|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|
Why does the media give Ann Coulter and Robert Zimmerman Jr air time?
Why not? They give people like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Chris Matthews and Lawrence O'Donnell air time every day. Not a functioning brain cell in the lot.
the media likes to air things that are controversial. The more controversial the better. It is entertaining and amusing most of the time. But when you have the radical right listening, they take their inept comments as gospel, so they can be dangerous in one sense, especially when they rile up those with no sense at all.
Those answers hit the spot, but as a former broadcaster familiar with FCC rules, I will add this. At one time there was such a thing as the Fairness Doctrine, or as we called it, the equal time provision. If you allowed a Democrat 30 minutes, the law said you had to allow a Republican 30 minutes. It wasn't just politicians, it was anything public. If you had a white preacher like Pat Robertson on, then you had to allow the black Jesse Jackson equal time (well, still politics, I guess). In the beginning, management was terrified that equal time would wreck the stations financially, After deregulation, these rules no longer applied, but the media tries to police itself (up to a point). They also found that equal time actually works in that these controversial figures do bring in the viewers, as in the other hubbers' answers. Then I think they lost all touch with reality and forgot anything about equal time. I believe that they are now going for the sensation.
Or you might look at it this way. They are still giving equal time. If they allow an intelligent person 30 minutes or an hour, they have to allow a stupid one equal time!
Because the media is in business and business requires customers. Without consumers of the this media, there would be no add revenue. They, as businesses, should be able to decide who they allow to appear on their shows. They also have the right to allow people like Jackson and Sharpton. This is freedom. While I disagree with Jackson and Sharpton on just about, if not everything, it is the right of a media outlet to decide what they air.
On what basis would you think that "someone" should stop a media outlet from airing a specific person's view? What specific issues do you have with these two citizens?
Why shouldn't they. Just because you disagree with Ann Coulter doesn't mean she should be silenced. Or maybe it does to some of the totalitarian thinkers out there. Clowns like Jesse Jackson have gone on national TV and made anti-semitic racially charged statements and he is still on television and considered a leader in the civil rights movement...or at least civil rights for some people...but not all.
It's amazing to hear people complain about Ann Coulter getting air time when liberal media outlets give non stop air time to their favorite pundits on a daily basis across every media outlet dominated by the left, and routinely make outlandish statements. Outside of talk radio...which for some reason liberals don't listen to long enough to keep a liberal thinker on the air and get any serious ratings, FOX news and once in a blue moon on CNN, there is barely a conservative voice expressed. I guess ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNC, NPR, CNN, and nearly every media outlet in print across the country is not enough ideological domination of the expression of ideas. The funny thing is that even though the political left in this country already dominates the media, they are the ones who have fought to bring back the fairness doctrine. Conservatives are more than happy to let the people decide what media outlets they choose to listen to. I guess why wouldn't they want to be able to regulate which conservative meets the standards of their definition of a conservative and worthy of air time. What's even more funny to me is how the media so often portrays a point of view as a general consensus when the ideological political divide in this country is split down the middle. Yet that is hardly represented in the journalistic community.
by Andrew Spacey2 years ago
Same sex marriage - Equality or Not for gay people?Ireland recently voted 68% to 32% by referendum to allow same sex marriage, the first country in the world to do so. Is this true democracy at work? How do you view the...
by Holle Abee6 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC_NewsThis is really hard to believe. A major news network would do something like this? Does anyone know if it's true that NBC did this?
by Lgali8 years ago
I think both will be equal
by Wesman Todd Shaw4 years ago
Al Sharpton didn't ever mention it, Jesse Jackson never brought it up, and you didn't look like one of Obama's daughters.The mass media couldn't sell your murder towards a globalist agenda, and Democrats didn't care...
by Borsia4 years ago
Now that the jury has acquitted Zimmerman what message will resound?Will there be more reporting and comments on the basic theme that violence begets violence and that if you attack someone they can defend themselves no...
by yankeeintexas4 years ago
Now that George Zimmerman was found not-guilty do you fell that the state did not have a strong caseor has a great injustice been done?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.