|
Pretty sure donald has the planet's market on embarrassment cornered so I doubt anybody can get any.
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:He kept using it in conversations with people who hadn't seen the episode (and probably had never even heard of John Oliver, he's not that well known here in Australia) so they had no idea what the gently caress he was talking about. Oh man, it was annoying enough when Americans did it, I can't imagine someone talking about that loving buffoon and using that tired joke in another country.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
Tot Bench was adorable. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
I'm just happy that Trump tweeted about Sinclair and forced real coverage of the issue. Thanks, Trump!
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:I'm just happy that Trump tweeted about Sinclair and forced real coverage of the issue. Thanks, Trump! Well to be fair the clip of all the anchors synced up was already making the rounds before that tweet. Although Trump tweeting it now forces everyone to talk about it because apparently nobody has figured out that nothing he says actually means anything. It's pretty sad how much lag time there was between LWT covering this exact same thing and the rest of the media picking up on it though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 23:43
|
|
|
It never stops loving with my head that there genuinely has been a rising problem with fake news, but the most prominent people crying out fake news are those who thrive on misinformation. Because somehow being told that you're being told lies somehow helps people mainline conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton, Antifa, and the deep state
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:It never stops loving with my head that there genuinely has been a rising problem with fake news, but the most prominent people crying out fake news are those who thrive on misinformation. The individuals and organizations that benefitted the most from this problem were the ones who were already saying that the media was left-wing, politically-correct, and distorting or outright fabricating news reports. Their audience was primed for this shift.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:46
|
|
|
Your dog's name is wolfy wolf?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
Kind of weird that both Last Week Tonight and The Joel McHale Show mentioned Hot Bench this week.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 02:21
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:I'm just happy that Trump tweeted about Sinclair and forced real coverage of the issue. Thanks, Trump! It's really weird to me that Trump and his ilk are highlighting this as an example of the "FAKE NEWS" they keep crying about, when it's actually the kind of right-wing propaganda the rest of us have been rallying against and were told we were censoring conservative media. Yes, this is fake news, guys! This is what we've been talking about! W.... Why are you still calling out CNN and not Sinclair?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
It still pisses me off that CNN gave Trump all that free air time during the election. And NBC let Trump host SNL as he was seeking the nomination. But Trump still gets to use THE MEDIA as a political foil. Like, I hate the media and Hollywood more than right wing shitheads pretend to. But so far, there's no substantial backlash or critique against the media coming from the Left within mainstream political discourse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
I don't have a problem with a station owner having an editorial, my Sinclair stations were previously run by a liberal old man who had post-newscast editorial segments where he ran Republicans down for education cuts and the like. Sinclair bought them because he died. It's making your newscasters go out and give the speech for you that's lovely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I don't have a problem with a station owner having an editorial, my Sinclair stations were previously run by a liberal old man who had post-newscast editorial segments where he ran Republicans down for education cuts and the like. Sinclair bought them because he died. There is a huge difference between framing something as an editorial and presenting clearly skewed opinions as actual news.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 04:40
|
|
|
Veskit posted:Your dog's name is wolfy wolf? I think it was Woofy Woof
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 08:06
|
|
|
webmeister posted:I think it was Woofy Woof This is a better dog name than Marlon Bundo is a bunny name.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
swickles posted:There is a huge difference between framing something as an editorial and presenting clearly skewed opinions as actual news. I don't see where Sinclair framed the statement in question as anything other than editorial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 17:41
|
|
|
General Dog posted:I don't see where Sinclair framed the statement in question as anything other than editorial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
FebrezeNinja posted:Did you miss the part where they were also required to run a report on "the deep state"? Or the fact that they described the process as "POW’s being forced to record propaganda messages". And immigration courts are sadly hosed up everywhere in the world. There was a case were iranian women fled to my country because she was sentenced to eighty lashes for drinking alcohol at a private party. Basically everyone, including an expert on iranian law, confirmed that the sentencing were legit. But the immigration services decided to trust the iranian government which of course denied it. She was sent back to Iran where she was whipped eighty times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 18:13
|
|
|
