REAL Whistle Blower FIRED In Act of Retaliation In Violation of Whistle Blower ACT

[Pogo]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"? Or to political parties at all?

Or didn't you think of that?

Good gods do I have to think of EVERYTHING around here??

/——-/ You think ABC is run by Tea Party Conservatives and not democRATs???

No. You see, I'm not self-enslaved to that childish binary world where all matter is comprised of either "Republicans" or "Democrats". Rather what I already KNOW is that ABC, like any other network, is run by corporate profit-seekers. The point is not that that leans them conservative, although it does, the point is that what ABC, or any commercial broadcast network exists for, is PROFIT. That means selling commercials. THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THEM.

A Clear Channel executive put it this way, after asking one of his Program Directors the definition of "programming" --
"Programming is the shit we run between commercials".

NOBODY IN THE COMMERCIAL BROADACST WORLD makes a dime off their ideology. They make them from selling dick drugs, monster trucks, cosmetics and all kinds of other shit you don't need. That's the system, that's how it works.

And we already did this. Read and learn.

The Propagandists didn't break it, they spiked it.
Pay attention.

You do understand that "JOURNALISTS" took their reporting to their editors and their editors spiked it because their editors are CORPORATE OWNED right??

But that doesn't change the fact that this journalist is the MAIN REASON Epstein went to prison....and this journalist is not a conservative....
View attachment 288487

And the only reason Judy Brown's face isn't a household name among conservatives is because they don't give a fuck about the victims of Epstein, they just care about if they can use him to attack Democrats....which makes you full of shit....

Not because they are corporate owned
Because they are proven progressive activists.

So yes you are claiming that, in your ignorance, because I can tell you right here and now, NOBODY makes a damn dime from "activism", whether "Progressive" or anything else. They make their money from selling you shit you don't need like dick drugs, stupid phones and pickemup trucks big enough to tow a meteorite. And to sell you that shit they will present whatever pap keeps you planted there until the sponsor gets the floor.

THAT is how it works, and that's what ratings are for.

And that leads us directly back to the network pushback of "nobody knows who he (Epstein) is". That means the network has to first EXPLAIN who he is, and that costs viewership, and ratings go down, and they can't charge as much for commercials, as they can when the feature the latest missing white girl or naked people stranded on an island forced to eat bugs.

Your ridiculous paranoia fantasies of "they're all out to get me" are ironically true --- they ARE out to get your money. They don't give a flying shit about what's left of your mind.

TSDR

If ratings were the goal -
News networks would all adopt the FoxNews Playbook.
They would rather be activists than have ratings.
All you need to do is look.
Other than airports - no one is watching CNN
No one is watching MSNBC

No idea what "TSDR" is supposed to mean but yes, so-called "news" networks HAVE adopted the Fox Noise model. That's a perfect illustration. Before Roger What-Ailes-Ya bubbled up Fox Noise, CNN was holding the position of news source with its idea of 24 hour coverage so we didn't have to wait for the 6pm network news.

But doing news -- REAL news -- is expensive. You need to hire reporters, fly them around with production crews, trucks, satellite phones, you need to open and maintain foreign bureaus, all that shit. That's why the old traditional Huntley-Brinkley-Cronkite network news shows were all subsidized by the mindless Gilligan's Islands and Beverly Hillbillies, because that's where the money was. The newscasts were loss leaders. Just there for PR so that a given station, come license renewal time, could tell the FCC, "See? We're serving the public interest as the license requires, look at all these news shows".

And of course being on cable, the Foxes and CNNs don't need broadcast licenses anyway so they're relieved of the mandate to operate "in the public interest, convenience and necessity" as licensees are.

Rupert Murdoch, who made his fortune selling sleazy tabloid rags, bubbled up the idea of, instead of spending all that money on actual news, plopping some talking heads down in a studio to talk ABOUT the news, rather than actually report it. MUCH cheaper. He came up with a gossip channel which, instead of gossiping about celebrities, gossips about politicians. It's always about people, not policy. That's a direct Appeal to Emotion.

Roger Ailes candidly put it this way: "If two guys are on a stage and one guy says 'I know how to bring peace to the Middle East' and the other guy falls into the orchestra pit, which one do you think is going to be on the evening news?"

