Oops...that should say 'not normally watch/sponsor' On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > Either way, they would be forced to air content that their viewers > and/or advertisers would normal watch/sponsor. Essentially taking > money out of the pockets of the broadcasters. > > I do like your last idea - too often in the media today opinion is > touted as fact. > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Maureen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It doesn't force broadcasts to air shows, only to offer time to >> opposing opinions. Do you not remember the little snippets that were >> occasionally aired at the end of newscasts when the station would run >> an opinion piece and had to allow the opposing view to have a say? >> >> Frankly I would be content with a law forcing broadcasters to label >> opinion as opinion, instead of allowing it to be presented as news or >> fact. >> >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> But could that not force broadcasters to air shows that may not be >>> profitable, or, possibly, not air shows that are? >>> >>> Seems a bit unfair. >> >>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:310983 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
