BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV

Subject: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: InOBU
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 07:58 PM

For those of you not in love with the cut and paste, sorry, this is very important, and was emailed to me, so I can't link it. But as artists in this nation, even musicians should be concerned... Larry
Date: 4/18/2003

Steve Rosenbaum, a NYC television producer.

TODAY SHOW GOES DARK ON TIM ROBBINS

At 8:15 Monday Morning, Today Show host Mat Lauer introduced the controversy that has been kicked up by the cancellation of the 15th anniversary of Bull Durham at the Baseball Hall of Fame.
In a letter made public on Wednesday - Dale Petroskey, the President of the Hall suggested that his venue was not the appropriate venue for a highly charged political expression.
Lauer then introduced Tim Robbins, who along with his wife Susan Sarandon, had had their initiations revoked.
Lauer quizzed Robbins on free speech, and pointedly asked Robbins if he had planned to use the Hall of Fame event as a platform for a political statement. Robbins said 'of course not.'
The discussion went back in forth for a few minutes, with Lauer being neither accommodating nor confrontational. And Robbins' responses were equally measured. But Robbins did end up saying things that have hardly been heard before since the war began. "The message is if you speak out against this administration you can and will be punished" Robbins explained.
"We're sending out messages on an almost daily basis, that they have no right to protest against this President" said Robbins. To which Lauer responded with a question about the Dixie Chicks and their controversial comments against the President. Robbins responded - pointing to the fact that the protest and banning of the Dixie Chicks was by Clear Channel Radio and its connection with the Bush Administration. This conversation was unheard of in the current environment. Robbins was talking serious politics on a morning chat show - and clearly hackles went up. By 8:24 Robins was explaining "We're fighting for freedom for the Iraqi people right now so that they can have freedom of speech, yet we're telling our own citizens they have to be quiet"
Lauer could have called it quits there -but he went on "When you see pictures of Iraqi's dancing and celebrating -does it change your mind?" "No" said Robbins - "I'm ecstatic that they feel this freedom, I hope we have the resolve to get in there and make it work."
It was at this point that something happened that has perhaps never happened before in the history of morning television.
The music swelled under Robbins... Mid-sentence, answering a question that had been asked just 10 seconds earlier... "We have a terrible track record" said Robbins, clearly not able to hear that music was coming up to literally 'play him off the stage'.
The camera cut to a wide shot. Lauer was leaning in and very much in conversation. Either Lauer was ignoring what must have been the deluge of invectives in his earpiece, or he was just determined that he wasn't finished with this line of questioning.
But the music ended. The bumper music ended and the studio was in the two shot as Robbins said..."It's for some reason not in our best interest to keep it going and pursue it to the next level." Lauer nodded, and the camera faded to black as Robbins - mid sentence - had his microphone turned down.
A conversation about free speech. An anchor asking reasonable questions. A guest responding in equally reasonable tones. No attempt to close out the discussion - to say "Well thank you, Tim". This was not a filibuster. Robbins was not hogging the spotlight. Someone in the control room simply decided that it was time to pull the plug. And without grace or ceremony, or even the face saving of letting Lauer say "We're out of time" as morning shows do on so many occasions.
A conversation about free speech and free expression was cut off mid sentence as the network went to black.
Television history was made, as million of Americans got to
watch in real time just how powerful and inescapable censorship
can be. Robbins wasn't revealing troop locations, or giving aid
and comfort to the enemy. Remember the war has been won -
by all accounts. He was discussing freedom, free speech, and
why his appearance has been canceled at the Baseball Hall of
Fame. NBC should invite him back and let him finish his thought -
or admit at least who was on the phone to master control,

demanding that they pull the plug.

---

Well, it was within our one-screen limit, once I took most of the $#%^ line breaks out. Next time, if you think an article is worth posting, take the line breaks out yourself, Larry. If it's longer than one screen, I'll delete it. Them's the rules.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 08:18 PM

Larry, did you see the further development? Old whats-his-name has made an apology of sorts, saying that the very thing he was trying to avoid- bringing politics into it- was what he has caused.

Mind you, Ari Fleischer had been a featured speaker previously so Petroskey was not even being consistent.

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 08:37 PM

Like I've said before, this Bush regime (which it is) is unlike anyything the United States has ever seen! They fully intend on keeping it for themselves and, unless Jos Sixpack is willing to get off his butt, look himself in the mirror and admit to himself that he is being duped, then democracy is dead as a doornail. The media is being micromanaged by the Bush people. Bush doesn't even care anymore what he proposes becuase he can put a flag around it and Joe Sixpack will nod with approval.

In the 60's when they came up with the "Love it or leave it" crap, we all were optimistic enough to think humanity coual and would prevail but now it is becoming increasingly more evident that the US, as we know it, will not survive these evil people who have highjacked our country. Yeah, if continues the way it going, these guys will have every citizen goose-stepping.

For the life of me I can't think of any other administration in the history of then US that has created so much damage in such a short time, T. Roosevelt, Polk, Wilson and Lincoln included.

