Live data from Hacker News

FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

variety.com

61–70 of 86 posts

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#61
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Do you think the modern Democratic Party has more or less conservatives then it did in the ‘60’s? Do you think there are more or fewer liberals? 2) Do you think the modern Republican Party has more or less conservatives then it did in the ‘60’s? Do you think there are more or fewer liberals? 3) Do you think conservatives voted for or against the civil rights bill? Do you think conservative ideology has distinct pr…

You appear to be reading things into my argument that aren't there, I suspect as a result of ideological blindness. Might I suggest you broaden your perspective just a bit beyond simple "liberal" and "conservative"? Because the real world is much more complex and so is my take on it. I object to mythological re-interpretations of events, that's all. No attempt to equate modern Democrats with slavery or segregationist…

I’m sorry but I can’t discuss politics with people that refuse to answer basic questions about the past and what they believe regarding it without ducking and obfuscation. To me it’s always a sign of concern trolling, especially when the argument then devolves into arguments that really just center around calling others ideologically blinded and calls for perspective and nuance - which you are curiously advocating for by dumping out of context figures and refusing to give context about.

For others that are interested, the liberal and conservative blocs were the predominant factions of both parties that played pivotal roles in civil rights era legislation. Specifically, the ‘64 bill was passed by factions of mainly northern democratic liberals and liberal republicans - many republicans actually played crucial roles in captaining the legislation through congress and surviving quorum calls organized by the opposing conservative southern and midwestern factions. Looking at the civil rights issue through the perspectives of liberal v conservative is also interesting for other reasons as well. LBJ in many ways was a pseudo-conservative, who by dint of his firmly conservative credentials was able to position himself to be mentored by and ultimately betray his mentor, the leader of the conservative faction and the strongest force for segregation in America - the senator Richard Russell. In the larger tapestry of American history, Russell was also a new dealer, which in many ways was a deal in which conservatives accepted the progressive safety net in exchange for entrenching the socioeconomic subjugation of minorities through carve-outs to their eligibility to receive aforementioned benefits. This is the thesis behind Ira Katznelson’s ‘Fear Itself’.

Additionally, America has been undergoing a political realignment in which party and ideology are increasingly correlated - there are fewer liberal Republicans and fewer conservative Democrats, which in turn has led to greater political polarization and the greater political paralysis we see today. Understanding the drivers of the realignment between conservatives and liberals is crucial to understanding American politics today.

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#62
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well said. I’m amazed by how blind history is to LBJ’s racist roots. LBJ was a life-long cold blooded political operative. His “courage” was strategic. And it worked.

Your critique of the civil rights bill is that the person who passed it was a politician?

No his critique is that it's laughable to call LBJ anything other than a blatent racist, despite the fact that he facilitated the civil rights act.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racis...

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#63
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well said. I’m amazed by how blind history is to LBJ’s racist roots. LBJ was a life-long cold blooded political operative. His “courage” was strategic. And it worked.

Your critique of the civil rights bill is that the person who passed it was a politician?

You clearly are ignorant of LBJ’s life. I suggest that you read his biography and expand your mind.

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#64
post #50
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention some pretty solid data about where the anti Black racists reside. It's hard to imagine a Klan member being a Democrat, within the past few decades. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/04/1...

Senator Robert Byrd was a Democrat and a KKK member. Although, when it become a bad move politically to be a KKK member he left and started saying he regretted it. I don't think all the Democratic politicians who were originally racist suddenly had a change of heart. It's my personal opinion that politicians are generally sociopaths, so it isn't a strange thing to me that most of the Democratic politicians suddenly s…

Lee Atwater, former chairman of the Republican National Party ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater ) literally said that the key to republicans winning in the south was couching racism in more palatable euphemisms.

https://www.thenation.com/article/exclusive-lee-atwaters-inf...

North Carolina's GOP was sanctioned by the Supreme Court for actively attempting to disenfranchise black people: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/north-c...

Then you've got this: https://twitter.com/KFILE/status/943864121497473026

People can be former racists, hell, the prior pope was in the Hitler Youth!

