Its time to MARCH ON CNN!! Dammit!

[burythehatchet]

I'm in Atlanta . There are many DUers in Atlanta. There are many more progressives in Atlanta who hate what CNN has become - a pale impersonation of Fux. I honestly think its time to march to downtown Atlanta and let their sleazy executives know in no uncertain terms that CNN is a worthless media outlet. TV Guide has better investigative reporting fergodsakes!

I'm not posting this in Georgia forum because I suspect many neighboring DUers would come to town for this.

[NYCGirl]

1. I hate to say it, but they have the First Amendment behind them. If they

want to become a piece of crap, it's their call. If people stop watching them, then they go out of business.

[burythehatchet]

7. I hear you but have you read the Glenn Beck quotes

about Michael Moore. That's speech which in not clearly protected. For them to give that asshole a show is beyond the pale.

[NYCGirl]

14. Yes. Write CNN, write your local papers and media. But the only power

we have is to stop watching. It's a corporation, and they have the right to do what they want, even if it is enormously stupid.

[ladjf]

13. But, it's illegal to aid and abet treason.

[NYCGirl]

25. Then take them to court and prove treason. NT

[ladjf]

26. That is precisely what needs to be done. And when the time is

right, that may well happen.

[NYC Liberal]

31. So do we. Why again can't a MARCH or PROTEST be organized?

[DanCa]

2. Set a date and i am there.

I am not from Atlanta but I'll love to picket cnn.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. Not Sure That Is the Right Thing To Do

They have the right to spew whatever viewpoints they want, and even moreso because they are a cable outlet. We may not like the propaganda and lack of reporting but they don't owe us a thing when it comes down to it. If we protested them I'm not sure the typical onlooker would truly understand the issue and say "oh my god, CNN has been misleading me!" but would be probably more likely to say "ugh, there they go getting all protesty again".

I agree with you on concept, I'm just not sure it would be effective.

[0007]

16. And I have the same fucking right to disagree goddammit

You remind me of another poster that use to come up with the same rhetoric, he moved to Florida from Washington D.C.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

18. Take A Deeeeeeeep Breath..... No one said you didn't LMAO

I also see no sign of rhetoric, and am uncertain where you grasped that from. :shrug:

Take it easy there fella. Was just giving a viewpoint. (*gasp* on a message board? How DARE I!!)

[burythehatchet]

27. I'll cut you slack cuz you like the Rangers

:)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. LET'S GO RANGERS!!!! :)

I understand where you're coming from, I just always look at every plan from the outside view of how an uninformed regular joe or jane would view it. I know that probably isn't always the best way and I agree the cable corporate news pisses me off too, I just think when we organize we should use that organizational effort right to the source, this administration.

I hear what you're saying though.

And yes, I bleed blue, and the NYR's are one of the only things that transcends politics or political opinions when it comes to who I consider family LOL

[CatWoman]

20. I love it when you talk dirty

:loveya:

:hi:

[0007]

29. Hey CatWoman, where do these new hall monitors come from??

Just cuz he wears those cheap Kim Jong Il kind of shoes, doesn't him the right to act like King Kong, eh? He should learn, that life is to short to be little.

How far away are you from the studio? Maybe I'll fly down and protest with ya.

:hi:
:loveya:
:bounce:

[CatWoman]

36. I'm about 30 minutes away

give or take

:hi:

[shance]

No, they do not have a right to intentionally lie and aid and abet lies.

That is not protected, however it has been tolerated by Americans and that is a large part of the reason we are where we are today.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

23. Actually It Is, As Much As I Hate It.

[shance]

33. Please cite your legal references that allow networks to promote

and enable illegal actions by any institution.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

34. It's Called The First Amendment.

Perhaps You've Heard Of It?

[0007]

38. Have you?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

41. Pretty Ignorant Question Since I'm The One Who Posted It Isn't It?

I mean, the answer to the question is inherent in the post itself. Kinda makes it look like your only intent is to start trouble rather than actually debate an issue with any context. If you choose to reply with some context as to why you feel the cable networks wouldn't have the right under the 1st amendment then I will consider replying. If you choose to reply instead with nothing more than uncontextual baiting, don't expect to hear from me.

Thanks!

:hi:

[0007]

46. Is that a promise or a threat? I should be so lucky, eh?

Didn't think you'd be so touchy about you're knowledge of the first amendment.

