Randi Rhodes Forums

Welcome to the Randi Rhodes Message Boards.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If you experience difficulties logging in, (i.e. Incorrect Password) please click the forgot password link on the login error screen to have a new password sent to you. If all else fails, register again.

It is currently Tue May 21, 2013 8:50 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
 [ 10 posts ] 

Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know


Author Message
 Post subject: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 9258
Location: Sunny Florida
... what they're paying for political ads.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75601.html

You do your taxes online. You get driving directions online. You’re likely reading this article online.
But if you want to see the “public file” every broadcaster is required to maintain, you have to drive down to the TV station and dig through filing cabinets.

It’s hard to believe such an antiquated system exists in 2012. But a Federal Communications Commission vote on Friday may finally push broadcasters into the 21st century. After a decade of dragging its feet, the FCC seems poised to force stations to put this public information online — where the public can actually find it.

This move is especially important now because the files are supposed to include information on who’s buying political ads and how much they’re paying. These political files provide information you can’t find anywhere else about the super PACs and front groups already clogging the airwaves with attack ads.

Political ads mean big bucks for broadcasters. Driven by the influx of super PAC spending, TV stations are expected to rake in far more than $3 billion this election cycle. The sources of this windfall should not be kept secret.

Stations are required by law to maintain public files on who buys political ads and what rates they pay. Files must also include the names of executives and directors of the groups buying the ads.
Moreover, unlike the Federal Election Commission, which collects information only about ads concerning federal elections, the FCC files cover all political advertising — including issue ads and local and state elections.

But while the public has the right to see this important information, broadcasters have kept it largely out of reach for people who don’t have the time to root around in TV station basements.
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has been right to push for greater transparency. But his proposals have faced significant opposition. “Some in the broadcast industry,” Genachowski said to the National Association of Broadcasters last week, “have elected to position themselves against technology, against transparency and against journalism.”

[snip][end]

For the larger context of this editorial...

FCC weighs putting political ad data online; broadcasters balk

Even though such information is already technically public, broadcasters fear that putting that level of detail on the Internet will undermine their own businesses.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-c ... 6221.story

[snip][end]

Here's the irony of all of this. The law already mandates that stations keep this information and make it available to the public. But you have to go visit the station to see it!

All the FCC wants to do is to make that same info available on the interwebz. But, it seems the broadcasters don't want that - due to the windfall of money they make from selling political ad airtime, and them not really wanting you to know how much - or who they're getting it from (i.e. super PACs.)

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds. -- Malaclypse the Younger



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:33 pm
Posts: 8192
Location: aka "Voluble"
I'm embarrassed this never occurred to me before.

There would obviously be some expense at start-up - there always is in undertaking a new system, and creating a catalog of existing archives. But it's almost laughable that this is - forget "already underway" - it should have been SOP years ago.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:45 pm
Posts: 10434
Location: Oregon
This is good. Now, I'd also like to see that stations who advertise themselves as "liberal," but who preempt their own programming with college baseball games whenever that team plays, must show who made the decision and who's behind it.

I have to laugh when the GOP advertises on a liberal station with an ad that begins, "conservatives like YOU..."

_________________
‎"The Devil can cite scripture for his purpose." —Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Act 1, Scene 3



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2821
Location: Portland OR
There's always KBOO Roy.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:45 pm
Posts: 10434
Location: Oregon
There's always KBOO Roy.

Yups. And NPR. One of the two is what I sometime twist the dial to when a program is preempted in the middle of a segment, but luckily I can pick the program up via iHeart too. But that's a pain if I'm doing a download.

_________________
‎"The Devil can cite scripture for his purpose." —Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Act 1, Scene 3



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:03 pm
Posts: 11175
Location: Back In The Saddle Again
I'm embarrassed this never occurred to me before.

There would obviously be some expense at start-up - there always is in undertaking a new system, and creating a catalog of existing archives. But it's almost laughable that this is - forget "already underway" - it should have been SOP years ago.