Yeah, I am making some first steps toward getting my affairs in order to get the heck out before people satrt being massively collected and imprisoned, killed or deported because they have had to courage to satnd up and be counted against these autocrats.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: InOBU
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 08:44 PM

Thanks Joe... Though I do these DAT recordings, and edit a wee bit, I don't know much from computors, like what a one screan limit looks like, didn't know about the line breaks... etc. So, in short, thanks again, no extra work or offence intended...
From an old tired dinosaur, singing for our rights
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 08:58 PM

My screen holds a great deal, so it depends on whose screen is being used! It would have been easier to read that story with the line breaks. Let's hope Joe has a high-resolution screen set at the maximum level (since I do web design and need the space, I have mine set at 1600 by 1200).

This story Larry has posted needs to be heard. I must admit, I stopped watching the NBC morning program a year or so ago because I was so tired of their hyping the things I thought should be left alone and neglecting the real "news." They're awfully willing to ask someone whose loved one was axe-murdered five hours ago "how do you feel?" instead of leaving them alone in their grief, and tracking down the real stories. The murder story would have been enough in itself, the instant reaction is too much, but is (to be blunt) the entertainment side of the news. ABC is slightly less bad about that.

Some of this may get even worse, since Murdock is trying to buy another media outlet, Dirct TV. He's famous for kicking out anyone who doesn't agree with him.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 09:14 PM

And while we're on the subject, Lets keep a watchfull eye on the FCC, headed by Micheal Powell, the Son of Collin Powell. After only two hearings on the dropping of the five last regulations on media ownwership, it looks very much like the GE/Murdock/Disney/ ClearChannel folks have the *prize* in sight: a complete monopoly of the media!

Don't think so?

Go to Goggle and punch in "FCC".

Which will leave only tiny "Pacifica" and after Amy Goodman gets taken out by the CIA, (but will *look* like a deranged psycho...) then what?

Nothing, that's what....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 09:22 PM

None of this surprises me at all. Sad, huh? Maybe we'll move to Canada or Oz.........

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 09:39 PM

"Freedom of speech" essentially just seems to mean the right to talk to the person next to you. Though you'd best be a bit carefdul what you actually say, especially these days.

You'd probably be a bit less likely to get hassled over here.

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Apr 03 - 10:05 PM

InObu - that note was sent to the FOLK-DJ list originally and it was an opinion from Rich Warren of WFMT, not attributed to Steve Rosenbaum, whoever that is.

While I am very suspicious of the media, this is a non-story. I would highly doubt that this was anything other than a techical snafu, nothing more.

As a former NBC employee, I am very doubtful that it was censorship, more likely it was just "live TV" and a resultof all the problems that go with producing a show like TODAY. If you were ever in that control room (master control is actually in another building), you would understand. The chaos that goes on with that particular show is the stuff that makes for ulcers.   More than likely someone wasn't hearing a cue and a hard break is a hard break - they have to hit it on time or alert affiliates in advance that it is being cancelled.    Breaking news is another situation, but NBC will hit every break they possibly can.

If I had a nickel for every time I've heard an on-air talent ignore a director and stage managers command, I would be very rich. The music is fed through an IFB into both Lauer and Robbins earpiece. If neither one gave an indication that they heard the music, then it was more than likely a technical snafu.

IF someone at NBC wanted to get Robbins off the air, they would have given Lauer a cue and the segment would have ended. The FACT that both Lauer and Robbins made no indication

IF someone was on the phone pulling the guest, you will certainly read have read about on Page 6 in tomorrows NY Post and Roger Ailes would have surely run with the story on FOX News Channel.   

As I said above, I am a former NBC employee, and I have NO allegiance to them. The reason I am so leary of this story is because there ARE numerous cases of REAL censorship, and if everyone were to jump on this non-story, then when a REAL issue arises, nobody will listen.   

Let's not become Chicken Little - wait until the sky actually is falling. The real villian in this case is the Baseball Hall of Fame, not NBC.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: InOBU
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 07:44 AM

Hi Ron: Very likely then this is a true SNAFU, however as the to sky falling, read the Patriot Act, it FELL mate.
Cheers
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 09:29 AM

Larry, I agree with you about the Patriot Act, but you can't use that as an excuse for every problem that occurs.   The Chicken Little syndrome take effect and NOBODY will listen when it is time to cry "wolf".   I think I just combined two different parables in that analogy, but that is the folk process at work!

Keep fighting, but make sure the battle is real.

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: GUEST,Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 09:39 AM

Oops... I lost my cookie - the above comment was from me - Ron Olesko

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: reggie miles
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 10:21 AM

This story showed up in my email it was forwarded to me by someone who had had it forwarded him via some service which could only accomodate 4000 characters per message. The original message was 4686 or there abouts so the service chopped it back, (censored it), to 4000 and notified the receiver of limit. It struck me as funny that the original TV censor was censoring the interview because of the subject, free speech and censorship and I learned about the censored interview via another service that censored it for bandwidth reasons.
Then Joe almost censored it again above. Censors censoring talk about censorship are censored by censors. Hmmm sounds like my next political song is in the works.