That said, if you want to argue Robert Byrd presence in the party, who has a 100% rating from the NAACP ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd ) somehow indicates that the Democrats are institutionally racist, you are operating with some substantially motivated reasoning.

(edited because it's likely SOME Democrats are racist, but not the political party itself as an institution, unlike the GOP)

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#65
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the post is not referring to a sudden exchange of political identities, but rather to the Southern Strategy. This definitely had its roots in the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but was a long, deliberate process by the Republican Party to exploit racial divisions for political gain. The RNC chairman formally apologized to the NAACP for this specifically in 2005. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

That 2005 apology is ringing pretty hollow in 2017.

Especially given that the Supreme Court has sanctioned the GOP on several occasions for racially motivated disenfranchisement.

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#66
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is the parent is referring specifically to the Republican Southern Strategy—whether the top-down or bottom-up variant is mostly immaterial—that notably did not display too much public opposition to racial integration on the national stage, but instead supported de facto racial segregation while appealing to entrenched racism and conservatism in the South as the Democratic Party realigned its platform and pos…

You can infer (or retrofit), but then there is the smug, pro-political non-factual content of the post. I don't consider echoing smugness necessarily snide. Don't insinuate to me all that all educated Americans share your political views and then proceed to back it up with half (or non) facts.

Here is Lee Atwater, the former Chairman of the Republican Party explains how Republicans can win the vote of racists without sounding racist themselves: https://www.thenation.com/article/exclusive-lee-atwaters-inf...

"You start out in 1954 by saying, “N@%#$r, n@%#$r, n@%#$r.” By 1968 you can’t say “n@%#$r”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N@%#$r, n@%#$r.”"

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#67
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your critique of the civil rights bill is that the person who passed it was a politician?

You clearly are ignorant of LBJ’s life. I suggest that you read his biography and expand your mind.

This actually made me laugh given that reading books about LBJ has been probably the most enduring habit of my adult life.

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your critique of the civil rights bill is that the person who passed it was a politician?

No his critique is that it's laughable to call LBJ anything other than a blatent racist, despite the fact that he facilitated the civil rights act. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racis...

That’s a good start to understanding LBJ, but also falls short just by dint of its brevity. To really understand him you’d also have to delve into his own lowly birth and social shame, his time as a school teacher, and much more. If you’re really interested I’d recommend Caro’s first book on LBJ, he really captured the context and character of Johnson in his early years.

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#69
post #4

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." What is the statutory reason that they are not allowed to do this? Sincere question.

"The Supreme Court has noted that the FCC has an expansive mandate to ensure broadcasters operate in the public interest." (National Broadcasting Co. v. U.S., 319 U.S. 190, 219 (1943).) It's like shouting fire in a theater when there is none - that would not be in the public interest. Neither is broadcasting lies to deceive the public.

It's not like that at all. If shouting fire in a crowded theater is constitutionally prohibitable, it's not because it's not in the public interest, it's because it's dangerous.

In general, the government is NOT allowed to prohibit any speech that "is not in the public interest" under the constitution. In general. The FCC and broadcasting is a special case justified by limited spectrum (although one that the Supreme Court has extensively limited further since 1943), but not because it's like shouting fire in a crowded theater.

Re: FCC Fines Sinclair Broadcast Group $13.4M for Running Sponsored Content as News

#70
post #5

I think people know, but Sinclair is the emerging threat to American public debate that is controlled by conservative owners. Sinclair requires their local affilate TV stations to run conservative-biased segments. In one case last year Sinclair lied about Hillary and the Democrats -- they required their local affiliates to run this segment -- saying viewers "should not vote for Hillary because Ds were historically pr…

The Sinclair outlet in my area is a cesspool of right-wing conservative blowhards and biased news. Very sad..

I'm sure they're glad to pay $13 million in return for the appearance that the FCC cares about broadcast standards. They're making billions - they can afford it.

I wonder where the fine money actually goes?

Post reply on HN