The other thing that people need to know is that IF you have issues with what you find or with anything the station is doing, like the way they cover or don't cover something in their news operation, you can ALWAYS FILE A CHALLENGE TO THEIR LICENSE.

They may have all the equipment in the world, without that license they have nothing. All these stations that flood the airwaves with this RW garbage need to have their licenses challenged, and when possible taken away. We are not powerless. There are so many things that can be done.

_________________
The conservative challenge: Name anything sponsored by conservatives since Carter, that has benefited the masses of America
Image

"OCCUPY THE VOTING BOOTH"--CarmenJonze



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:35 pm
Posts: 15198
Location: As-Salamu Alaikum
I'm embarrassed this never occurred to me before.

There would obviously be some expense at start-up - there always is in undertaking a new system, and creating a catalog of existing archives. But it's almost laughable that this is - forget "already underway" - it should have been SOP years ago.



The other thing that people need to know is that IF you have issues with what you find or with anything the station is doing, like the way they cover or don't cover something in their news operation, you can ALWAYS FILE A CHALLENGE TO THEIR LICENSE.

They may have all the equipment in the world, without that license they have nothing. All these stations that flood the airwaves with this RW garbage need to have their licenses challenged, and when possible taken away. We are not powerless. There are so many things that can be done.

Challenge them while you still can...

_________________
Image



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:03 pm
Posts: 11175
Location: Back In The Saddle Again
I'm embarrassed this never occurred to me before.

There would obviously be some expense at start-up - there always is in undertaking a new system, and creating a catalog of existing archives. But it's almost laughable that this is - forget "already underway" - it should have been SOP years ago.



The other thing that people need to know is that IF you have issues with what you find or with anything the station is doing, like the way they cover or don't cover something in their news operation, you can ALWAYS FILE A CHALLENGE TO THEIR LICENSE.

They may have all the equipment in the world, without that license they have nothing. All these stations that flood the airwaves with this RW garbage need to have their licenses challenged, and when possible taken away. We are not powerless. There are so many things that can be done.

Challenge them while you still can...



In my experience, that's one of the ways to get their attention. Jus sayin'

_________________
The conservative challenge: Name anything sponsored by conservatives since Carter, that has benefited the masses of America
Image

"OCCUPY THE VOTING BOOTH"--CarmenJonze



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:35 pm
Posts: 15198
Location: As-Salamu Alaikum
SF Bay Area channel two is the fox affiliate, but since I dont watch their 10 o'clock news or much of anything else other than prime-time, i dont know if they are slanted towards stupid like some.

I wouldnt think they are, and I hope not as I have really fond memories of that channel going back 50 yrs or more.

Before it was the Fox affiliate it was the big independent in the Bay Area, it is where I would see

Image


http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/ ... r-himself/

Professor Irwin Corey, who made me laugh maybe more than anybody ever.

click on the link, watch the video, wow, what an amazing man

_________________
Image



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Broadcasters Don't Want You To Know
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 7:38 am
Posts: 4398
We have an update as seen in the Chicago Tribune. Seems they are still arguing the case.................


National Association of Broadcasters goes to court to block transparency in political ads



Quote:
The FCC expected the rules to swiftly gain OMB approval, in
time to reflect spending during the 2012 campaign cycle.

The litigation is unlikely to hamper that intent, said Corie
Wright, an attorney for the public interest group Free Press.
The broadcasters did not seek an emergency stay of the rules in
their petition.

The new rules would come at a time when political spending
has hit record highs. Independent "super" political action
committees have already spent nearly $126 million this campaign
cycle compared with only $32.7 million spent in the same time
period during the 2008 election.

These "Super PACs" can raise and spend unlimited amounts to
help politicians, as long as they do not coordinate with
official campaigns.



more

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-rt-el ... full.story

_________________
I think the paranoid people are following me.................



Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
 [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rokit88 and 34 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: