Friends are furious with Reagan series

Washington Times ^ | 11/01/03 | Jennifer Harper

[kattracks]

The protectors of the Reagan legacy are in full cry.

Critics who believe former President Ronald Reagan is portrayed unfairly in CBS' "The Reagans," a miniseries scheduled for broadcast Nov. 16 and 18, have challenged the network and its advertisers to either revise or abandon the project, which they consider a partisan hatchet job and a distortion of history.

[Conservative4Ever]

MSNBC just had Merv Griffin on and he was veeeerrry unhappy on this upcoming show. Stated to write CBS and complain. I say...add the sponsers to that objective.

[JustPiper]

After watching Merv Griffin on Scarborough, I wrote a lengthy letter to CBS and joined up with the Boycott CBS group, who's founder was also on Scarborough yesterday.

[JustPiper]

Making it easy for everyone to help as Nancy Reagan relayed through Merv

Boycott CBS

CBS Feedback Form

CBS Advertiser's

[JustPiper]

Being your organization started the boycott, please add your site's info please Jon!

[MEG33]

I just heard a Chris Matthews make sense."Reagan was a big man and shouldn't be portrayed by a show put together by a bunch of midgets."

[tkathy]

God knows what these mental midgets are going to do to the Bushes someday.

[jazzlite]

Good for him! These "midgets" and their colleagues on the left have been getting away with distorting history for a long, long time..In news reports, in movies and perhaps, the most destructive, in the history books our children learn from in school. Regarding textbooks, I remember something about George Washington's legacy being replaced with that of Marilyn Monroe. This Reagan smear is just such a bold "in your face" attempt to distort his legacy that the effect may be a positive one. Perhaps through this, people are beginning to gain an understanding of just how the entertaining industry is able to do so much damage to our society through the misuse of their craft.

[OmegaMan]

This movie has received better publicity than any amount of money could buy. People who would have never even considered watching will be tuning in - I know I will. Its gonna get boffo ratings. And I have a feeling that the overwhelming majority won't see anything wrong with it. No doubt the makers are already editing out anything they feel goes a little too far. I can imagine them though laughing with glee behind the scenes at all the headlines this has caused - that's good news for them. I agree, from what I've read this does seem like it will be a slanted, melodramatic account in the vein of 'Mommie Dearest'. And if it is, I can understand people taking offense considering Reagans health and what Nancy is currently dealing with. For most sheeple though I think it will seem like making a mountain out of a molehill. For me, its just another example of the left-wings divorce from reality. But I'm sure that in no time this campy film will be forgotten. It will have no impact on the legacy of Pres Reagan.

[jonalvy44]

http://www.pabaah.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=222&mode=&order=0&thold=0

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

A few years ago I saw a fine biography of Reagan on PBS.

Stretched back to his days as a lifeguard to his fight with Alzheimers now.

Any fool could have obtained more than enough relevant research to make a good TV movie!

[MEG33]

It would seem someone was agenda driven,wouldn't you suspect?

[twinklbell]

1. Notify your local CBS affiliate TV station that you will NOT watch "The Reagans." This is very important.
2. Consider watching no CBS TV at all during that whole week, which is Sweeps Week. If so, email your local CBS station about that, too.
3. Watch for sponsors' lists, which will be published after the miniseries runs. I've already emailed Target, having read that they will be a sponsor -- told them I would not do any holiday shopping in their local store. Excerpts from their reply:

TARGET: "Target is not a sponsor of the two-part movie "The Reagans." However, we frequently advertise on several television networks, including the one airing this particular program. "

Translation: We didn't pay for the movie but we may have bought the airtime it will run in.

TARGET: " The purchase of commercial airtime is a complicated process. ...Target contracts with television networks, which then provide us with a block of programming time in which our commercials may air."

Translation: We can't do much about when our ads will run, having bought a "block of time."
Implication: It's those horrid networks' fault, not ours.

TARGET: "Not every program will appeal to every viewer..."

Give me a break!

Their address is < guest.relations@target.com >

Regardless of what one thought of Mr. Reagan as president, the issue is the airing of a twisted smear as "history," which many people will take it for. Not to mention the callous attack on a man dying of Alzheimer's. If any of you have elderly family members with dementia, I suggest you include that point when emailing your local TV station or sponsors. I did.

[twinklbell]

1. Notify your local CBS affiliate TV station that you will NOT watch "The Reagans." This is very important.
2. Consider watching no CBS TV at all during that whole week, which is Sweeps Week. If so, email your local CBS station about that, too.
3. Watch for sponsors' lists, which will be published after the miniseries runs. I've already emailed Target, having read that they will be a sponsor -- told them I would not do any holiday shopping in their local store. Excerpts from their reply:

TARGET: "Target is not a sponsor of the two-part movie "The Reagans." However, we frequently advertise on several television networks, including the one airing this particular program. "

Translation: We didn't pay for the movie but we may have bought the airtime it will run in.

TARGET: " The purchase of commercial airtime is a complicated process. ...Target contracts with television networks, which then provide us with a block of programming time in which our commercials may air."

Translation: We can't do much about when our ads will run, having bought a "block of time."
Implication: It's those horrid networks' fault, not ours.

TARGET: "Not every program will appeal to every viewer..."

Give me a break!

Their address is < guest.relations@target.com >

Regardless of what one thought of Mr. Reagan as president, the issue is the airing of a twisted smear as "history," which many people will take it for. Not to mention the callous attack on a man dying of Alzheimer's. If any of you have elderly family members with dementia, I suggest you include that point when emailing your local TV station or sponsors. I did.

[longtermmemmory]

sweeps is the whole month of november. Don't watch ANY cbs to impact the CBS bottom line for the rest of the quarter.

CBS should be more worried about the fact that NOBODY has said CBS has a reputation for fairness. In fact nobody is disputing just the opposite.

[TracyPA]

You could not pay me enough to watch this trash. And having Mr.Barbra Streisand(James Brolin) play Ronald Reagan!!! What a slap in the face to any conservative! I will definitely notify CBS of my intentions. Smearing a man dying of Alzheimer's and being beyond cruel to Nancy Reagan is unconscionable. Hit'em in the pocketbook-the only thing that will get their attention.

[Hildy]

The RNC wants us to have VIEWING parties? Yea. right. If Fox was smart, they would program a real good Conservative based movie that night. Guarantee ratings bonanza during sweeps!

[Hildy]

I understand about buying "Blocks" of airtime and they probably don't know when it's going to run. HOWEVER, they can make a public statement about future advertising from Target if this runs. Their explanation is a copout.

[longtermmemmory]

But when this move goes to european uneducated masses, they will eat up the unedited version with gusto. This is not for the US market, this series is for the "I hate america" rest of the world. Some democrat will probably slip it in Iraqi TV and Armed forces TV.

[MissAmericanPie]

Now those demons can't even contain themselves until the man is in his grave to revise history. Such impatience.