[JohnyCanuck]

53. Right by news media to intentionally lie is protected by the courts

Consider the the case of two reporters working for a Fox station WTVT-13 in Florida, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson. They made a documentary on some serious health issues and other problems associated with Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone used in dairy cattle. After getting pressured by Monsanto, their editors asked them to make changes and tone it down to reduce any adverse publicity for Monsanto. However, the reporters refused because they felt the issues they explored in the documentary had serious health implications and they had the evidence to back their claims.

They were then fired by the TV station. They took the case to court under the whistleblower laws and won their case initially when the jury awarded them $425,000 for damages, but on Fox's appeal, an appeals court judge ruled falsifying news isn't against the law and now the judgment in their favour was overturned and they were also ordered to pay Fox's court costs.

DocBack chats with Jane Akre

All she wanted to do was warn people about the hidden dangers of hormones in dairy products. And for that, Jane Akre lost her job, along with fellow investigative journalist Steve Wilson.

Jane and Steve sued Fox Television for wrongful dismissal under Florida's whistleblower statute, which protects those who try to prevent others from breaking the law.

But her appeal court judges ruled that falsifying news isn't actually against the law.(my emphasis /jc) So they denied Jane her whistleblower status, overturned the case, and withdrew her $425,000.00 award.

http://www.docback.org/talk_interview.html

Two former Fox Television (WTVT-13) journalists have filed appeals of a ruling that they must pay the legal costs and fees the broadcaster incurred defending itself in a landmark whistleblower case the reporters filed in 1998. The journalists estimate Fox spent more than a million dollars on its defense.

The ruling assessing the fees came on the heels of a ruling that overturned a August 2000 jury verdict and $425,000 award to former Fox investigative reporter Jane Akre. Although jurors unanimously concluded she was pressured by Fox lawyers and managers to broadcast what the jury agreed was “a false, distorted or slanted story” and was fired for threatening to blow the whistle, the jury decision was reversed on a legal technicality when a higher court agreed with Fox that it is technically not against any law, rule or regulation to deliberately distort the news on television.

In setting the jury verdict aside, the appeals court ruled that in order to be protected by Florida’s Whistleblower Act, the employer’s alleged misconduct must violate a written law. The court said the FCC’s prohibition against news distortion is merely a policy.

http://www.foxbghsuit.com/release022803.htm

[bpilgrim]

55. it's the effective measure of last resort, nothing else has been effective

and protesting has been very successful in the past.

if we lived in a world that wasn't so corrupt you would have a point.


more...
http://GLobalFreePress.com

peace

[Dr.Phool]

4. I'm in Florida

But, I could probably get a few people there!

[Atman]

5. I've called for this several times. In NYC, too. And ABC, NBC...

...anybody with a window and teevee camera. We should be filling up their windows every day, make it impossible for them to use them as backdrops. Sure, they'll find away to claim the sidewalk as their legal property soon enough, but you have to start somewhere. All of the news outlets should be protested. After all...

They make the money off of the lies, too! And unlike the government, they can't just demand we pay it. We could, theoretically, all turn them off. If the viewers won't watch them, they can't get ad revenue. We really do need to stop focusing on Marches on DC and events that require the cooperation of the media, we need to make THE MEDIA THE MESSAGE. Make THEM the subject of the news, and stop allowing them to dictate what the news is!

[burythehatchet]

11. RIGHT ON!!

I've decided that I'm going to scout out the location for getting "in the window", and the police will have to drag me and my sign off when I show up. I will post the date.

[oasis]

6. Set the date, I'm onboard.

[Botany]

8. Don't bother they are part and parcel of the problem

Corp. Media that answers to Creative Response Concepts, Rove, and Money ....

Hit em where it will hurt ...... organize a boycott for sponsors of Glen Beck's program on
CNN ..... let the sponsors know why too.

We are the majority ..... we can deal from strength.

[sasha031]

15. now that sounds like a plan

:thumbsup: :)

[CottonBear]

9. I'd march on CNN. The network reports lies & spin instead of facts.

:grr: There is really nothing worth watching on either CNN or CNN Headline News except maybe the weather.

[CottonBear]

10. VP Gore did say that TV (MSM) was a major problem. n/t

[radwriter0555]

12. Turn the teevee off and march on WASHINGTON. The teevee isn't your

enemy, they're just a tool.