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 10:38 AM

Reggie,your note shows how amazing the internet can be, and how paranoid we all can be. From Rich Warren's original post on FOLK-DJ to what appears to be numerous forwards, and it appears that Rich didn't get credit for his original note. What is worse, censorship or infringement of thought?   Amazing, and for a story that appears to be a misunderstanding of a "normal" event. This is how folklore starts.

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: InOBU
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 05:14 PM

Hi ROn, in fact, if you read my post more carefully, I am agreeing with you in saying that it most likely WAS a snafu, however, on a separate note, full stop, period, deep breath, new song, take a slug at the pint, scratch your chin, tie your shoe.... then note the sky has fallen already, etc.
Cheers Ron, GET ANOTHER COOKIE! yum
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 09:42 PM

Somehow Larry, when I read your first statement, and then Joe Offer's comment right under it, I got this funny thought about what you would feel if you took all that effort to copy-paste that thing on the screen and then only one screens worth of the story appeared every time you did it.   

Do-do Do-do...

Suddenly you realize, "they" know who you are...

And you find yourself praying it's just NBC...

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Apr 03 - 11:07 PM

Larry, I did understand what you were saying. I was merely making a point about making assumptions before getting the facts. This is what the news media is guilty of - in a rush to get a story they jump on fragments of facts. The post-watergate era has led to this. I was trying to get the point across that before we fall into the same traps.   

You posted a note that you received without getting any confirmation from another source. I am guessing that whoever sent you that note did the same thing.

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not saying this as a reprimand or anything, I am just trying to point out how easy it is for us to make the same mistakes that we jump on the media about. This creates the mistrust that exists of the media, and it can also do the same for those who are attempt to make a difference in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 03 - 12:06 AM

Hey, Bobert...

Canada and Oz remain fairly reasonable refuges for American expatriates in troubled times...so far. What worries me about Canada is that we have the "longest undefended border in the World".

What reassures me is that there are so many other places that the USA is more likely to invade first.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 03 - 10:45 PM

Yo, Little Hawk. Word on the street is that Canada is not in the "Top Twenty" countries to get whacked. I figgure at one every two years, heck Canada gettin' invaded is 40 years out...

Hey, that don't sound too bad. Wes Ginny came in at No. 16 this week!

But back to the other issue. Censorship. Is anyone aware of the FCC thing? No? I can't believe it. Here we have the big four, in essence saying "We Want IT All!!!" and like no one knows this is going on? Really.

Ron? You gotta know about this bad deal gettin' ready to go down! What's your take?

Here we are on the doorstep of killing off the one thing that Tom Jefferdson said was essentiasl for democracy to live, and like no one is paying attention!

Danged!

Yo, Little Hwak! You got a spare room fir me and the P-Vine to rent while we find our own place?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: GUEST,Ron Olesko - sitting at work without his coo
Date: 23 Apr 03 - 03:56 PM

Bobert,

This is a tough one. I assume when you mention "the FCC thing" you are referring to the ownership issue.   

One one hand I am scared when I see Clearchannel and a handful of other corporations owning all the media. However this may be a case of "getting what you wish for".

When I first started in radio (back in 1975) the FCC had it's claws in everything. I remember getting on the bus and heading into the city to the FCC office at Houston and Varrick to take my 3rd class license test. I spent weeks studying for that thing.   Now, anyone that can sign a form gets a license.   The FCC had strict rules about offering programs in the public interest. A challenge to a license was much easier then. While such strict rules about ownership seemed to be in the public interest, it placed serious restrictions on what you could do as a broadcaster. Many small-time broadcasters could not afford to keep in business as technology and expectations changed. There were parts of the country that lacked decent news coverage because of limitations placed on who could own a radio station. Public radio (and TV) had some serious issues - at that time you weren't allowed to have "underwriting" as it exists today. It was a tough time. There was a serious cry, from broadcasters, to loosen the restrictions and redtape. First amendment rights were at issue.

Now it seems we have gone to the extreme. I have reservations about placing restrictions on big business, I always think of being in the other guys shoes and I don't feel that is right to infringe upon my attempt at success.   On the other hand, monopolies aren't good either.

What is the answer? I wish I knew.   Perhaps the answer is in low power radio stations, the internet and whatever the future will bring. The other is to stop Clearchannel and their brothers from buying out more stations. Somebody is selling these outlets, they aren't appearing out of the blue.

Remember one thing - if "the big four" take over it is because of, as you mentioned, people not paying attention. Only 190 people showed up for the recent FCC forum on this issue, and most of those were lobbiests from the media. The general public sat on their hands, once again. There are still rules to challenge station ownership, but admittedly it is a tough route. The FCC is required to review ownership issues biannually so no matter what transpires this spring, it can be changed again. However, people need to speak out.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: New Political Censorship in USA TV
From: GUEST,..... without his cookies
Date: 23 Apr 03 - 03:59 PM