If we took FOX, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, and Headline "News" out....

[PROGRESSIVE1]

of the media equation, we would have a different race today. John Kerry would be far ahead of Bush. Cable "News" is watched by 4 out of 10 Americans which means they get a good deal of their news from them.

If we took these networks were not there, there would be no mainstream platform for the Right Wing to spill out it's venomous lies, distorisions, propaganda, and other crap. The rest of the media, including Russert and This Week on ABC are NO WHERE near as whorish as the Cable "News" Mafia is.

comments please.

[patrice]

1. I swear I will get rid of cable TV if Bush wins. n/t

[NoBorders]

2. I stopped watching cable news. What's the point?

It has helped reduce my anxiety level.

[CrowNotAngelGRL]

3. I agree

and I mainly watch Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" or "Tough Crowd" for news.

[Tafiti]

4. Is Colin Quinn a conservative?

I'm usually left with that impression when I watch the show. I don't really like the show though - I don't know, maybe it's just the few episodes I've seen. But the guests are always pretty much uninformed, simple-minded, and just not very smart. Plus, Colin Quinn isn't funny to me. He gets on my nerves.

[w4rma]

5. When I heard him interviewed a while ago, he didn't sounds Repug.

He sounded very tolerant of viewpoints and ethnicities. Maybe you are thinking that if someone talks tough they can't be a Democrat. Seems stereotypical, to me, to do that.

[ProfessorPlum]

6. He's a pretty strong Bush supporter

He inarticulatedly tried to defend that on Fresh Air with Terri Gross a few months ago. I think he's a Republican. He does make me chuckle sometimes, and seems to be a bit more of a human being than most GOPers.

[w4rma]

7. Darn. Oh well. (nt)

[DeepModem Mom]

8. You're right, and DUers ceasing to watch does not solve the problem ---

others watch, and think they're watching the news. Fox, I write off. They will lose viewership when, I pray, the wheel turns away from the right-wing extremism that has a grip on our country. I honestly don't know if we can change the others, but I think we should continue to try. Luntz is gone from MSNBC, and Olbermann still there. If not for our voices, this might not be the case. I think we should press on, do what we can, and not hide our heads in the sand and ignore the cable beast, from which many Americans get news.

[forgethell]

9. Sounds like censorship to me.

It would be a different race if they took out The New York Times , too. Isn't it lucky that they can't do either?

[PROGRESSIVE1]

10. I am not for censoring the Times. What I gave here was....

a theroretical situation. Cable "News" has made our job very difficult!

[forgethell]

12. So? Anything worth having

is worth a little difficulty. It wouldn't be good if everybody thought (and voted) the same way, would it? I like diversity, and I like testing my ideas against competent opponents.

but more important, are you "for" censoring the cable networks? What is your justification other than inconvenience? Does it trump the Constitution?

[Cats Against Frist]

13. Look, the person is just simply saying

that if the 24-hour blather that is cable news wasn't on all the time, that the GOP would have a harder time REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING AND REPEATING their mind-numbing, lowest common denominator, sensational, fearmongering half-truths, smears and ridicule of anyone who disagrees with them.

You can't fault the GOP on ONE THING -- and that's how to subliminally inject "talking points" into the brains of the electorate -- PARTICULARLY those who are only half-listening.

If it were not for cable news, then the Freepers would have to rely on talk radio to get their kool-aid, which, though far more angry and biased, does not have VISUAL STIMULATION, which is much more powerful, hands down.

No one is saying censor it. And it's only THE GOVERNMENT censoring something that is true censorship. Demand from an intelligent audience for non-sensational, non-infotainment, RELEVANT INFORMATION is something else, altogether.

I think that's all the poster was saying.

[forgethell]

16. Thank you, I knew what he was saying,

So what is your solution?

For myself, I actually approve of having a variety of viewpoints to listen to. In my view the "marketplace of ideas" is a real marketplace, where the best ideas will win, and the useless ones will fall by the wayside of history.

You do not seem to have a lot of respect for the American voter. Repetition works when there is only one viewpoint, but when a number are offered, I fully expect that the voter will make the right choices. And we do have our viewpoints offered in the media.

But, hey, if you want to write letters to stations, newspapers, etc., or call for a boycott of FOX, CNN, CBS, or whoever, I'm with you. If they don't offer our viewpoints, let them have it in the pocketbook.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

11. kick

[Jon8503]

14. Bush Is Getting Free Political Coverage Today

Has anyone noticed how CNN, MSNBC all are giving his speech today so much coverage.

[sherilocks]

15. We used to have an equal time

law. If someone criticized, the other side got equal time to respond. They were careful about what was said when they had give up airtime for a response. We need that again and it's doable.