Jump to content

Sinclair, Tribune Close to Merger Deal


MidwestTV

Recommended Posts

Imagine being this emotionally invested over a TV station company whose political opinions are different from yours. Yikes. Most of you don't even have any skin in this game... just being emotional because John Oliver told you big bad Sinclair will eat your children or whatever.

 

I bet if Sinclair leaned left like the rest of the mainstream media, there wouldn't be this level of bitching or moaning over this deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I bet if Sinclair leaned left like the rest of the mainstream media, there wouldn't be any bitching or moaning over this deal.

 

It's not even that though. That's the thing. Truth be told, we could care less about their political views, or at least I could. It's the other practices they do that don't sit well with me.

 

Full disclosure: I'm a right-leaning centrist as well but that still is irrelevant to how I feel about this particular deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the domain for this website change to TVPoliticsTalk.net?

 

So, we've got Myron Falwell & scrabbleship (among others) on the left, and Eat News, CalItalian2 & Nicktes95 (among others) on the right. Seriously, enough with the politics already.

 

And ColDayNews & televisionguy16, yes I am complaining. No need for either of you to point that out as I'm sure both you drama queens are itching to do.

 

I'm a right-leaning centrist anyways. (Trust me, I believe in free market enterprise, but not to the degree of not letting people think for themselves.) Hence my lack of posts here, but still. I don't like politics either, but let's face it, Sinclair's scrutiny is based on its own ideology! #NotWorthIt!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine being this emotionally invested over a TV station company whose political opinions are different from yours. Yikes. Most of you don't even have any skin in this game... just being emotional because John Oliver told you big bad Sinclair will eat your children or whatever.

 

I bet if Sinclair leaned left like the rest of the mainstream media, there wouldn't be any bitching or moaning over this deal.

If they played by the rules and not let their politics override good broadcasting, then maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't going to say anything until you brought my name up. It's very funny how you call us drama queens when all of your posts on this site, with the exception of some, consist entirely of you bitching at someone over their point of view. If you don't like people's posts that much, you have the option of hitting the ignore button so that you do not see what they have to say or not coming on this site. You brought our names up so expect one or both of us to respond to you. If you don't want people to respond to you, do not fix your fingers to mention their name.

 

Yeah, okay. You were probably waiting for the opportunity.

 

Are you TVNewsStalking me? Do you read all my posts? This is the first time I’ve called you out, yet you do it constantly. I’m very aware of the ignore button how to use it. I think you’ve lecture me on that before. Perhaps you should take your own advice.

 

And I saw the recent comments that you made earlier subtweeting me and I chose to take the high road. Keep my name off of your comments and keep me out of your comments in general and we won't have any personal problems. Ok?

 

I don’t tweet or subtweet. I’m not even a registered user of Twitter. I have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

I really don’t care if you like or dislike me. I have no beef with your comments or your opinions, only that you’re constantly complaining about me! Find someone else to obsess with or start drama with. I was flattered at first you picked me, but it’s now become obnoxious and annoying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, any chance of completely wiping out pretty much the last 50 posts? :D:D:D

 

So you’re also tired of the politics stuff? Yeah, I know of me too. :cool:

 

Keep telling yourself that. I got better things to do than come on this site and monitor you 24/7. Moving on, any new business about the topic this thread was made for?

 

Yeah, I doubt that. If you want to TVNewsStalk me, see how often I am on here and then see how often you’re on here. ‘Nuff said.

 

Of course you want to move on, like the little drama queen you are you want the last word too. Funny how you never responded to what this subtweet stuff was all about. Bye Felicia!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you’re also tired of the politics stuff? Yeah, I know of me too. :cool:

 

 

 

Yeah, I doubt that. If you want to TVNewsStalk me, see how often I am on here and then see how often you’re on here. ‘Nuff said.

 

Of course you want to move on, like the little drama queen you are you want the last word too. Funny how you never responded to what this subtweet stuff was all about. Bye Felicia!

 

My name's not Felicia.

 

And to subtweet means talking about someone without mentioning their name. And once again, you're the one marching in here starting this stuff. None of this would have taken place had you left people's names off of your comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My name's not Felicia.

 

And to subtweet means talking about someone without mentioning their name. And once again, you're the one marching in here starting this stuff. None of this would have taken place had you left people's names off of your comments.

Seems like you’re once again selectively handpicking only part of my response while avoiding the rest. Anyway, I know you’re name is not Felicia. Educate yourself, it’s an expression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My name's not Felicia.

 

And to subtweet means talking about someone without mentioning their name. And once again, you're the one marching in here starting this stuff. None of this would have taken place had you left people's names off of your comments.

