Posted on 10/27/2007 8:31:57 AM PDT by anita
The Fox News Channel sent notices to the campaigns of the leading Republican presidential candidates ordering them to stop using images from their Fox appearances in their campaign ads. The notices were sent out after the network was criticized for singling out only Senator John McCain’s campaign in barring use of the images.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
After the liberal website Talking Points Memo complained that other candidates using the debate on their site, Fox listened to the liberal web site and ordered other Republican Candidates not to use their talk on the debate.
Is Fox became INSANE or what?
Fox’s policy violates “personality rights.”
A person has all rights to his or her image. It supersedes any and all copyright. It also would classify as fair use.
Use of an opponent’s clips, however, would not fall under personality rights. Fox can regulate that all they want.
And yes, Fox is going insane.
“Fox Bars Candidates From Using Its Images(1st McCain, now all GOP candidates)”
Wow, even Rudy?
this is a joke...right? Seriously, Hanniity needs a bib when talking to/about Giuliani!
Re: FOX being insane. I believe they are well on their way to making themselves irrelevant to me.
No. It's copyright law.
Just like one may not rebroadcast or use any portion of any major sport on TV - Baseball, Football, NASCAR etc without prior written consent: i.e., a Legal Document. And no it doesn't fall under 'Fair Use'. A program televised by Fox (or any network) belongs to them, period.
An example; On FoxandFreinds they were prohibited by NBC from using any tape replay of the last Olympics.
The idiotic thing is why they take orders(or complaints) from the left wing site Talking Points Memo & “order” Republican Candidates while the dems refuse to appear on Fox?
FOX will pick and choose which RINO gets airtime on their networks.
Doesn’t Rupert just love Hillary?
NewsCorp endorses and fund Democrats like Kerry for president.
It is not a conservative news network.
Meanwhile I don’t think that there should be corporate sponsorship of any presidential debate. It is newsworthy and the feed should be made available to all networks.
NBC & CNN were challenged by moveon.org and they backed off on using the images shown on their networks.
Or like when NBC branded the Virgina Tech murder’s photos and videos with their logo because they were PROUD the be his network of choice.
Agreed 100%.
NBC and CNN were challenged by moveon.org to back off of who’s images???
I am no fan of McCain. But when Fox starts to behave arrogantly towards GOP candidates (besides their multimedia team distorts thir images) we have to hold them responsible for their actions, imo.
Whomever - Republicans(mainly) and democrats appear on their network debates.
Well, this is going to give them all cover.
Yes Fox is INSANE.
I suspect that Fox will never again be the host of any serious Political Debates.
I also suspect that whatever copyright protection Fox is claiming here is going to be changed as soon as McCain has a chance to convene a committee on this subject.
What better way to usher in Hillary?
Either way, he gets a liberal.
Either the GOP wants Hillary to be the one to take healthcare off the backs of corperations, so they don’t have to be the ones, or they really love liberals.
Time for people to “wake up” and see how dangerous party politics really are. The framers of the Constitution warned of this, including our first President. They were right.
It is very dangerous to vote for people you have absolutely nothing in common with, they are your enemy.
Well put. Actions certainly should have consequences.
This sounds not so good for us.
But FNC is also protecting its copyrights and can therefore prevent the Dims from making ads against our nominee if they say something in these debates that might be used against them as our nominee.
I’m not sure FNC’s move is all bad.
The GOP candidates together need to force Fox’s hand on altering the contract or refuse any Fox debates. It’s rediculous in a POTUS campaign to have the possibility for great electoral moments and not be able to use it for your campaign.
The irony is the dims don’t debate on Fox. Depending on how this turns out we may not either. How rich...
No, but he's afraid of getting on the wrong side of her.
He will be very careful not to print anything that really offends her, and he will probably donate to her. He gave a couple of million to al gore's Democrat convention, in hopes of getting the regulators off his back that the clintons had sicced on him during the 90s, putting some real crimps in his expansion plans.
He certainly doesn't want to be on hillary's bad side if there's even a slight chance she and bill will be back in the White House.
I agree that GOP candidates should start demanding fairness from all networks. Fox will never challenge dems even a small bit when it behaves arrogantly.
Damn right, this guy will manipulate the the dumb folks to amass his fortune.
People really don’t see the manipulation because they are so tied into party politics.
Rupert knows that. We could call him an evil genius.
I am no longer going to “whore’ myself for the party.
I don’t like who has been chosen? I won’t vote.
At least I will have the right to bit*h. I can say “I told you so”.
Fiar and balanced gone a long time ago. Carl Cameron never dare to challenge or even report about Hillary or Obama scandals. Rarely they get mentioned except on Hannity’s show.
Yeah, that's the ticket. Run to court and get a cease and desist order against the next president of the United States.
These bozos at Fox are going to be sorry they ever made an issue of this.
I don't agree, I think the elite of both parties want the same thing. Their goal is the same.
