Fox Refuses To Air Gay N.Y. Candidate's TV Ad

[scottie300z]

I agree w/ bob. Those commercials are paid for and the television channels can deny business to anyone they want its not cencorship. if it was, then the tv channels would have to let anybody that wanted to be on.

And yeah i agree that the fcc is cencsorship, but its just too bad you cant do much about it. Same thing w/ the gun laws sort of, they dont let just anyone get a gun. Of course i understand the reasoning behind that as it is very sound and i support them and all, but where do you pick and choose what rights to hold and what rights to violate? do you decide to give crazy people and previous criminals guns just to hold up the principle? In the minds of the fcc they are protecting people from certain things just like the gun laws are as well. Of course i dont agree w/ this but i sorta see where they are coming from, they think they are doing society a service.

[Matra et Alpine]

It's not censorship, censorship comes from the government.

A streange definition of censorship

Censhorship is by ANYONE.
TO someone with little power and no influence over media it's called "opinion".
BUT once a group has power to influence control of a media format THEY ascribe the principles of FAIRNESS to then it IS CENSORSHIP.

In my opinion, it would be a violation of freedom of press if the government said they did have to run the ad. Remember, freedom means not only the freedom to show what you want, but the freedom not to show what you don't want. Whether FOX is controlled by the republicans anyway is another matter...

erm THAT is the best twist on the American Constitutino and it's amendments ever.
The "freedom of speech" ONLY ascribes to freedom for the individual to say what they wish without fear of attack. How can that be turned around to freedom to suppress for a media group whos stated purpose is "news" ?
Everyoen is free to NOT say what they dont agree with.
Again, HOW is that then turned in to suppress what they dont agree with for a media group who are hedl up by their advocates as "balanced" ??

As far as the FCC goes that IS censorship. I think its one of the major things thats wrong with this country. It DOESN'T protect the kids, at least not the 90% with internet access, and what they do and do not censor is ridiculous.

For instance, you can say 'nigger' (imo one of the most vulgar and derogatory words in our language) as many times as you want, but you can't say shit (usually, except for south park, which says it 146 times in one episode.) Its crazy, and its directly against freedom of speech and freedom of press.

Yep, tyou can't say shit and you cant have an ad for a gay politician.
Seems liek you concur that FOX are in error

[Bob]

No Matra you're right, when one group controls all media and uses it to control the public outlook, that is censorship. But FOX (in principle) is free press, and therefore they can choose what they do and do not want to say. If they find the commercial distasteful, they have full rights to refuse to show it. Of course, we all agree that some of their other programming, ex. Jerry Springer, is as bad as or worse than the commercial, but it is not our place to judge.

Of course we all know FOX is NOT balanced, their 'advocates' are left wing republicans who are glad that FOX follows the party line. But there are democratic biased news sources too, so its not like foxes decision not to run the ad will mean that it is not seen.

As far as my twisting the constitution, in america a corporation is given the same rights and protections as an individual. FOX has the right to maintain a biased view, just as the republicans have the right to say the fox maintains a fair and balanced view.

I found your post a bit confusing, so if my response doesn't make sense I'm a bit sorry.

[Bob]

I use the term censorship to describe governmental suppresion of views that are not concurrent with the governments wishes OR suppression of a media producer by any person or corporation.

You are assuming that fox is presenting their content as unbiased and factual. We both know that its not, and those who think it is are republicans anyway .

Opinion and censorship are not the same thing. I do not post obscenities and porn on the boards because in my opinion they are vulgar and have no place here. However, if I did and you deleted my post, that would be censorship, because you decided what I could say. In this case, it is fox deciding what fox will say, and therefore opinion, not censorship.

[Matra et Alpine]

No Matra you're right, when one group controls all media and uses it to control the public outlook, that is censorship.

I disagree, when any national media applies opinion to it's NEWS channels then THAT is as much censorship as any other act they may do to manipulate public opinion.
Just because it has another outlet does NOT mean that suppression isnt' censorship.
I think we may have a different view of censorship. Censors are NOT limited to government or "all" in any dictionary or legal system.

But FOX (in principle) is free press, and therefore they can choose what they do and do not want to say. If they find the commercial distasteful, they have full rights to refuse to show it. Of course, we all agree that some of their other programming, ex. Jerry Springer, is as bad as or worse than the commercial, but it is not our place to judge.

Dont have a problem with a 'free' media chosing it's content.
UNLESS that 'media' is a news channel and DOUBLY positions itself and is argued as being the most "balanced". They chose the 'high ground' they're falling from
The question in this case should be if the morality of the ad was likely to cause upset or be libelous. It would require a wider analysis of ads they've aired and stopped to determine if their is a bias. Why is a mans upper body is a problem when it appears in every shower gel advert ? Are gay people blocked from all Fox programming and adverrts ? Is any ad suggesting Bush is underperforming or biased banned ? Are all ads suggesting the same for others banned ??

Of course we all know FOX is NOT balanced, their 'advocates' are left wing republicans who are glad that FOX follows the party line. But there are democratic biased news sources too, so its not like foxes decision not to run the ad will mean that it is not seen.

One bias and one censor is a poor excuse foir a NEWS media to be the other. The best aspire to BALANCED view within their content and then they are 'fair'. Using other media bias to support one medias bias is the downfall of any suggestion of being a 'news' channel and moves it to an 'opinion' channel.

As far as my twisting the constitution, in america a corporation is given the same rights and protections as an individual. FOX has the right to maintain a biased view, just as the republicans have the right to say the fox maintains a fair and balanced view.

I see the point on "rights", I was errantly taking the position that as a national news channel that they would be MORALLY required to be balanced. So the freedom to SAY what you want also covered a requirement to report what they didn't too - otherwise it is THEN suppression.
Legally clearly they aren't. Agreed.

I found your post a bit confusing, so if my response doesn't make sense I'm a bit sorry.

The rights comments I woudl concur, but the rest I think you got spot on

[Matra et Alpine]

Opinion and censorship are not the same thing. I do not post obscenities and porn on the boards because in my opinion they are vulgar and have no place here. However, if I did and you deleted my post, that would be censorship, because you decided what I could say. In this case, it is fox deciding what fox will say, and therefore opinion, not censorship.

I was positioning opinion and censorship of the SAME group - ie FOX.
So as you said, IF an advertiser placed an ad that FOX didnt' liek then removal of it is censorship.
THe only difference is the advertiser ASKED for it first.

If you ASKED to post porn and were told not to, THAT is still censorship.
If you look at how the film industry handles censorship that is exactly what happens there. You ask, make changes, ask again.
It's all censorign content.

[Bob]

You're right, I agree now, my mistake was I was assuming that we were talking about Fox's main channel, which is very little of a news channel and does not present itself as fair and balanced. After rereading the original post, Fox News, a separate channel, is 24/7 news and supposedly unbiased.

But I think you agree it is within their legal rights to refuse the commercial, it just may not be morally right.

[Matra et Alpine]

But I think you agree it is within their legal rights to refuse the commercial, it just may not be morally right.

yes.
Whether the FCC should ALLOW a TV channel to call itself a NEWS Channel perhaps is the issue

It's like a brothel advertising as a "Sports and health centre"

[Bob]

I'd like to reply, but I have to go visit the sports and health center now.

[Matra et Alpine]

class, Bob