How do we take down the likes of Lil Tucker, Hannity, Ingraham, et al?
The entire right wing propaganda machine needs to be hit, and hit hard.
I'm talking about legal means here. Their careers should be destroyed in the most humane way possible.
In this case, I'd call the desire for civility a gray area in the interest of defending our democracy.
So, how can it be done? Boycotts of advertisers? Tear 'em up in the Twitterverse?
They've caused too much damage, and continue to do so. They have to go.
In a related subject, I'm thinking of trolling rw radio. Has anyone else here done this?
Please tell me how it went.
Anything goes on the subscription services, and that will be a perpetual cost of liberty.
But the AM and FM terrestrial bands belong to the People and need to be fought for.
It is the pollution on those freely accessible frequencies which is the principal cause of RW brainwashing and political dysfunction.
Lay it out in all its ignominy and ask the same question over and over: How is this in the public interest?
To quote the Commission:
The FCC receives numerous complaints that television and/or radio networks, stations or their employees or guests have broadcast extreme, incorrect or somehow improper political, economic or social statements.
In some cases, the complaints allege that certain broadcast statements may endanger the United States or its people, or threaten our form of government, our economic system or established institutions like family or marriage. They say these statements are "un-American" and an abuse of freedom of speech. The FCC also receives complaints that some broadcast statements criticize, ridicule, "stereotype" or demean individuals or groups because of the religion, race, nationality, gender, gender identification, or sexual orientation, or other characteristics of the group or individual. Finally, many consumers complain that television or radio broadcasts are obscene, indecent, profane or otherwise offensive.
The FCC is barred by law from trying to prevent the broadcast of any point of view. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast material, in most cases, and from making any regulation that would interfere with freedom of speech. Expressions of views that do not involve a "clear and present danger of serious, substantive evil" come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press and prevents suppression of these expressions by the FCC. According to an FCC opinion on this subject, "the public interest is best served by permitting free expression of views." This principle ensures that the most diverse and opposing opinions will be expressed, even though some may be highly offensive.
It decides who shall operate terrestrial radio stations for the next license term.
And it is fully within the FCC's wheelhouse to make a determination as to which applicant is best qualified to operate the station in the public interest.
This includes the determination that a previous licensee has NOT been so operating.
That was a tweet by then FCC Commissioner, and now FCC Chair, Jessica Rosenworcel, when Trump was caterwauling about "fake news" and demanding that the FCC revoke broadcast licenses.
I've practiced communications law at, or before, the FCC for more than forty years. In that time, not a single petition attacking a station's license renewal based on the content of its programming has succeeded. Most are summarily dismissed. The FCC has explained its position on multiple occasions. In addition to the statement quoted in my previous post, here is another more directly preferred in the context of the Commission's licensing authority:
"The Commission has made clear that a fundamental public interest obligation of a television broadcaster is to air programming responsive to the needs and interests of its community of license. Section 326 of the Act, however, prohibits any Commission actions that would give the Commission the power of censorship over Foxs transmissions. Because of this statutory prohibition and related First Amendment principles, and because editorial discretion in the presentation of news and public information is the core concept underlying the regulation of broadcasting pursuant to the Communications Act, the Commission does not interfere with a licensee's selection and presentation of news and editorial programming."
Walter Winchell, giants of their times.
And William Randolph Hearst, the Murdoch of his day. Powerful enough to start the Spanish American War.
All were defeated by entities more powerful than they were
You beat them at the polls, trolling them, debating them, contributing to decent candidates, etc.
Trolling and debating them also doesn't faze 'em.
The networks are only in it for the money. Cut that off and they will change or be gone.
and shake the traitorous morons who live and breathe Fox to at least pause.
Like cancellations and arrests.
Words no longer work.
There is no shame on the part of Fox nor listeners.
I do not believe that Fox even needs advertisers to exist.
Fox is and has been hazardous to the nation and to individuals of the nation of any persuasion.
Deliberate and premeditated.
Conspiracy to incite and exacerbate a public health crisis.
Conspiracy to incite, fund, and plan an insurrection against the USA.
Doubt if it will happen. Just like anti-trust is old and antiquated and would pop too many folks' bubbles.
Been a long time not addressing what needed to be addressed to get to where we are at present.
I'll wager that very few DUers are regular FoxNews viewers. I've been reading the "I never watch, why do you?" posts here at DU for damned near 20 years. It does not seem to be hindering their business model.
If enough people contact their advertisers, eventually that may have an effect.
Virtue signaling about refusing to watch? Not so much.
Interesting. We know who uses that term.
And no, I just dont watch. Never have, never will.
Boycott their advertisers if you want, but thats all you can do without becoming them.
They are well-funded, have absolutely no accountability, and have a receptive audience. Plus the Supreme Court is radically conservative, so there are zero legal remedies.
Successful calls for violence land followers in prison.
Misinformation lands followers in morgues.
How to break the "spell" that masks this self-destruction? I don't know. Can anyone pull off a successful JFK Jr. impersonation?
FWIW, there are plenty of exceptions to "free speech".
And the Wikipedia article doesn't even mention the Sedition Act of 1798, nor the Espionage Act of 1917.
It's an investment by fascists in propaganda that has paid great dividends for them in acquiring power. It's not about making money with the actual broadcast.
Need to find some way of getting a counter message out that will resonate and stick.
can start calling them out by call-sign & advertising list ! they hate that !! each station has it's own local ad group's !
Maybe we could take a page from their playbook.
Basically, the goal was to get him off the air by relentlessly and very publiicly going after any company that advertised on his shows.
It's not the same challenge, but worth a shot. Does take some organizing!
He was still on the radio almost up until he croaked, so tell us how it succeeded.
crazy or not.
You may get to swing it now, but your opponent will certainly get their chance at some point. No one should get that kind of power.
Perhaps broaden this to cover not just "claims that can affect consumers health or their pocketbooks" but also misinformation/disinformation/propaganda that can distort consumers' understanding of the truth/reality in general.
(Not holding my breath.)
destroy them with logic and emotion and better ideas.
destroy them with kindness and open debate.
destroy their arguments, not their voices.
THAT is the American way.
Fox News and other rw media off the basic subscription to a higher, more expensive tier, just like MSNBC is. Don't think one can underestimate how being on "basic" cable helps Fox News. How many viewers would pay extra to watch it?
The kind of people flocking to RW news obviously aren't in it for the charts and graphs.