The elites will use each party to acheive their goals. They will use the masses in the form of parties to achieve the ultimate goal. To them we are the manipulated. The non thinking minions.
I don't buy their crap and I will not allow them to shape my thought.
Can’t imagine why Fox wouldn’t want them giving its debate even more publicity. Doesn’t really seem to make sense.
So what is the LAW? If the LAW is on their (FOX) side there is nothing arrogant about requiring especially a bunch of LAWmakers live within the LAWs they penned.
Oh I am not a particular fan of FOX myself, rarely watch them. My guess is they are all liberals in masks, they might contract on occasion a 'Conservative' to fill that claim of balance.
It is much worse than you think.
I recognized Fox News’ duplicitous stripes back in ‘04 in the weeks before the election. I remember specifically the awful post-debate commentary of the first two debates. It was like the panel felt they had to practically throw the election to Kerry in order to make Fox News look ‘fair and balanced’. And the constant dragging of Dick Morris to change stances from week to week on who would win - he finally settled on Kerry, which settled my opinion of him as a political analyst. I placed Bush’s popular vote within 1/4th of a point and his E.V. within 10, missing one state. How did you do Dick?
I am sure. They use us like a ladder to climb top and try to kick. Losing the ladder would be brutal when going down, which certainly will happen - as other MSM learned.
Well, you may be right.
People like Murdoch donate to whichever politicians have the most influence, do them the most good, or could do them the most harm if they aren’t bribed.
The clintons are way out on the end of the curve in this regard. If you cross Bush, he smiles and pats you on the back. And maybe he refrains in future from doing you small favors. If you cross the clintons, you’re dead.
Practical businessmen understand this. If there’s any chance in the world that hillary will be elected, no prominent businessman can afford to cross her.
All very true. We will NEVER foget. History will repeat itself and they better prepare to eat crow.
I think you are looking at left wing spin, look at the source,the slimes.
Very true, which takes me back to my point.
Totally unprincipaled. Thats why we do not want them running things.
Sorry, not good enough. We played a part in elevating them to the top. So, WE deserve respect. Nobody is really breaking the law if they use what they talked in OUR debate.
When Spepherd Smith shouts a lie we expose them . When O'Reilly trash FR, we expose him.(He boasted that he is a registered independent.)
No more blank checks. You play fair, we do the same. That 's all.
You 're saying that NYTimes is lying that Fox sent a cease & desist order to all GOP candidates after liberal web site's comment - right?
If that 's a lie, Fox is welcome to defend itself, here @ FR saying that what appeared in NYTimes is not true. :-).
“No. It’s copyright law.”
A voice of reason in a thread that could be a carbon copy of something on Kos.
At least I will have the right to bit*h. I can say “I told you so”.
1st, you have that backwards. If you don't vote, you have no right to bitch ~ except at yourself, as do the now silent masses who didn't vote and subsequently handed us Reid and Pelosi.
If the law is on their side, there is little these candidates can do about it. On the other hand the way 'we' the ones who gave them their status can respond is to turn them OFF. Which is exactly what I have done, I turned them OFFFF. They run a business and part of that business is doing whatever it takes to drag in their oceans of money with their ratings and advertising. Now it does not matter to them if they use DECEPTION as window dressing to fund their business.
Toooo bad when McCain was so busy sticking his finger into conservatives eye for NOT electing him he did not demand of these businesses what he is expecting them to provide him in his time of need.
“Sorry, not good enough. We played a part in elevating them to the top. So, WE deserve respect.”
Almost an exact quote from the folks at MoveOn. You seem pissed because the liberals aren’t right about FoxNews being a Republican mouthpiece. Sad, our side doesn’t even want objectivity. You have no right to complain about jack in the media, since you publicly state you have no interest in one that isn’t beholden to ideology.
You have no idea what kind of danger you are to freedom.
“Didn’t he back Labor and Blair in past elections?
Murdoch isn’t especially conservative. He just makes money off conservatives. A businessman.”
Yes, Murdoch’s newspapers have endorsed Labour in the past 3 UK elections. The most important thing to him is not being seen to support an ideology but to be seen to support the winner (so long as they are not actively anti-business).
I wouldn’t say he is particularly conservative, especially the way conservative tends to be defined in the US these days. He is a businessman and a globalist. Hillary is less left wing than Blair anyway, and not likely to do anything that would significantly impinge on Murdoch’s business interests, I would imagine he would see her as someone he could live with.
You are wrong on that. If I do not like my choices, I will not vote. I will no longer go out and vote for a candidate that shares none of my opinion or values.
And yes, I DO have the right to gripe about both parties.
I will not be responsible for either one.
I am not like a black voter for the Democrats. I will not vote for someone who promises me they are going to be my savior and then do nothing that the other party would not have done.
It is party polics insanity. I will not submit to that.
polics=politics Sorry
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.