[nathanbedford]

It is obvious to you and to me that there was egregious bias but the important question: Is it clear to Viacom that there was bias? Further, is it clear to Viacom that that bias is costing its stockholders money? Is it clear to Viacom that a majority of its stockholders, insofar as they think about these things, so not share Dan Rather's agenda? Will any of this occur to the shareholders? Has it dawned on Viacom that their shareholders might resent management for subsidizing Rather's bias over these many years with their money?

Obviously, all of this has occurred to Roger Ailes years ago.

[altura]

I don't think they are capable of "handling the truth" as Jack Nicholson so famously remarked in "A Few Good Men."

Their mindset is so firmly entrenched it may take a few more episodes like this or an even more serious tanking in their ratings to penetrate their skulls.

Even then, I wonder?

I wonder if they won't just think ... we need to try even harder to get all those idiots out there to see things our way.

[Socratic]

"Is it clear to Viacom that there was bias?"


If it's not clear, perhaps some Freepers could ask them: Viacom's Investor Relations Department at 1-800-516-4399.