Comments on: The Government Channel http://www.ethicalrealist.com/the-government-channel/ Ethical Realism Mon, 21 May 2012 07:51:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: kris Britt http://www.ethicalrealist.com/the-government-channel/#comment-10 kris Britt Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:54:32 +0000 http://www.ethicalrealist.com/?p=96#comment-10 Who would you suggest for reporting that would appear trustworthy? Who would you suggest for reporting that would appear trustworthy?

]]> By: Edward http://www.ethicalrealist.com/the-government-channel/#comment-8 Edward Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:12:41 +0000 http://www.ethicalrealist.com/?p=96#comment-8 Interesting concept, although I am not sure how one could limit political campaigning in other media. Freedom of speech and therefore political speech being part of the cornerstone of our constitutional system. Some type of public financing to level the playing field as well as creating a venue where opinions could be heard by all has a positive democratic feel. The TV advertising community would not be happy at the loss of revenue. Still, talk radio, internet blogs, and biased or incomplete mainstream journalism will continue to have a huge impact as will lobbyist and special interests. The entrenched political entities could take this noble concept and control it a la police state. In several ways, the current administration showed a penchant for such anti democratic tactics. Although she read the sports news on a local television station in Anchorage, you totally loose me with suggesting Sarah Palin as an anchor person. Palin is a partisan politician, not an unbiased journalist, which disqualifies her. In my opinion she is also a poorly educated, mendacious, narcissistic, unscrupulous self promoter whose main function in the last election was to galvanize the most regressive and undemocratic elements of the Republican party. In other words, I do not trust her and I think that the person chosen to anchor such a forum would have to be honest, intelligent, well read and believably unbiased by a vast majority of the plebiscite. A descent speaking voice would be a bonus. We have C Span covering the congress. Perhaps its mandate could be expanded. With all broad cast going digital, C Span should be available to all very soon. Interesting concept, although I am not sure how one could limit political campaigning in other media. Freedom of speech and therefore political speech being part of the cornerstone of our constitutional system. Some type of public financing to level the playing field as well as creating a venue where opinions could be heard by all has a positive democratic feel. The TV advertising community would not be happy at the loss of revenue. Still, talk radio, internet blogs, and biased or incomplete mainstream journalism will continue to have a huge impact as will lobbyist and special interests. The entrenched political entities could take this noble concept and control it a la police state. In several ways, the current administration showed a penchant for such anti democratic tactics.

Although she read the sports news on a local television station in Anchorage, you totally loose me with suggesting Sarah Palin as an anchor person. Palin is a partisan politician, not an unbiased journalist, which disqualifies her. In my opinion she is also a poorly educated, mendacious, narcissistic, unscrupulous self promoter whose main function in the last election was to galvanize the most regressive and undemocratic elements of the Republican party. In other words, I do not trust her and I think that the person chosen to anchor such a forum would have to be honest, intelligent, well read and believably unbiased by a vast majority of the plebiscite. A descent speaking voice would be a bonus.

We have C Span covering the congress. Perhaps its mandate could be expanded. With all broad cast going digital, C Span should be available to all very soon.

]]> By: Moderator http://www.ethicalrealist.com/the-government-channel/#comment-7 Moderator Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:31:09 +0000 http://www.ethicalrealist.com/?p=96#comment-7 I think that’s a great idea. Then third parties might actually have a voice too, instead of being silenced by the mainstream media and two-party, special interest controlled Commission on Presidential Debates. If you haven’t seen the movie called “An Unreasonable Man” about Ralph Nader, you should watch it if only for the scene where he is refused entrance to the DNC. It’s pretty disturbing. When I was in journalism school, we were still taught that it was required for candidates in a political race to get equal time. This election provided the most biased coverage I’ve ever seen. How can we make Government TV a reality? I think that’s a great idea. Then third parties might actually have a voice too, instead of being silenced by the mainstream media and two-party, special interest controlled Commission on Presidential Debates. If you haven’t seen the movie called “An Unreasonable Man” about Ralph Nader, you should watch it if only for the scene where he is refused entrance to the DNC. It’s pretty disturbing. When I was in journalism school, we were still taught that it was required for candidates in a political race to get equal time. This election provided the most biased coverage I’ve ever seen. How can we make Government TV a reality?

]]>