That's why all those garish Romper Room colors festoon the set. That's why the women are all facing the camera in short skirts. That's why all those suggestive chyrons are dancing across the screen. That's why the talking heads are pounding their fists on the desk and speaking in three octaves. All that shit SELLS. Emotion sells. Sex sells. Suggestive shit plants seeds and the colors keep you awake. And then ---- BAM, buy this dick drug. That's the game, Gumball. It's all manipulative psychology. Commentary --- which is where Fox Noise makes all its money --- is cheap, because as the old maxim says, TALK IS CHEAP.

And that's why ratings exist.

CNN, to its discredit, saw what Fox Noise was doing and adopted some of the same shit. MSNBC came along and switched from its far-right position that Fox already had, to the other side to milk a different audience. ALL of them are in it for the goal of maximizing viewership, simply because the more hypnotized drones you have, the more you can charge the advertiser for time. Ratings measure attention. If my network can deliver more eyeballs than yours, then I can charge more for a commercial. Simple as that. How I get those eyeballs could be bimbos in short skirts in a garishly colored studio with suggestive chyrons running amok, it could be naked people on an island forced to eat bugs, it could be here's the results of the paternity tests, it could be dancing with the who-cares. Doesn't matter, they're all there for the same goal.

THAT, Virginia, is how they work and what they work for. Not fucking "activisim", which makes ZERO money.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

 

[Pogo]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Judging by what her producer told her, ratings. That's what "nobody knows who he is" means. Because explaining to an audience who he is, would take up too much time and be too much of a challenge to hold interest, and that means losing viewers, and that means losing money.

Make no mistake --- It's ALWAYS about the money.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Judging by what her producer told her, ratings. That's what "nobody knows who he is" means. Because explaining to an audience who he is, would take up too much time and be too much of a challenge to hold interest, and that means losing viewers, and that means losing money.

So it's not about reporting the news.

 

[Pogo]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Judging by what her producer told her, ratings. That's what "nobody knows who he is" means. Because explaining to an audience who he is, would take up too much time and be too much of a challenge to hold interest, and that means losing viewers, and that means losing money.

So it's not about reporting the news.

Not for a commercial entity, no. What'd I just say? It's ALWAYS about money.

ABC, or any other TV network, is beholden to its stockholders. It isn't required to run this story or not run that story. Consequently it will run what sells.

 

[francoHFW]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Because they didn't want to get sued? This isn't the GOP propaganda channel or your silly radio demagogues....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Judging by what her producer told her, ratings. That's what "nobody knows who he is" means. Because explaining to an audience who he is, would take up too much time and be too much of a challenge to hold interest, and that means losing viewers, and that means losing money.

So it's not about reporting the news.

Not for a commercial entity, no. What'd I just say? It's ALWAYS about money.

ABC, or any other TV network, is beholden to its stockholders. It isn't required to run this story or not run that story. Consequently it will run what sells.

Than they aren't news agencies they're propaganda outlets.

 

[Leo123]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"? Or to political parties at all?

Or didn't you think of that?

Good gods do I have to think of EVERYTHING around here??

ABC

 

[007]

ABC, CBS, CNN, MSDNC... ETC... = the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING.

Epstein was MURDERED, beyond a SHADOW OF A DOUBT. I worked in a prison for the State of Wisconsin as a Maintenance Mechanic/Electrician/HVAC technician, and I learned how prisons work. NEVER, are guards ASLEEP, NEVER are cameras OUT, NEVER are lights OUT that should be on, NEVER are inmates mysteriously MOVED to ISOLATE someone, NEVER is a prisoner who's on SUICIDE WATCH removed WITHOUT a FULL REVIEW, and a person can NOT, CRUSH, THREE of their OWN cervical vertebra with a ligature while trying to HANG themselves from only THREE FEET up from the FLOOR, on, and, ON... this was a TOTAL INSIDE SET UP JOB and MURDER.

Why?

Because he knew FAR, FAR too much about FAR, FAR too many POWERFUL people, namely, the MOST powerful, and someone you DON'T want to cross, the CLINTONS. Just add Epstein to the CLINTON HIT LIST, and also the subsequent COVER UP by the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING to SWEEP THE MURDER UNDER THE RUG.

