Skip to comments.ABC News Forbids American Flag
Posted on 09/24/2001 10:24:37 AM PDT by aculeusEdited on 09/03/2002 4:49:20 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Two brief paragraphs from the 'Jennings' column in today's Washington Post may deserve more attention. Jennings said things you may not like on 9/11 -- but this is going on NOW.
ABC has barred its journalists from wearing lapel flags such as the one sported by White House correspondent Terry Moran.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Note: This is a Disney subsidiary.
Thank God for the Internet!
Anyone have the facts before we do a needless Freep?
CNN, the Democratic Party, National Council of Churches, ACLU, NEA, 98% 0f Hollywood...just a few that come to mind.
It's a quotation from an ABC executive published in today's Washington Post.
No further confirmation needed.
It's like Alice In Wonderland logic.
In a NATIONAL crisis, a PATRIOTIC American journalist should remain OBJECTIVE.
Welcome to bizarro world.
I have said it before and I will say it again. Politically correct thinking will be the end of the United States of America.
Parents called and said they were never watching the show again
At least they are being HONEST about their allegiance.
Of course this has zero impact on our family. We have not watched Jennings or any ABC news for close to a decade! I watched clymer Maher for two programs during his vile defense of the Moniker Licker, X42. That was enough for me!
I email ABC daily begging them to keep Maher and Jennings on and to expand their time on tv. I tell the Maggots/$aggots at ABC that everytime these two world class left wing extremist clymers open their mouthes that two things happen. They drive away more viewers and then more advertisers! I hope they keep both on and often to destroy this left wing extremist hate America organization!
Who are the FReep targets de jour? (I rarely watch the A$$#0le Broadcasting Corp anymore)
Our tv would explode if anyone tunes into ABC. Hopefully the people in charge of Drew and the marine will move to Fox!
That's saying something, when Afghanistan is more pro-American than a major American news network.
This is getting ridiculous.
Rush Limbaugh would have us believe that the pinkos have taken over our culture and are oppressing conservatives by mocking and excluding their views from the hegemonic liberal media. But even intelligent conservatives do not genuinely believe this. (Paging my main man again, Billy Kristol.) Indeed, if you think Jack Welch and Andy Lack over at NBC, Michael Eisner and David Westin at ABC, and Sumner Redstone and Andrew Heyward at CBS are secretly conniving to spread the gospel of world revolution, I'm afraid there is not much that can be done for you this side of electroshock.
Let us take the case that has been in the news lately, AOL Time Warner's CNN, which has recently been courting Limbaugh himself, and, according to rumor, the no-less-nutty Bill O'Reilly. The rap on CNN is that it leans too far leftward to attract the right-wing cable news audience that is rapidly falling into the lap of "fair and balanced" Fox News. Tom DeLay regularly refers to CNN as the "Communist News Network" and has suggested a Republican boycott of its programs. The network's new head, Walter Isaacson, recently made a high-profile diplomatic démarche to DeLay's minions, outraging Democrats and inspiring fears of future on-air suck-ups.
Perhaps CNN does see its financial salvation in becoming a kind of faux Fox. In the meantime, if CNN were really run by liberals--to say nothing of actual commies--we might hear a great deal more about Tom DeLay, for instance. How about a CNN special dealing with DeLay's pre-Congressional career as an exterminator, where he fought off three separate tax liens for failing to properly pay payroll and income taxes, and twice paid former business associates court-ordered settlements? Part two of the special might focus on DeLay family values. Where are the family values, a liberal CNN might ask, of a conservative leader who refuses to speak to his own 77-year-old mother and does not even invite her to the wedding of her granddaughter? A network that can milk Gary Condit's affairs for a billion consecutive hours should be able to find a few for a story this good.
