"Let us be clear -- That announcement (by Sinclair) was all spin --"

[Paradise]

"In response to the calls people have made to Sinclair and their advertisers, lawsuits others have filed and the petition you signed, Sinclair announced on Wednesday they would not air Stolen Honor unedited.

Let us be clear
-- That announcement was all spin --

All indications are that a large portion of the film will be shown and compounded by commentary attacking John Kerry. This action by Sinclair is NOT a capitulation. We must not allow Sinclair to get away with airing a fake news show as an attempt to throw the election to George W. Bush." -- www.stopsinclair.org

WE "MUST" KEEP UP OUR ONE-CLICK-EMAIL-HITS-ALL SINCLAIR'S ADVERTISERS, RIGHT HERE: http://grassrootsnation.com/sinclair/

[Shoeempress]

1. General Mills has forwarded the most insulting response to my complaints.

Here's their Email address: [e-mail]

And here's the response, hope some of you feel free to respond as I already have.

Thank you for contacting General Mills.

Many consumers have written to share their views on this issue. Some have urged General Mills to use its influence as an advertiser to ensure that the media reports the news in an unbiased manner. Some have urged General Mills to continue advertising, and have threatened to withdraw support for our products if we alter our advertising plans. Passions run deep on both sides, particularly this close to an election.

Whenever possible, General Mills does strive to preview the programs on which our advertising appears. We do so to assure that we do not advertise on programs inconsistent with the family-oriented nature of our products. This works well with entertainment programs produced and available for advance screening, but pre-screening of news broadcasts is usually not possible.

Our view in this area is clear. We believe one of the fundamental elements of our society is the freedom of the press. Companies such as ours, in our view, should not attempt to influence, control or pre-empt the content of news through the leverage of advertising sponsorship. To do so would undermine that fundamental freedom.

From time to time, any one of us as viewers may consider a particular news story to be inaccurate or imbalanced. News organizations do err. Judgment is not always well applied. One major news organization recently acknowledged that errors were made in stories relating to the current presidential election. When such errors occur, certainly a price is paid in terms of reputation. But errors and questionable judgment are an acceptable price to pay, in our view, to assure the presence of a free and independent media in our society.

As viewers, each of us is free to make a choice. We can choose to patronize or not patronize programs with our viewership. We can choose to patronize or not patronize particular television stations, or even entire networks.

Similarly, advertisers may choose not to sponsor certain broadcasts, a particular network or specific publications because of their journalistic standards and judgment. But advertisers should not attempt to control or pre-empt news programming prior to broadcast or publication. That, in our view, would be inappropriate.

In this instance, as in the example cited earlier, passionate voices are calling on advertisers to insert themselves into the election by threatening to boycott those who remove or who do not remove their advertising.

We choose to stand with freedom of the press.

We welcome the views that you and others have shared with us. You may rest assured that we will remind the networks we sponsor that the integrity of their reporting reflects on the companies that advertise during their broadcasts.

Hopefully, you will understand our views – and the importance we place on a free press.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact us and share your views.

Sincerely,



General Mills

[Paradise]

5. Shoe, I do not believe for a second that *he believes

this is freedom of the press! this is just a convenient excuse spewed to those whom *he believes are ignorant. a n d, "IGNORANT AIN'T US!"

*I say 'he' because another du'er received the same email showing its president's name.

ALL THE MORE REASON WHY IT IS UP TO US TO FULFILL OUR ROLE IN DEMOCRACY!

[Shoeempress]

6. No kidding, and thats why I'm hoping folks will let General Mills know

how sleazy they are.

[Paradise]

7. we're on the same page, and thanks for the email address. :) n/t

[cali]

2. It sure was.

Utter bullshit to stop the stock slide. It's so bad, so unfair, so disgusting, I'm in shock. If you want to know what we're up against, go to Kos' site and read the transcript. I'm hoping that the lawsuit initiated by the film maker in MA, will result in an injunction. This is intolerable. Utterly despicable.

[emulatorloo]

3. I am totally clear that it was Spin and Whining - my summary

Sinclair announced today that it will not be showing "Stolen Honor" unedited. Instead we will be editing it more to make it even more slanted! And we'll just show the good parts!

Mean partisan Democrats and thier liberal allies have been personally attacking our Pure and Tender Executives - these attacks are of the vilest nature; it is as if we prolonged the Iraq war and caused prisoners to be tortured.

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

As to advertisers, lets keep it up. . .unfortunately I don't think they are reading the emails as I keep getting boilerplate back.

[pinkpops]

4. This is bigger than Sinclair

Local stations should be locally controlled. The fact that Sinclair can preempt network programming is proof that networks are not the problem. It is the quasi-networks that exist due to corporate control of local licenses that creates the problem.