I don't think there's really ANYONE that doesn't know Epstein was KILLED.

Democrats do not have a propaganda wing, brainwashed functional moron. CNN and MSNBC fight ridiculous GOP propaganda, along with all of our law enforcement and all the real journalists around the world who care about facts and evidence.... All you have is Rupert Murdoch owned garbage media and lying scumbag ex Coke head DJ demagogue pundits who are even worse.... Wake up and smell the coffee.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So Democrats also control the BBC, France 24 the hindustani * the Tribune of India and all respected media and law enforcement around The World? Only You rubes out on the farm listening to Rush Limbaugh know the truth. Amazing. Scariest thing that's ever happened to America is people like you.

Oh... "people like me"... you mean SERVICE CONNECTED DISABLED VETERANS that spent EIGHT YEARS in the MILITARY? "People like me" that are college educated, have multiple degrees, have owned my own business, have excellent credit, own my own home and virtually no debt? "People like me" that regularly donate to charities? "People like me that LOVE AMERICA? "People like me" that are "PATRIOTS?" WHITE CHRISTIANS? Those kinds of people?

You're out in INTERGALACTIC LA-LA LAND, you pathetic DUNCE. Your self righteousness is a disgusting FARCE, and your arrogance is enough to make a NORMAL person have to VOMIT. You democrats are a CANCER on the earth. Everything you touch and everywhere you live that's under your control is a DUMP, a SHIT HOLE, a LIVING TOILET of humanity. NO ONE should EVER listen to you IGNORANT jackasses, because one and all, you're full of SHIT.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Because they didn't want to get sued? This isn't the GOP propaganda channel or your silly radio demagogues....

Yet they report fake news constantly and never get sued.
I thought the media was protected?

 

[francoHFW]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Because they didn't want to get sued? This isn't the GOP propaganda channel or your silly radio demagogues....

Yet they report fake news constantly and never get sued.
I thought the media was protected?

The hell they do, super duper. It's just that your propaganda machine react to suing by saying they are simply opinion and entertainment. Wake up and smell the coffee d******.

 

[francoHFW]

ABC, CBS, CNN, MSDNC... ETC... = the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING.

Epstein was MURDERED, beyond a SHADOW OF A DOUBT. I worked in a prison for the State of Wisconsin as a Maintenance Mechanic/Electrician/HVAC technician, and I learned how prisons work. NEVER, are guards ASLEEP, NEVER are cameras OUT, NEVER are lights OUT that should be on, NEVER are inmates mysteriously MOVED to ISOLATE someone, NEVER is a prisoner who's on SUICIDE WATCH removed WITHOUT a FULL REVIEW, and a person can NOT, CRUSH, THREE of their OWN cervical vertebra with a ligature while trying to HANG themselves from only THREE FEET up from the FLOOR, on, and, ON... this was a TOTAL INSIDE SET UP JOB and MURDER.

Why?

Because he knew FAR, FAR too much about FAR, FAR too many POWERFUL people, namely, the MOST powerful, and someone you DON'T want to cross, the CLINTONS. Just add Epstein to the CLINTON HIT LIST, and also the subsequent COVER UP by the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING to SWEEP THE MURDER UNDER THE RUG.

I don't think there's really ANYONE that doesn't know Epstein was KILLED.

Democrats do not have a propaganda wing, brainwashed functional moron. CNN and MSNBC fight ridiculous GOP propaganda, along with all of our law enforcement and all the real journalists around the world who care about facts and evidence.... All you have is Rupert Murdoch owned garbage media and lying scumbag ex Coke head DJ demagogue pundits who are even worse.... Wake up and smell the coffee.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So Democrats also control the BBC, France 24 the hindustani * the Tribune of India and all respected media and law enforcement around The World? Only You rubes out on the farm listening to Rush Limbaugh know the truth. Amazing. Scariest thing that's ever happened to America is people like you.

Oh... "people like me"... you mean SERVICE CONNECTED DISABLED VETERANS that spent EIGHT YEARS in the MILITARY? "People like me" that are college educated, have multiple degrees, have owned my own business, have excellent credit, own my own home and virtually no debt? "People like me" that regularly donate to charities? "People like me that LOVE AMERICA? "People like me that are "PATRIOTS?" WHITE CHRISTIANS? Those kinds of people?

