This article made me feel sad and angry to think our freedom of expression may end, along with so many other freedoms we've recently lost.
Personally, I enjoy hearing different views on things so I don't become a robot programmed the way the media or government wants. I don't have to agree with everything I hear.

Do you think this can happen here in the 'land of the free'? Do you think it should happen just to prevent 'hurt feelings'?

How can we preserve our right to say what we believe? I'm worried and a little angry.:mad:

What do you say?

Accuracy in Media - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, yea, I guess they would be telling people that media is a "leftist" - that's their job.

?? I thought media's job was to fairly report a situation - not to label or take sides.

That would be the perfect situation but now we have "opinion" shows that are all spin.

The *media* is entertainment, wings. :) Television, radio, newspapers... all entertainment, and it has been that way for quite some time. Mostly, it has been dominated by right wing spin machines-now, I have sensed that it is going to turn around since the disgrace of Bush and the advent of Obama.

A person who wants to get non-propagadized information has to go online and get "facts" and opinions of educated, qualified people in order to form a relatively unbiased opinion. But, I think we all have a worldview that we like to use as a framework.

As choux says, unbiased opinion is a myth.
Everything that has ever been written is pretty much biased, the only people who could present an unbiased opinion are people who don't care, and someone who doesn't care would not bother presenting an opinion would they?
What I find interesting, is that "free speech" isn't as prevalent as people think. Freedom of speech isn't in the Australian constitution, and I have heard that america is still in a state of emergency left over from ww2 which can legally suspend peoples rights to freedom of speech.

Yes, and in the end, the consumer decides what shows stay on the air, unless they receive government funding like Public Broadcasting does.
The reason there is less liberal talk shows, they can't keep the advertisers, if they could get more, there would be more of their talk shows.

... Radical right are feel-good hatemongers. That is why right wing shows have been more popular... NO ONE WANTED TO HEAR THE TRUTH, Chuck, they just wanted to hate who they were told to hate. :)

Those days are going to be over soon, I hope. Time for Americans to grow up; no more hiding from real life in ignorance and fear.

We all should take responsibility for the information we are fed. We should not just sit back and accept it, if the media says something, we should check it with other sources before swallowing it, and listen to all sides of the story if possible. There is a similar problem with music. The radio mostly just plays the mainstream hip hop/ pop stuff, when there is plenty of much better music out there, but people just want to swallow what is fed to them directly, no matter how mindless and how sexist the music can be, instead of actually seeking out the right music for them.

I gave up watching, reading and listening to media "stories" of both the right and the left when the media made an ar$e of itself with Watergate. Stuff like "when Nixon traipsed off to China"... It is almost impossible to relate the truth when a person's words and time are limited by full page ads and commercials. I can't believe that so many intelligent people quote the newspaper or the local news. The facts have become a progressive soap opera which I would like to rent later, laugh and watch without the commercials.

I shot my TV months ago. My wife was quite upset because I didn't take it outside first. Now, I just read Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler. They say history repeats itself and I am finding that to be true. At least I now know what to expect.


Volume One - A Reckoning
Chapter VII: The Revolution

WITH THE YEAR 1915 enemy propaganda began in our country, after 1916 it became more and more intensive, till finally, at the beginning of the year 1918, it swelled to a positive flood. Now the results of this seduction could be seen at every step. The army gradually learned to think as the enemy wanted it to.
And the German counter-action was a complete failure.
In the person of the man whose intellect and will made him its leader, the army had the intention and determination to take up the struggle in this field, too, but it lacked the instrument which would have been necessary. And from the psychological point of view, it was wrong to have this enlightenment work carried on by the troops themselves. If it was to be effective, it had to come from home. Only then was there any assurance of success among the men who, after all, had been performing immortal deeds of heroism and privation for nearly four years for this homeland.
But what came out of the home country?
Was this failure stupidity or crime?

There is rumors of reinstituting the so called "Fairness Doctrine".
Fairness Doctrine

Back when there were only 3 networks if someone did an op-ed on line the network was compelled to allow a counterpoint .

With the many options available to obtain information that is no longer needed and those who attempt to revise it are only doing so for punitive reasons. They want to fix the fact that liberal radio and televison does not get the same ratings as their conservative counterpart.

Instead of letting competition work they want to impose broadcast selection on the media.
This is an issue that has come up before since the doctrine was repealed in the 1980s .I do not think it will go anywhere ;but then again... there are plenty of Repubulicansalong with almost all the Democrats who were mad that the public was mobilized to defeat the Comprehensive Immigration reform last year (including John McCain) who would love to see a legal muzzle on Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Your right to say what you believe is not in danger. Don't worry. Be happy.

The media's job is to get as many people as possible to pay attention to it so that they can charge advertisers more money for delivering more eyeballs. It's important to understand that the only thing that matters to them is that you pay attention, not whether you approve or disapprove, agree or disagree. Disapproving attention is worth just as much to them as approval is, so stoking controversy is their stock-in-trade. If you really want to strike a blow against them, ignore them completely. If you aren't willing to do that, don't complain about what they serve up.

I'm old enough to know that conservative talk shows ARE the "balance". I well remember the time when all that was available was what the media wanted us to hear, and most of the media was owned by few ultra rich left leaning families. In spite of the "lack of balance" that they decry, Obama would be nowhere were it not for the puff job that the media gave him starting with his face on the cover of Time magazine.

There it is there.

You only need tin foil hats to keep the aliens from bombarding your brain with unwanted information or orders to do something you wouldn't normally do. There is not a hat in the world that can block out Hannity and Colmes. You have to shoot your TV.

For everyone's information... some* facts*... so right wingers can skip this since you only like lies. Lol

These are the issues of real Liberals...

1. Constitutional amendment to ban capital punishment.

2. Gun control in cities.

3. Equal rights for all Americans including homosexuals

4. Etc.

SEE, **NONE** OF THE MSM ARE LIBERAL!!

They range from rabid right wingnuts, to **Moderate**.

THE MSM IS OWNED BY SIX MAJOR CORPORATIONS( LIKE DISNEY); CORPORATIONS WITH A RIGHT WING AGENDA, certainly not left! Some facts to rattle your cages. :)

Gee I am so sick of right wing liars and propagandists after all these years. :)

I agree with karma. They are trying to brainwash us into buying foxtel.

Thanks everyone. I actually don't watch or listen to any 'talk shows' but I certainly want to preserve our rights to broadcast them. Hopefully, our politicians will still allow us choices after the next president comes into the white house. Losing personal freedoms increase quickly after the first one slides by without complaint.