I was watching the TVs their pictures went out and went to inform someone that their pictures went out on the TV. The guys said they knew and was replacing cable with free TV channels with an HD outdoor antenna.
Bingo I stood and watched and purchased the same antenna they was putting up. Which is the antenna I mentioned before. My wife voiced her concerns and that's when they told us about Sling TV. Haha.
With internet, Wifi and Sling TV our bill is $50 bucks a month compared to $200 we use to pay for the same damn HD channels we have now with the outdoor HD antenna and Sling TV.
Yes I agree, gotta love capitalism and competition. I sure do...!
Quote from: redbeard on April 06, 2017, 06:04:29 PM
For years may cable bill has included CNN that advertises as a "News" organization. I never watched them but each month I have been Forced to pay a portion of my Cable bill to support them!
There in a mounting pile of evidence that they are not as they advertise!
I suggest a class action lawsuit for the re imbursement of all funds they have received by their false advertisement! This could be fun forcing them in open court to prove the accuracy in their reporting! Of course they would claim their first amendment rights as a news organization but the argument against that is --That is what we are in court to determine!
How much evidence of fake news and false reporting is there as related to their organization? I'll bet Accuracy in media has enough on hand to start the ball rolling. Can you imagine their national news reports having to stand for depositions? The best thing about a class action is that it is done by a group of people and not the Government!
It CNN was to lose and forced to pay back subscription fees to every cable and every other subscriber This could be out of business or it could start a share holder revolt.
Could be a fun thing! Any other constructive suggestions?
I've mentioned it in another post and will again because I think the logic behind this concept is supportable To start, interpret the First Amendment as applied to individuals, not organizations. Then recognize that our government went to a lot of trouble to put checks and balances on our governing power - executive, legislative, and judicial with all the trimmings. But they did not anticipate the progress of technology and how much power over the thinking of the people that the media could capture. Not only technology, but how we've settled for being dumbed down and have become zombies in front of the TV. I think that with such a perspective, it would be reasonable to amend the constitution to put focus on the media and put checks and balances in-place on their power - much aligned with what the founders did with the US constitution. Basically, to amend the Constitution to address the power control that resulted from technical innovation. Protecting the media with the First Amendment is asymmetric; they get protection from the government but the people don't get any protection from them.
Quote from: Bronx on April 07, 2017, 09:45:02 AM
I was at Best Buy a couple of years ago and was looking at some TVs. As I was watching the TVs their pictures went out and went to inform someone that their pictures went out on the TV. The guys said they knew and was replacing cable with free TV channels with an HD outdoor antenna.
Bingo I stood and watched and purchased the same antenna they was putting up. Which is the antenna I mentioned before. My wife voiced her concerns and that's when they told us about Sling TV. Haha.
With internet, Wifi and Sling TV our bill is $50 bucks a month compared to $200 we use to pay for the same damn HD channels we have now with the outdoor HD antenna and Sling TV.
Yes I agree, gotta love capitalism and competition. I sure do...!
i DID THE DIGITAL SIGNAL FOR AWHILE, BUT IT WAS HIT AND MISS ON RECEPTION BECAUSE OF MOUNTAINS AND WEATHER
DAMN CAP LOCKS KEY IS STUCK,....ARRRRGGGhhh!!!
We have wifi in my area, worthless as Hell, you're lucky to get one bar for very long, so satellite is our, and most of rural America's only option.
Quote from: quiller on April 07, 2017, 04:21:54 AM
I believe he's talking more about separating unwanted TV channels from whatever package is arranged from a given carrier. That doesn't limit free speech, but expands freedom of choice.
I don't see the big-name players bowing down to just any one country, even ours. We may win choices but not minimum amounts. They'll fleece users anyway, it's what they do.
My choice about ten years ago was to stop paying for TV altogether. The money went to better more enduring things.
Quiller can probably elaborate on this, would it be unbiased to say, just stick to the bare facts, When, Where, Who, What and Why? For example...
When: Thursday 10pm EST
Where: Syrian Airport.
Who: Cruise Missiles.
What: Crash Landed & blew up.
Why: Launched by US forces to damage Runway.
Pretty boring, IMO. The rest is somebodies "take" - which is gonna be biased, so I contend ALL NEWS IS BIASED.
Everyone sensationalizes the news, it works, even websites are cluttered with "click bait" to grab our attention, the "crawlers" on the bottom of the screen useto be weather statements, not it's filled with crap to keep you watching.