You're out in INTERGALACTIC LA-LA LAND, you pathetic DUNCE. Your self righteousness is a disgusting FARCE, and your arrogance is enough to make a NORMAL person have to VOMIT. You democrats are a CANCER on the earth. Everything you touch and everywhere you live that's under your control is a DUMP, a SHIT HOLE, a LIVING TOILET of humanity. NO ONE should EVER listen to you IGNORANT jackasses, because one and all, you're full of SHIT.

no people like you that believe hundreds of phony scandals and character assassination and misinformation from the GOP propaganda machine, ignoramus doop. Thank you for your service now wake up....

 

[Pogo]

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Judging by what her producer told her, ratings. That's what "nobody knows who he is" means. Because explaining to an audience who he is, would take up too much time and be too much of a challenge to hold interest, and that means losing viewers, and that means losing money.

So it's not about reporting the news.

Not for a commercial entity, no. What'd I just say? It's ALWAYS about money.

ABC, or any other TV network, is beholden to its stockholders. It isn't required to run this story or not run that story. Consequently it will run what sells.

Than [sic] they aren't news agencies they're propaganda outlets.

No, they're commercial whores. Their prime directive is to sell ads for as much money as they can. To do that they'll run whatever they think you'll sit there and get hypnotized over. Conversely they won't run what they think won't do that.

I've been explaining to you klowns all day, NOBODY ANYWHERE makes money from propaganda. The only propaganda that translates to cash is that which tells you to go buy a monster truck that can tow an asteroid.

 

[Pogo]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"?

Recently a video was released showing 'ABC News anchor Amy Robach venting that her network "quashed" a major news story three years ago about now-dead pervert and convicted child molester Jeffrey Epstein that would have implicated former President Bill Clinton, the British Royal family, and more.'

Clinton isn't a Democrat?

Clinton was running for office?

Again, the story wasn't about 'Clinton". It was about "Epstein" and "the British royal family". Clinton is a bit player in it, like Alan Dershowitz and a couple of other lawyers and victims. Nobody cares what the fuck political party they were with.

Except of course on this board where Composition Fallacies are passed around like popcorn.

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Because they didn't want to get sued? This isn't the GOP propaganda channel or your silly radio demagogues....

Yet they report fake news constantly and never get sued.

Such as?

You mean like the Weather Channel not disclosing that a Sharpie hurricane was going to wipe out Alabama?

 

[francoHFW]

If thats the case why did they kill the story?

Judging by what her producer told her, ratings. That's what "nobody knows who he is" means. Because explaining to an audience who he is, would take up too much time and be too much of a challenge to hold interest, and that means losing viewers, and that means losing money.

So it's not about reporting the news.

Not for a commercial entity, no. What'd I just say? It's ALWAYS about money.

ABC, or any other TV network, is beholden to its stockholders. It isn't required to run this story or not run that story. Consequently it will run what sells.

Than [sic] they aren't news agencies they're propaganda outlets.

No, they're commercial whores. Their prime directive is to sell ads for as much money as they can. To do that they'll run whatever they think you'll sit there and get hypnotized over. Conversely they won't run what they think won't do that.

I've been explaining to you klowns all day, NOBODY ANYWHERE makes money from propaganda. The only propaganda that translates to cash is that which tells you to go buy a monster truck that can tow an asteroid.

Fox Rush Savage etc etc make money from propaganda I don't know what you mean. Our television media is pathetic, they don't have foreign offices and foreign reporters anymore for all practical purposes. And fox MSNBC and CNN save tons of money by just having talking heads all day. Extremely divisive and gives way too much air time to conspiracy theories r
and misinformation of the GOP.

 

[easyt65]

ABC, or any other TV network, is beholden to its stockholders.

Many, if not most, of America's media / 'news agencies' are owned by foreign entities and / or individuals who have an obvious, non-hidden objective, primarily a liberal progressive intolerant socialist objective, one that more and more pushes 1 narrative, 1 voice, blocks / 'kills' any other voice / message, and which - as we just saw - fires any of its members who dare give the public insight into the truth, whether accidentally or intentionally.