swickles posted:There is a huge difference between framing something as an editorial and presenting clearly skewed opinions as actual news. I saw the segment in whole on one of my locals. It's presented as an editorial, it's just lovely to make newsreaders (who are not necessarily Sinclair lifers and maybe want to work at CNN or something in the future) read it. Go send a presentable vice president or other corporate rep to read it and put "Editorial" on-screen at least once and it'd be fine. Station owners have opinions and editorialize, it's why many of them buy stations. Newsrooms understand that and operate usually at an arms length from the editorials. Making your news hosts read an editorial from management is way worse than insisting the station run a 10 minute rant-fest from a Trump lackey. That's station management with a political bias, but nobody expects station owners to be neutral. They expect owners to not overrun the newsroom and demand the newsreaders to read an opinion piece as their own.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I saw the segment in whole on one of my locals. It's presented as an editorial, it's just lovely to make newsreaders (who are not necessarily Sinclair lifers and maybe want to work at CNN or something in the future) read it. Go send a presentable vice president or other corporate rep to read it and put "Editorial" on-screen at least once and it'd be fine. That's the biggest problem with all of this. Local newscasters are local celebrities and are trusted by a lot of people. Having them read that statement is preying on that trust to put legitimacy on the editorial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
The way the immigration courts are set up right now seems like a pretty clear violation of human rights, but the way the government works, noncitizen rights routinely get trampled on, which is a real big systematic problem. Also important to note is that a lot of the people in favor of oppressing illegal immigrants don't necessarily want them gone, they just want to make sure they stay oppressed so they have a convenient underclass of people who can serve as underpaid laborers with no workers' rights. If any of them get uppity, they can just try to deport the lot. Trump knows this tactic well. Trump Tower was built using illegal polish immigrants who he tried to stop paying halfway and attempted to have them deported. The very concept of insisting that they're all uniformly illegal and blindly deporting them is just dutifully enforcing the law is a farce. The biggest reason we need immigration reform is that these people, one way or another, have a functional part in our economy, and keeping the only options as either deporting or looking the other way only keeps them as an underclass of humans without rights. bull3964 posted:That's the biggest problem with all of this. Yeah, if you have the news people suddenly going into editorial mode, there's definitely going to be confusion over whether it's supposed to be news. From what I recall, Fox News exploits the same kind of confusion dipping in and out of editorial mode. Caught in blatant lies? Nah, just an editorial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
https://deadspin.com/how-local-news-stations-are-rebelling-against-their-sin-1825013865 Report about the fallout from all that Sinclair news.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 01:25
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:https://deadspin.com/how-local-news-stations-are-rebelling-against-their-sin-1825013865 I feel like the anchors should take the approach that one doctor in the abortion bit did, where he basically said "the law requires me to say these things, however the law does not prevent me from following up with my professional medical opinion that this is all bullshit" Is there any sort of antitrust suit that could be brought against Sinclair for scooping up all these local stations? I mean I know that the law is generally bad about dealing with "local monopolies" which is why cable companies get away with so much poo poo, but it seems like some kind of legal action could be taken. Although I guess the regulators in the current administration that would be responsible for taking that action aren't particularly inclined to do so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Is there any sort of antitrust suit that could be brought against Sinclair for scooping up all these local stations? I mean I know that the law is generally bad about dealing with "local monopolies" which is why cable companies get away with so much poo poo, but it seems like some kind of legal action could be taken. Although I guess the regulators in the current administration that would be responsible for taking that action aren't particularly inclined to do so. The FCC did have some ownership restrictions still in place, but Ajit Pai has spent the past year rolling many of them back...after meetings with Sinclair executives. Nothing suspicious there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I feel like the anchors should take the approach that one doctor in the abortion bit did, where he basically said "the law requires me to say these things, however the law does not prevent me from following up with my professional medical opinion that this is all bullshit" Except when it's your owner telling you to do something rather than the law, they just fire you for that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 03:42
|
|
|
I'd totally line up for a souvenir ultrasound photo and some 'pregnancy vitamins' from Wanda-Jo if I saw that van in the street. I don't even have a womb but I'm sure she could find something interesting in my hairy man belly and add a wacky caption to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 10:47