 

I know what subtweet means. Subtweeting is in reference to twitter, not forums. I wasn’t asking what it meant. Where did I mention you without saying your name? Today is the ONLY time I’ve called you out by name and ever referenced you first, directly or indirectly. You are constantly calling me out, even when I’m not talking to you. I’m still waiting for you to produce the evidence (or come up with an excuse not to).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cna247 seriously... What the actual fudgeballs is wrong with you? Do you have to pick a fight with everyone on this site? Grow some balls and have spirited discussion or take your spineless egotistical argumentative ass out of here. I'm extremely tired of reading thread after thread where you continuously attack people. And as the great Craig Ferguson once said, I look forward to your letters. :rolleyes:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sinclair wanted to be a "fair and balanced" news organization....THIS is how they should have attacked the issue.

http://www.wsfa.com/story/33849304/guest-editorial-facebook-and-news

I'm glad WSFA addressed the "fake news" issue in that way. As viewers, we should make judgments for our own selves and seek news that gives a voice to ALL angles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad WSFA addressed the "fake news" issue in that way. As viewers, we should make judgments for our own selves and seek news that gives a voice to ALL angles.

 

Sinclair will never see that. They want us to decide too but that's not happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad WSFA addressed the "fake news" issue in that way. As viewers, we should make judgments for our own selves and seek news that gives a voice to ALL angles.
Me too, but not as much because it makes no mention of how partisanship has influenced news. Also, contrary to popular belief, no news can give a voice to ALL angles no matter how hard it tries. Which is why we should seek multiple sources instead. Yes, even Fox News, Sinclair stations, Breitbart, and Infowars.

 

Sinclair will never see that. They want us to decide too but that's not happening.
Again, we should seek multiple sources and not stick to only one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Narrator: It wasn't that simple.

As much as I respect him, Stelter could have done a great service to himself and to CNN by disclosing in his article that his parent company, Time Warner, and AT&T are themselves in the middle of a media mega merger, also currently under review by the government.

 

I will agree with you on that. Stelter really did drop the ball here.

 

The President has not minced words about how he feels about CNN.

 

That whole anti-CNN thing by Trump is a classic example of “perception is reality.” After all, CNN is headed by Zucker, who helped greenlight The Apprentice. In theory, it began as a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” setup.

 

Thing is, Trump fell for it, to the point he obsesses endlessly about the network. He’s 70 years old but possess such simplistic reasoning on things. As a result, he painted himself into a corner where he cannot approve AT&T-TimeWarner.

 

They and the parent company have skin in the game if Sinclair-Trib passes muster and their merger doesn't--especially if theirs doesn't.

 

See, TimeWarner will be more apt to take the DOJ to court that utilizing CNN as a passive aggressive outlet to attack Sinclair. This piece was not a vendetta piece disguised as journalism. It was a commentary (without as much disclosure as there should have been) by a media critic that is almost old news.

 

We live in interesting times.

 

Damn straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad WSFA addressed the "fake news" issue in that way. As viewers, we should make judgments for our own selves and seek news that gives a voice to ALL angles.

 

Raycom as a whole uses commentary to discuss issues of importance to THEIR LOCAL AUDIENCES!!!

 

Unlike "one" that tries to perpetuate the hell, fire and brimstone that the world is out to get them..

 

Well...the truth is, we are out to get them BECAUSE THEY ARE ABUSING THEIR POWER TO SHOVE FEAR AND "FAIR AND BALANCED" NEWS DOWN OUR THROATS!!!

 

Not to mention the motivations of the higher management to profit off of all of it....to deny that their airwaves are for sale to their buddies and the highest bidder, and to use the same legal maneuvers over and over again to get what they want and to use their power to grease the wheels in their favor.

 

At least with cable news...we have choices. 3 news channnels, or the ability to tell them all to take a hike by cutting the cord.

 

Broadcast TV is different because it is our link to our community, and wasting time by fear-mongering and shoving must-runs down the viewer's throats on multiple stations destroys the link to the viewer and makes TV even less relevant than it already is.

 

Ok...end rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raycom as a whole uses commentary to discuss issues of importance to THEIR LOCAL AUDIENCES!!!

 

Unlike "one" that tries to perpetuate the hell, fire and brimstone that the world is out to get them..

 

Well...the truth is, we are out to get them BECAUSE THEY ARE ABUSING THEIR POWER TO SHOVE FEAR AND "FAIR AND BALANCED" NEWS DOWN OUR THROATS!!!

 

Not to mention the motivations of the higher management to profit off of all of it....to deny that their airwaves are for sale to their buddies and the highest bidder, and to use the same legal maneuvers over and over again to get what they want and to use their power to grease the wheels in their favor.

 

At least with cable news...we have choices. 3 news channnels, or the ability to tell them all to take a hike by cutting the cord.

 

Broadcast TV is different because it is our link to our community, and wasting time by fear-mongering and shoving must-runs down the viewer's throats on multiple stations destroys the link to the viewer and makes TV even less relevant than it already is.

 

Ok...end rant.

 

Not to mention that Raycom clearly defines what is news and what is editorial opinion. That differs from someone who tries to blur the lines between news and opinion.

 

The same thing happened to AM Radio and Cable News and we've seen what both of those have become. It's a shame seeing that slowly being done to Local TV which has had a long-standing history of being objective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why we should seek multiple sources instead. Yes, even Fox News, Sinclair stations, Breitbart, and Infowars. Again, we should seek multiple sources and not stick to only one.

 

These two highlighted sites/groups are NOT, in any way, shape or form, a news site and/or a source of anything other than propaganda and complete and utter nonsense. I'm all for being informed, but people need to realize when they are being used and fed a bunch of bs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using TVNewsTalk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.