 

[Pogo]

ABC, or any other TV network, is beholden to its stockholders.

Many, if not most, of America's media / 'news agencies' are owned by foreign entities and / or individuals who have an obvious, non-hidden objective, primarily a liberal progressive intolerant socialist objective, one that more and more pushes 1 narrative, 1 voice, blocks / 'kills' any other voice / message, and which - as we just saw - fires any of its members who dare give the public insight into the truth, whether accidentally or intentionally.

Bullshit.

 

[Leo123]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"? Or to political parties at all?

Or didn't you think of that?

Good gods do I have to think of EVERYTHING around here??

/——-/ You think ABC is run by Tea Party Conservatives and not democRATs???

No. You see, I'm not self-enslaved to that childish binary world where all matter is comprised of either "Republicans" or "Democrats". Rather what I already KNOW is that ABC, like any other network, is run by corporate profit-seekers. The point is not that that leans them conservative, although it does, the point is that what ABC, or any commercial broadcast network exists for, is PROFIT. That means selling commercials. THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THEM.

A Clear Channel executive put it this way, after asking one of his Program Directors the definition of "programming" --
"Programming is the shit we run between commercials".

NOBODY IN THE COMMERCIAL BROADACST WORLD makes a dime off their ideology. They make them from selling dick drugs, monster trucks, cosmetics and all kinds of other shit you don't need. That's the system, that's how it works.

And we already did this. Read and learn.

You do understand that "JOURNALISTS" took their reporting to their editors and their editors spiked it because their editors are CORPORATE OWNED right??

But that doesn't change the fact that this journalist is the MAIN REASON Epstein went to prison....and this journalist is not a conservative....
View attachment 288487

And the only reason Judy Brown's face isn't a household name among conservatives is because they don't give a fuck about the victims of Epstein, they just care about if they can use him to attack Democrats....which makes you full of shit....

Not because they are corporate owned
Because they are proven progressive activists.

So yes you are claiming that, in your ignorance, because I can tell you right here and now, NOBODY makes a damn dime from "activism", whether "Progressive" or anything else. They make their money from selling you shit you don't need like dick drugs, stupid phones and pickemup trucks big enough to tow a meteorite. And to sell you that shit they will present whatever pap keeps you planted there until the sponsor gets the floor.

THAT is how it works, and that's what ratings are for.

And that leads us directly back to the network pushback of "nobody knows who he (Epstein) is". That means the network has to first EXPLAIN who he is, and that costs viewership, and ratings go down, and they can't charge as much for commercials, as they can when the feature the latest missing white girl or naked people stranded on an island forced to eat bugs.

Your ridiculous paranoia fantasies of "they're all out to get me" are ironically true --- they ARE out to get your money. They don't give a flying shit about what's left of your mind.

TSDR

If ratings were the goal -
News networks would all adopt the FoxNews Playbook.
They would rather be activists than have ratings.
All you need to do is look.
Other than airports - no one is watching CNN
No one is watching MSNBC

No idea what "TSDR" is supposed to mean but yes, so-called "news" networks HAVE adopted the Fox Noise model. That's a perfect illustration. Before Roger What-Ailes-Ya bubbled up Fox Noise, CNN was holding the position of news source with its idea of 24 hour coverage so we didn't have to wait for the 6pm network news.

But doing news -- REAL news -- is expensive. You need to hire reporters, fly them around with production crews, trucks, satellite phones, you need to open and maintain foreign bureaus, all that shit. That's why the old traditional Huntley-Brinkley-Cronkite network news shows were all subsidized by the mindless Gilligan's Islands and Beverly Hillbillies, because that's where the money was. The newscasts were loss leaders. Just there for PR so that a given station, come license renewal time, could tell the FCC, "See? We're serving the public interest as the license requires, look at all these news shows".

And of course being on cable, the Foxes and CNNs don't need broadcast licenses anyway so they're relieved of the mandate to operate "in the public interest, convenience and necessity" as licensees are.