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Except when it's your owner telling you to do something rather than the law, they just fire you for that. Worse than that, Sinclair contracts the on air personalities with really heinous contracts. If an on air personality quits or is fired with cause before the end of the contract the personality must repay Sinclair 100% of prior bonuses paid out during the current contract and 50% of the salary they were set to receive if they served out the remainder of their contract. These contracts have somehow been upheld in court.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 14:38
|
|
|
So, you have a recording of Pruitt's security team calling the ambulance for an unresponsive man after busting down the door, and you take the "he was just napping" line at face value?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
Baronash posted:So, you have a recording of Pruitt's security team calling the ambulance for an unresponsive man after busting down the door, and you take the "he was just napping" line at face value? I'm not sure John could even insinuate much else with out possibly getting into some more legal poo poo. I wonder if HBOs lawyers were like :cool it for like a minute: My assumption is that Pruitt was sleeping off a bender. Or just generally drunk in the middle of the day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Macdeo Lurjtux posted:Worse than that, Sinclair contracts the on air personalities with really heinous contracts. If an on air personality quits or is fired with cause before the end of the contract the personality must repay Sinclair 100% of prior bonuses paid out during the current contract and 50% of the salary they were set to receive if they served out the remainder of their contract. These contracts have somehow been upheld in court. loving hell America
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:35
|
|
|
Macdeo Lurjtux posted:Worse than that, Sinclair contracts the on air personalities with really heinous contracts. If an on air personality quits or is fired with cause before the end of the contract the personality must repay Sinclair 100% of prior bonuses paid out during the current contract and 50% of the salary they were set to receive if they served out the remainder of their contract. These contracts have somehow been upheld in court. How? This is essentially slavery, especially the repayment of monies you have already worked for. How can this stand in court?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:52
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:How? This is essentially slavery, especially the repayment of monies you have already worked for. How can this stand in court? Because news anchors don't make enough money to fight a legal team backed by a billion dollar media company.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Separately, yes. But I was under the impression that Sinclair had a poo poo-ton of local networks bought. Why don't they coordinate to fight this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
That sounds dangerously close to union talk there, we won't have any of that around here. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
Plus, while Sinclair is the worst, contracts similar to that are standard in the local affiliate markets. You can't go anywhere in America and report the news without signing a really lovely contract. Mainly because there's a staggering ratio of on air talent/people looking for on air work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:I'm not sure John could even insinuate much else with out possibly getting into some more legal poo poo. I wonder if HBOs lawyers were like :cool it for like a minute: Yeah, speculation when that story broke was that Pruitt might have some kind of substance abuse problem if his staffers immediately panicked and jumped to that conclusion. Like, whether he was napping or not why would you jump there so quickly unless there was a reason? But Oliver can't speculate on that without getting his rear end sued.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Macdeo Lurjtux posted:Worse than that, Sinclair contracts the on air personalities with really heinous contracts. If an on air personality quits or is fired with cause before the end of the contract the personality must repay Sinclair 100% of prior bonuses paid out during the current contract and 50% of the salary they were set to receive if they served out the remainder of their contract. These contracts have somehow been upheld in court. I can't think of any other country off the top of my head that this is legal. It is so outrageous I am not sure if you're telling the truth. Solmaila must have better contracts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 04:39
|
|
|
It's called a Liquidated Damages clause, nominally it's used by a broadcast company to recoup the losses incurred by unexpectedly having to train and establish a new personality. I was wrong about it being upheld in court, mainly because it hasnt made it that far yet, theres also a clause for forced arbitration.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
I am disappointed that the thread title hasn't been changed to "Johnny O's Fish Facts, Wildlife Wonders, and Abortion".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
oohhboy posted:I can't think of any other country off the top of my head that this is legal. It is so outrageous I am not sure if you're telling the truth. Solmaila must have better contracts. It reminds me very strongly of k-pop artist contracts in South Korea, honestly. Those can be just as predatory with the artist having to take on a debt to their promotion company to cover their training (often when they are still kids) and then having to pay it back, and retaining that often crippling debt if they decide to quit or try to leave their company. If they aren't popular enough or their company is shady enough paying this back becomes a huge problem. Comes with a fat slice of blacklisting if the promotion company is powerful enough too. Never thought I'd see something like that outside of Korea though, even there people are starting to successfully fight those types of contracts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 07:23
|
|