More to the point, if CNN were actually a liberal station, it would employ genuine liberals to host its shows. (I hear that Jesse Jackson has a show, though nobody I have asked has ever seen it.) All right, Bill Press is a decent match for Tucker Carlson on Crossfire, albeit from a deep-inside-the-Beltway perspective. Al Hunt and Mark Shields also qualify as liberals by the conservative hegemonic standards of punditocracy discourse. But historically, no CNN "liberal" has proved an ideological match for the fire-breathing zealotry of the pro-fascist Pat Buchanan, the pro-McCarthy Robert Novak or even the charming apparatchik Mary Matalin. And what of the rest of the schedule--Is Larry King a liberal? Wolf Blitzer? Jeff Greenfield? Greta van Susteren? Howard Kurtz and Bernard Kalb? The only way to apply this honorable label to the likes of these nonideological, nonthreatening interviewers is to define the word "liberal" to mean "not obviously insane."
CNN counts as "liberal" only in a universe where conservative political hegemony is so strong that critics have lost the ability to think clearly about anything. CNN does not cover trade from the perspective of the antiglobalization movement.
It does not cover business from the perspective of the labor or environmental movements. It does not cover war from the perspective of the peace movement and it does not cover dictatorships (and illegal military occupations) from the perspective of their victims. It does not even cover George Bush from the perspective of the people who had their election subverted. Indeed, a recent study of the guests on Wolf Blitzer's Inside Washington recently found that the guests were more often Republican than Democrat, more often conservative than liberal. True, not all those who count as "conservative" are willing to go on record about Tom Daschle's supernatural satanic powers, but that's why we have Rush, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the Weekly Standard, the Washington Times, the New York Post, Matt Drudge, etc., etc.
Heh heh heh! The shows are boring, once you realize the plot twists always hinge on Political Correctness!
I've got to disagree... ABC owns the shows, and can require or forbid whatever attire they want to have telecast. Russert has no "right" to violate their rules and keep his job. That being said, just because ABC has the right to make bone-headed decisions doesn't mean that I will ever view their shows again. (I'll only miss Monday Night Football and George Will on Sunday mornings)
A cause???? Since when is the American Flag "a cause"?
When I started as a radio reporter in the 80's, I had moved from another state and needed to know things such as changing my driver's license, registering to vote, etc., etc. Everyone was real helpful with supplying me with information. Both the news director and the General Manager suggested that when I registered to vote, which they completely encouraged, that I register as a "decline." It is a designation no longer in existence as far as I know, but it meant you chose not to align with any particular party. At the time it made sense to me, as I was going to be doing all of the political coverage throughout the state
I truly appreciated the encouragement I got when I later learned that several of the other local media outlets DIScouraged their reporters from registering to vote at all.
This entire "arguement" over news people wearing a symbol of their country is anethma to me. And I think I have ranted enough so I will cease my rant.
Truly, truly bizarre.
They're simply holding off until they get their UN lapel pins around the time they change their name to WBC (the WORLD Broadcasting Company).
After feeding us over 40 years worth of liberal propaganda?
After earning the name Anything But Clinton?
After destroying the reputation of FoodLion by creating a phony report?
After holding annually slanted hour long gun control reports and debates in which the anti-gun extremists were given the first, middle, and last word and outnumbered the pro-gun people by ten to one?
After banning the US flag using this phony "remain objective" excuse?
Remain objective? Yeah, right.
This is the Disney investor page emailBut it is not currently operating, at least not for me.
We the people do not agree with this stupidity. Everyone... "object". Turn there station off 24/7 on going.
To me this is absurd. Brings to mind the line from the movie "Network". I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore.
Do we draw a line here?
To each of these, I would say yes, they are liberal. Greenfield being, personally, an interesting exception (he seems more even-handed than the others). But note his background: From 1968-1970, he served as chief speechwriter for New York Mayor John V. Lindsay, and from 1967-68, he was a senate aide and speechwriter for Sen. Robert F. Kennedy.
Anyone working for RFK and Lindsay was certainly not "middle-of-the-road". When you add Russert, Stephanopoulous, Schieffer, to name a few, how do the liberals get away with so many political operatives in positions in the media? (RHETORICAL QUESTION).
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.