Rupert Murdoch, who made his fortune selling sleazy tabloid rags, bubbled up the idea of, instead of spending all that money on actual news, plopping some talking heads down in a studio to talk ABOUT the news, rather than actually report it. MUCH cheaper. He came up with a gossip channel which, instead of gossiping about celebrities, gossips about politicians. It's always about people, not policy. That's a direct Appeal to Emotion.

Roger Ailes candidly put it this way: "If two guys are on a stage and one guy says 'I know how to bring peace to the Middle East' and the other guy falls into the orchestra pit, which one do you think is going to be on the evening news?"

That's why all those garish Romper Room colors festoon the set. That's why the women are all facing the camera in short skirts. That's why all those suggestive chyrons are dancing across the screen. That's why the talking heads are pounding their fists on the desk and speaking in three octaves. All that shit SELLS. Emotion sells. Sex sells. Suggestive shit plants seeds and the colors keep you awake. And then ---- BAM, buy this dick drug. That's the game, Gumball. It's all manipulative psychology. Commentary --- which is where Fox Noise makes all its money --- is cheap, because as the old maxim says, TALK IS CHEAP.

And that's why ratings exist.

CNN, to its discredit, saw what Fox Noise was doing and adopted some of the same shit. MSNBC came along and switched from its far-right position that Fox already had, to the other side to milk a different audience. ALL of them are in it for the goal of maximizing viewership, simply because the more hypnotized drones you have, the more you can charge the advertiser for time. Ratings measure attention. If my network can deliver more eyeballs than yours, then I can charge more for a commercial. Simple as that. How I get those eyeballs could be bimbos in short skirts in a garishly colored studio with suggestive chyrons running amok, it could be naked people on an island forced to eat bugs, it could be here's the results of the paternity tests, it could be dancing with the who-cares. Doesn't matter, they're all there for the same goal.

THAT, Virginia, is how they work and what they work for. Not fucking "activisim", which makes ZERO money.

There would be no advertising without viewership. The MSM knows that the more outrageous their stories the more suckers they can fool into watching their bullshit opinions which they pawn off as journalism.

 

[easyt65]

Such as? You mean like the Weather Channel not disclosing that a Sharpie hurricane was going to wipe out Alabama?

No, like the Director of the CIA, one of the heads of the entire US Intelligence Community Directors, reporting for 2 years that the President is a 'compromised Russian agent'...and when it is proved he isn't that same CIA Director is allowed to say, "Well, I'm glad it was proved he isn't - my bad."

'I'm glad he isn't - my bad for saying so'?!

Talk about horrific Intel and a complete inability to acquire any correct legitimate Intel.....THIS, again coming from possibly the # 2...3...4 Intelligence Directors in the US Govt & he went around for 2 years committing Sedition without knowing if it was true or not.....facilitated by CNN...and he got to keep his job (for a while)...and Dems / snowflakes got pissed he was fired after this?

No, like declaring lies to be true without even attempting to fact-check them, resulting in retraction after retraction, fired employees (warranted and not), and ratings dropping through the floor due to obvious partisanship and a lack of credibility.....

 

[francoHFW]

Where's any connection here to "Democrats"? Or to political parties at all?

Or didn't you think of that?

Good gods do I have to think of EVERYTHING around here??

/——-/ You think ABC is run by Tea Party Conservatives and not democRATs???

No. You see, I'm not self-enslaved to that childish binary world where all matter is comprised of either "Republicans" or "Democrats". Rather what I already KNOW is that ABC, like any other network, is run by corporate profit-seekers. The point is not that that leans them conservative, although it does, the point is that what ABC, or any commercial broadcast network exists for, is PROFIT. That means selling commercials. THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THEM.

A Clear Channel executive put it this way, after asking one of his Program Directors the definition of "programming" --
"Programming is the shit we run between commercials".

NOBODY IN THE COMMERCIAL BROADACST WORLD makes a dime off their ideology. They make them from selling dick drugs, monster trucks, cosmetics and all kinds of other shit you don't need. That's the system, that's how it works.

And we already did this. Read and learn.

Not because they are corporate owned
Because they are proven progressive activists.

So yes you are claiming that, in your ignorance, because I can tell you right here and now, NOBODY makes a damn dime from "activism", whether "Progressive" or anything else. They make their money from selling you shit you don't need like dick drugs, stupid phones and pickemup trucks big enough to tow a meteorite. And to sell you that shit they will present whatever pap keeps you planted there until the sponsor gets the floor.