It's the regime in the white house who is the enemy.

[0007]

19. And CNN is an extension of the White House, let's march on both!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

21. Now THAT I Wholeheartedly Agree With!!!!!!!

[Joe for Clark]

17. We don't have to march. We have more powerful tools.

I have a real problem with CNN too - maybe different reasons.

One organized 24 hour boycott will work better. Suck their revenue stream and you hit them where they feel it. Just has to be organized enough so we impact the advertising revenue stream- and we can do that. I always thought that was the real power of the internet, we just haven't used it yet as such a tool. The use of internet functions for fund raising was just childish - a first step only.

And we own the internet, so to speak.

Yeah, I miss Ted Turner, too.

But we can really do this kind of thing. Civil disobedience.

Joe

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

22. Thing Is You Have To First Start An Online Search For

Democrats with Nielson ratings boxes.

Actually, that's not a bad idea. Start an online query for dems with boxes and then unite them against those deserving retribution!

[Joe for Clark]

39. I know they do not rely on Nielson.

The tracking polls don't, either.

No, we really do control this here. Subject only to the laws of randomn sampling.

Funny, we don't have to ask anyone to write checks to win here - just turn something off.

A lot easier than asking someone to write a check, don't you think??

The people who can win this understand where the power is in this new century.

I thik we are in pretty good position.

Joe

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

42. I'm Not Sure I Understand.

All of the advertisers that pay for airtime on cable do so based off of ratings boxes and the pricing tier appropriate for the results.

If you are saying tracking polls that just ask what you watch, then turning it on or off doesn't much matter, just say you don't watch anyway! LOL

[Joe for Clark]

43. I do and have represented some of those people.

I am telling you - for a fact - a random sampling, assuming a skew, will pick up and cause a "tizzyfit" with revenue streams - I KNOW.

A tracking poll is no more than an ability to match reality with sample. Thats all.

We cause a skew of 3% - and they will know, and pay accordingly. I know.

And maybe that is how we may win this fight.

I have represented some of those "advertisers" - do you really think they write checks based on bullshit?? It can be a lot of money - how much would you trust those people?? You think they do??

No, we can trust on a higher power in statistics when it comes to paying actual monies - a reality check in our favor.

Reality is reality - and we do win this fight.

Joe

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

45. A Random Sample Of What?

I appreciate your efforts but I still am not clear on how you think this would be accomplished. Who is taking the sample? Where is it coming from? Where can you show that the nielson ratings themselves aren't the biggest guide to advertising dollars? If the random sample is via question, can't we just respond "no, I don't watch" even if we do, thereby rendering the act of actually turning off our tv moot?

I'm not necessarily challenging, I just don't really understand your concept yet.

[Joe for Clark]

47. Your question is good and needed.

Nielson is the concept promulgated by networks to sell advertising space.

The fact is, how much would you - as a buyer - trust this concept to sell your own wares??

It does not cost that much to hire a confirmation service. Sample a sample, not so much.

It is not so much, I have participating in that process.

I am saying, with certainty - if we do have an ability to react in mass, to turn off CNN or what-ever - You may have certainty knowing they will pick it up - it is their job to "police" the matter. And they are good. And they react to revenue.

The sample will be correct, in private hands paying the bill - I guess, the nature of capitalisim.

Nielson is just a boogieman - a sales tool.

Joe

[Joe for Clark]

49. I am not very good at this, I think

I am trying to be clear - they have their own means of determining the result.

And they are very good. If turned 3%, they will know before we do, that good.

Joe

[burythehatchet]

24. I like that idea as well

Have every liberal web site and blog join in, select a three day period where NO ONE tunes in to CNN. That might at least get some attention.

[Joe for Clark]

37. It seems such a big order to do, and I know its not.

Cnn has, maybe, a million viewers on a given day. I am a numbers guy - we tip 3% away, and we WILL get their attention. There are 80,000 users on this site alone, and we can link with other sites for such an attempt. 3% is only 30,000 viewers. We can do even better.

They get paid by their advertisers on the number of viewers they attract, I know. And they track on a 24 hour basis. And they can track this better than we can.

It can be done.

CNN is a unique opportunity to start with. They have no sister station. If we get pretty good at this kind of tactic, we can do FOX too.