One of my "personal filters" is whether or not the source is pro-American or anti-American. I automatically assume everything RT (Russia Today) posts is fiction, propaganda or some factual material mixed with pro-Russian trash - so I know they have an ultimate agenda & gladly use American Freedom to promote it.
News or any commercial outlet - They are trying to SELL something, if you don't like it, don't watch it. I think there's enough stuff on the internet to exceed the entertainment desires of any type of person, some of it is actually educational & useful...! It might take a lot of digging though.
Quote from: Hoofer on April 08, 2017, 06:55:07 AM
Quiller can probably elaborate on this, would it be unbiased to say, just stick to the bare facts, When, Where, Who, What and Why? For example...
When: Thursday 10pm EST
Where: Syrian Airport.
Who: Cruise Missiles.
What: Crash Landed & blew up.
Why: Launched by US forces to damage Runway.
Pretty boring, IMO. The rest is somebodies "take" - which is gonna be biased, so I contend ALL NEWS IS BIASED.
Everyone sensationalizes the news, it works, even websites are cluttered with "click bait" to grab our attention, the "crawlers" on the bottom of the screen useto be weather statements, not it's filled with crap to keep you watching.
One of my "personal filters" is whether or not the source is pro-American or anti-American. I automatically assume everything RT (Russia Today) posts is fiction, propaganda or some factual material mixed with pro-Russian trash - so I know they have an ultimate agenda & gladly use American Freedom to promote it.
News or any commercial outlet - They are trying to SELL something, if you don't like it, don't watch it. I think there's enough stuff on the internet to exceed the entertainment desires of any type of person, some of it is actually educational & useful...! It might take a lot of digging though.
I quit watching TV because the money was better spent elsewhere.
Quote from: Hoofer on April 08, 2017, 06:55:07 AM
Quiller can probably elaborate on this, would it be unbiased to say, just stick to the bare facts, When, Where, Who, What and Why? For example...
When: Thursday 10pm EST
Where: Syrian Airport.
Who: Cruise Missiles.
What: Crash Landed & blew up.
Why: Launched by US forces to damage Runway.
Pretty boring, IMO. The rest is somebodies "take" - which is gonna be biased, so I contend ALL NEWS IS BIASED.
Everyone sensationalizes the news, it works, even websites are cluttered with "click bait" to grab our attention, the "crawlers" on the bottom of the screen useto be weather statements, not it's filled with crap to keep you watching.
One of my "personal filters" is whether or not the source is pro-American or anti-American. I automatically assume everything RT (Russia Today) posts is fiction, propaganda or some factual material mixed with pro-Russian trash - so I know they have an ultimate agenda & gladly use American Freedom to promote it.
News or any commercial outlet - They are trying to SELL something, if you don't like it, don't watch it. I think there's enough stuff on the internet to exceed the entertainment desires of any type of person, some of it is actually educational & useful...! It might take a lot of digging though.
There are ways of presenting an unbiased report that is not limited to a laundry list of facts.
For instance:
On Thursday, at approximately 10pm Eastern Daylight time, two United States destroyers launched 59 Tomahawk Block IV cruise missiles against a military airfield in Syria. The missiles damaged the runways and destroyed several aircraft housed in hardened bunkers. In an announcement by President Donald Trump, he stated the missile attack is in response to a Sarin gas attack which was allegedly initiated by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad against a rebel stronghold in the city of Khan Sheikhoun. The targeted airfield is purportedly the origin of the Sarin gas attack. President Trump said his purpose is to "prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons."
Not exactly a Tom Clancy thriller, but not dead-assed boring, either. And I am not a professional.
The pros know how to write. The CHOOSE to use propaganda instead of truth, not just because their propaganda is more sensational, but because they have chosen to be part of the push to devolve the United States and the rest of the world into a socialist tyranny.
Quote from: zewazir on April 08, 2017, 11:42:57 AM
There are ways of presenting an unbiased report that is not limited to a laundry list of facts.
For instance:
On Thursday, at approximately 10pm Eastern Daylight time, two United States destroyers launched 59 Tomahawk Block IV cruise missiles against a military airfield in Syria. The missiles damaged the runways and destroyed several aircraft housed in hardened bunkers. In an announcement by President Donald Trump, he stated the missile attack is in response to a Sarin gas attack which was allegedly initiated by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad against a rebel stronghold in the city of Khan Sheikhoun. The targeted airfield is purportedly the origin of the Sarin gas attack. President Trump said his purpose is to "prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons."