THAT is how it works, and that's what ratings are for.

And that leads us directly back to the network pushback of "nobody knows who he (Epstein) is". That means the network has to first EXPLAIN who he is, and that costs viewership, and ratings go down, and they can't charge as much for commercials, as they can when the feature the latest missing white girl or naked people stranded on an island forced to eat bugs.

Your ridiculous paranoia fantasies of "they're all out to get me" are ironically true --- they ARE out to get your money. They don't give a flying shit about what's left of your mind.

TSDR

If ratings were the goal -
News networks would all adopt the FoxNews Playbook.
They would rather be activists than have ratings.
All you need to do is look.
Other than airports - no one is watching CNN
No one is watching MSNBC

No idea what "TSDR" is supposed to mean but yes, so-called "news" networks HAVE adopted the Fox Noise model. That's a perfect illustration. Before Roger What-Ailes-Ya bubbled up Fox Noise, CNN was holding the position of news source with its idea of 24 hour coverage so we didn't have to wait for the 6pm network news.

But doing news -- REAL news -- is expensive. You need to hire reporters, fly them around with production crews, trucks, satellite phones, you need to open and maintain foreign bureaus, all that shit. That's why the old traditional Huntley-Brinkley-Cronkite network news shows were all subsidized by the mindless Gilligan's Islands and Beverly Hillbillies, because that's where the money was. The newscasts were loss leaders. Just there for PR so that a given station, come license renewal time, could tell the FCC, "See? We're serving the public interest as the license requires, look at all these news shows".

And of course being on cable, the Foxes and CNNs don't need broadcast licenses anyway so they're relieved of the mandate to operate "in the public interest, convenience and necessity" as licensees are.

Rupert Murdoch, who made his fortune selling sleazy tabloid rags, bubbled up the idea of, instead of spending all that money on actual news, plopping some talking heads down in a studio to talk ABOUT the news, rather than actually report it. MUCH cheaper. He came up with a gossip channel which, instead of gossiping about celebrities, gossips about politicians. It's always about people, not policy. That's a direct Appeal to Emotion.

Roger Ailes candidly put it this way: "If two guys are on a stage and one guy says 'I know how to bring peace to the Middle East' and the other guy falls into the orchestra pit, which one do you think is going to be on the evening news?"

That's why all those garish Romper Room colors festoon the set. That's why the women are all facing the camera in short skirts. That's why all those suggestive chyrons are dancing across the screen. That's why the talking heads are pounding their fists on the desk and speaking in three octaves. All that shit SELLS. Emotion sells. Sex sells. Suggestive shit plants seeds and the colors keep you awake. And then ---- BAM, buy this dick drug. That's the game, Gumball. It's all manipulative psychology. Commentary --- which is where Fox Noise makes all its money --- is cheap, because as the old maxim says, TALK IS CHEAP.

And that's why ratings exist.

CNN, to its discredit, saw what Fox Noise was doing and adopted some of the same shit. MSNBC came along and switched from its far-right position that Fox already had, to the other side to milk a different audience. ALL of them are in it for the goal of maximizing viewership, simply because the more hypnotized drones you have, the more you can charge the advertiser for time. Ratings measure attention. If my network can deliver more eyeballs than yours, then I can charge more for a commercial. Simple as that. How I get those eyeballs could be bimbos in short skirts in a garishly colored studio with suggestive chyrons running amok, it could be naked people on an island forced to eat bugs, it could be here's the results of the paternity tests, it could be dancing with the who-cares. Doesn't matter, they're all there for the same goal.

THAT, Virginia, is how they work and what they work for. Not fucking "activisim", which makes ZERO money.

There would be no advertising without viewership. The MSM knows that the more outrageous their stories the more suckers they can fool into watching their bullshit opinions which they pawn off as journalism.

yes all respected media and journalists around the world are wrong, only your high school grad ex-cokehead DJ's know the truth. You people are absolutely unbelievable in your ignorance and Duperee... Your whole imaginary planet is about to blow up all your conspiracy theories and the deep State etc etc. Poor America.