This kind of thing is going to happen. I think this is about winning at this point. I am tired of losing. I think the RNC is still in the 20th century. If we are in the 21st century, we can kick their ass. We can outthink them - and that is a good reason they will lose.


Joe

[RubyDuby in GA]

28. RIGHT ON BROTHER!

I'll see you there. Then we can have lunch at Ted's down the street. That would be so nice :)

And I'll make a sign - I'm known for my scathing protest signs :evilgrin:

[burythehatchet]

32. Oh Ted - why hast thou forsaken us??

I'm pissin vinegar today.

[RubyDuby in GA]

35. Ya know - I think that alot

Yeah yeah yeah you're off saving the world and putting your foot in your mouth, but there is much to be done here at home Ted.

[w8liftinglady]

40. march on their sponsors-it feels GOOD!

http://www.usa.canon.com/contacts/feedback.html
Canon Corporation:
1-800-OkCannon

http://www.pampers.com/prodinfo/frames/2prtt.htm
Pampers
1-800-337-0766

http://www.tmo.hp.com/cgi-bin/preform.cgi?/tmo/feedback/English/feedback.html
Hewlett Packard-Toll free number is on this page, as well as feedback via email)

http://www.carrier.com/wp/nao_cc1/nao_ccd1.html

Carrier Corporation
1-800-CARRIER or 1-800-4Carrier


http://www.ford.com/customer/window.html

Ford Motor Company
Customer Service

http://www.kelloggs.com/contact.html
Kelloggs

http://www.ahp.com/invest.htm
Advil
American Home Products
scroll down to the bottom of the page, there is an email link)

http://www.americanexpress.com/cust_serv/cgi-bin/email-form.cgi?About
American Express

[burythehatchet]

48. Thanks for the info

and are those your guns? WOWZA!

[Cha]

44. Recommended! I've been

saying this for years and I know it's going to come to marching on the corporate media because they are the source of Democracy's imminent demise.

[neverevergivein]

50. Why not gather at CNN Center?

Seriously disrupt operations there.

[burythehatchet]

51. I believe that any sort of action can only be beneficial

because it would bring attention to the train wreck that is CNN. The most trusted name in news my ass.

[Armstead]

52. Those who can should

Even if it's a small gathering that demands to meet with CNN execs it would help.

We are AT LEAST half the country (market). They have to be constatly reminded to that fact.

[Catrina]

54. This is a great idea! A lot of people, individually, have cancelled

their cable subscriptions, but it isn't effective unless it's an organized effort and it costs them money.

I hear more and more people focusing on the media now. Nothing that has happened, the stolen election, the war, the immoral budget, the high gas prices with the huge profits to oil cartels while people are suffering, Cheney getting away with not revealing those energy meeting memos etc. etc. if the media had done its job.

Demonstrating outside the WH doesn't affect them. They don't care what we think, but they need our money ~ and that's the best way to get their attention.

Boycotting their sponsors, cancelling them totally, getting them blocked if possible will let them know we are not going to tolerate being lied to anymore.

Also, someone down thread said they are not beholden to us. Well, I disagree. We pay to keep them on the air. They owe us a service for that money. We are CUSTOMERS! If CNN, Fox, MSNBC were free, then I would agree. But they are not. And as customers we can demand better service. Maybe we couldn't sue each one individually, but I wonder if Cable could be sued for these 'news networks' failing to keep their promise of, 'fair and balanced' reporting.

I'll put up with their right to lie, so long as it's free, but if I'm paying for it, and we are, then we have a right to demand what they promise, imo.

The ruling against those two reporters in favor of Fox's right to lie, (unbelievable!) because there was no written law demanding that they tell the truth should have resulted in legislation at least when it comes to news reporting, and also their 'fair and balanced' claim. It's an open door to allow the airwaves to be used for propaganda.

I don't know what the solution is, but there's something really wrong when a judge rules that a network has the right to lie about something that it is in the public's interest to know the truth about, especially when, as in this case, the truth was available, and acknowledged. The ruling there, imo, should have been that Fox had to show the documentary, and tell their audience that they had fought to suppress it, to protect the bottom line of their sponsors, rather than protect the health and well-being of their viewers. Most people are not even aware of that ruling. They should be, and let the audience decide if they should be lied to or not.