Old news is old.

Most intelligent people figured this out during the first Bush term. Slowfags figured it out during the second.

Yeah, you can say whatever you want on TV... except that means you can no longer call it "news" ... or so I thought. Someone should file THAT lawsuit.

>>3996240
>implying 100% of the people have figured it out

>successfully argued
more like successfully bribed some people

lol foxnews

is anyone, well except for the kool-aid drinkers who will keep their heads in the sand, surprised?

If true, will be overturned

lrn2judicialsystem

I didn't read this; maybe you can let me know

Does this mean that it would be unconstitutional for the FCC to revoke their license for that?

>>3996454
>Does this mean that it would be unconstitutional for the FCC to revoke their license for that?

Yes. But it goes to show you that you can't trust mainstream media these days. You have to verify the truth of the news yourself.

All our news channels are biased and crappy. Only idiots hate Fox News and then gleefully watch MSNBC or CNN and think that they are watching honest television.

The triumph of truthiness.

OP is so utterly clueless of the machinations of the 4th estate that it would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

>>3996475
What about those of us that make up our own minds and don't let the media make our decisions for us...you know, the people that actually elected Obama in the red states.

FAUX IS NOT PRONOUNCED THAT WAY
FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

>>3996489
Wait, what other news agencies have gone to court to argue that they have the right to make up shit as new?

btw, the Cardinals won the last Superbowl. It's true because I want it to be, and it appeals to the Arizona public.

>>3996508
new = news

>>3996415
Hey, I like Kool-Aid fella.

That's completely constitutional, news networks aren't legally inclined to be truthful, just like you aren't inclined to treat them as viable news sources.

So don't, because they aren't

>>3996504
Only a compete idiot would think that anyone thinks that it is

>>3996533
This is a bit more complicated than that. The FCC is in place because there are only a limited number of public airwaves. Their task is to allocate those airwaves in the manner most beneficial to all (or something like that). It's not simply a matter of "of course they can do that"... because of course you can curse, or show nipples on tv. When dealing with a limited, public resource, the concern is a bit different. We are trying to get the most use for the most people. Making up news is a terrible way to use this resource

That being said, I'm a bit confused by this: isn't fox news on a private cable network (which isn't limited and, therefore isn't regulated by the fcc)?

Why should this concern them at all?

>>3996475
True dat. I got into an argument becuase I said MSNBC sucks as hard as FOX, my position being that I don't want ANY propoganda, just the fucking facts. Olberman and O'Reilly should both die of ass cancer for all I care.

And anybody that doesn't know that CNN is for & by retards needs to have their voting rights revoked.

tl;dr - NPR/PBS/BBC FTW

>>3996590
True, but the FCC hasn't done it's job in doing that in a long time.

Also, the FCC has limited jurisdiction in cable and satellite broadcasting and can't regulate programing in cable or satellite systems unless it's obscene.

Still better than digg or perez hilton.

thomas jefferson is turning in his grave
>"whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government." --thomas jefferson
the aim of this sort of disinformation is to wrest power from the people's hands and give it to a new aristocracy
the biggest irony is that they used the system in its current form and made it work against itself
this by the way goes for the entire media, not just fox
it's an oligopoly working for the american oligarchy
democracy is dead

>>3996614
That is my point

Why would Fox News Network ever be regulated by the FCC? They aren't on public airwaves

>>3996543
Say Fox News
Then say Faux News if faux was pronounced wrong
It's the only way this joke would work

In the past, politicians that owned newspapers would publish lies about their opponents. How is now any different from when our founding fathers did the exact same thing?

ITT people to incompetant to get their news from off the wire

>>3996646
or the joke could be its visual similarity to "fox" and the fact that it means "fake"

It never even occured to me that people might think it was pronounced similarly; I"m not sure why you think it's necessary for a joke to be made

>>3996670
>to
>incompetant

nice job there, broseph

>>3996670
>to incompetant
>to

>>3996533
So why is the FCC so worried about keeping the airwaves "decent" and "clean"?.

A tit is shown on tv, somebody says motherfucker and all hell breaks lose but networks routinely distort the news and lie and the FCC stfu.

>>3996685
he also misspelled "incompetent"

>>3996661
Today people are way more gullible and thus much more dangerous.

>>3996634
"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

>>3996714
Except some countries have more shit for brain "patriots" than others. America is the perfect breeding ground for fascism. Europe is experienced in that area so they are less nationalistic. But who knows how long that will last. They will forget eventually.

>>3996714
FUCK YEAH GÖRING

this thread is now about bruno making a sex tape with ron paul

>>3996786
Paul is pretty limp wristed there. O_o
I think he may have scared the straight out of him.

>>3996702
What's even worse, there are no regulations regarding violence in broadcasting. We are possibly the only country in the developed would without such regulations.

Once upon a time people believed everything that was photographed was real. They took it as scientific proof that everything that was pictured was real. Nowadays we know about photoshop and know we can't take every picture so literally.

>>3996881

You make it sound like that's a bad thing

>>3997127
clearly it has NO effect on society
you dumb 14 year old

>>3997127
It is, because movies are still censored and American television, in comparison to Europe's, (read: the UK and France) have not fully grown up when it comes to objectionable content.

The Parents Television "Council" has plenty of complaints on sex on television (even simple mild references), but has never did a major campaign on tv violence.

Also, the standards and practices guidelines of the major broadcasting companies (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC)? You can't find them online on their websites.

>>3996454
Fox News is a cable channel, and therefore does not have an FCC license, nor is it required to have one.

FCC licenses are only for broadcast stations, which mostly means PBS, ABC, NBC, Fox (not Fox News), CBS, The CW, MyNetworkTV, and some spic stations.

There are smaller ones (Create, e.g.), but those are the main ones.

tl;dr Fox News is cable; no need for FCC license; stop talking like you have a brain.

>>3997425
lol I konw
I posted >>3996590
it was actually a preliminary question to my actual question

I'm a lawyer, faggot; my brain is bigger than yours

>>3997219
Uh, look at the fucking filename of your picture, asslobster: "VIDYA GAME" not "TV"

PS I guess we should ban everything that isn't sunshine and flowers from TV so we don't have an army of fruitfucker high schoolers, right?

>>3997434

HAHAHAHAAAAAA NIGGA What's your area of expertise bitch? Legal Aid? hahahaaaaaa

>>3997448
Don't you already feel stupid enough?

no need to drag this out