Not exactly a Tom Clancy thriller, but not dead-assed boring, either. And I am not a professional.
The pros know how to write. The CHOOSE to use propaganda instead of truth, not just because their propaganda is more sensational, but because they have chosen to be part of the push to devolve the United States and the rest of the world into a socialist tyranny.
Thank you Zewazir ... well said! And I think you'd make a better reporter than 95% of those I hear that either overtly or insinuate via spin their positions into so-called news reports. Both red and blue. The news should present the facts and stated opinions of those on both sides of any topic - and work hard to avoid their own opinions. I would even ask them to drop editorials and stick with only reporting the news of those involved in an event by happenstance ... not by chasing after it.
Quote from: topside on April 08, 2017, 12:59:01 PM
Thank you Zewazir ... well said! And I think you'd make a better reporter than 95% of those I hear that either overtly or insinuate via spin their positions into so-called news reports. Both red and blue. The news should present the facts and stated opinions of those on both sides of any topic - and work hard to avoid their own opinions. I would even ask them to drop editorials and stick with only reporting the news of those involved in an event by happenstance ... not by chasing after it.
There goes the investigative reporting which toppled Richard Nixon.
Quote from: quiller on April 09, 2017, 01:11:51 AM
There goes the investigative reporting which toppled Richard Nixon.
Yes. The random topical drive by's do find an occasional target. Is it worth all the other problems via sensationalism they stir up in the name of ratings / income / notoriety.
Also, Nixon's illegal actions were uncovered by journalists who took the time to uncover and report facts. Journalists can actually uncover their own facts ... it is possible albeit far too rare? Most (all) aspects of interest don't come across the wire but takes someone getting their hands dirty.
Quote from: Solar on April 06, 2017, 06:52:07 PM
News papers sell the same crap.
But you are not forced to buy them!
Quote from: Solar on April 07, 2017, 08:44:47 AM
This explains why Dish made the offer they made us, they're afraid people might switch.
God I love capitalism and competition.
A few months ago I cut the TV cable but kept the High speed internet and now stream most channels. I did opt for Sling TV for the movie line ups and guess what, CNN is still in the package!! However my cable bill is half what it was. most TV channels are available on You tube these days live stream, Including FOX
Quote from: redbeard on April 09, 2017, 05:33:06 PM
A few months ago I cut the TV cable but kept the High speed internet and now stream most channels. I did opt for Sling TV for the movie line ups and guess what, CNN is still in the package!! However my cable bill is half what it was. most TV channels are available on You tube these days live stream, Including FOX
You and I of the old guard have to admit we're not mainstream cases ... rare cases now. I believe that most of the millennials, especially the snow flakes, get their dialogue from the media - a vanishingly small percentage understand or care about the history of the country and how it came to become as stable as it has been. All is becoming (or is) relative ... "I'm glad the whole work ethic thing is for you but it's just not for me as I choose to pursue my passion even though it creates nothing that anyone else values; no one will give me a paycheck for drawing the art that I and my mom thinks is awesome.
Combine this prevalent mentality with the breakthroughs in communications technology (ubiquitous) over the past 20 years and you've got a recipe for major power control. A media that hawks opinion for the sake of controlling the dialogue and the country. As I've said (and seems to be falling on deaf ears), the founding fathers went to a great deal of trouble to put in checks and balances to keep the powers that be in balanced over time. They could not have forseen the tech breakthroughs or the power that it's enabled the media to wield. I haven't seen such an analysis, but I would bet you could show that the media controls a degree of power in our country that competes with the branches of government - basically on how the media influences the people who influence those in the branches of government. I'm still thinking an amendment to the constitution regarding the actions of
societal groups, which would include the media, is in keeping with balance of power and does not contradict the original intention of the first amendment to give
individuals free speech.
You may choose to turn off the media of varied forms ... good for you. But you are the exception and not the rule.
Quote from: redbeard on April 09, 2017, 05:26:08 PM
But you are not forced to buy them!
OK, I see what you meant now.
Yeah, I guess your only true option is to buy a Satellite receiver, an actual 12' dish and you are free to purchase individual channels, not packages, and it really isn't that expensive in the long run.
But because you do have options, you don't actually have a case, unless, you can prove you are being forced to hook to a service, say like govt housing and they only allow one provider.
Then you might have a case, but someone like me, they'd laugh out of court because I can't even get cable or DSL, only satellite.