Did he actually make a threat or are you just exaggerating? Also, it seems like you believe in the 1st ammendment for everyone but the governor. Is he not allowed to share his thoughts?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Opposition to Univision sale
- Thread starter ercjncpr
- Start date
- Status
That's a fair question because what he said was based on the assumption that the Latino Media Network plans to use its radio stations to broadcast "leftist disinformation." As of now, there's no reason to believe they will.
He's welcome to express his thoughts, but not to make threats. Threats are not covered by the first amendment. He has already passed and signed laws that the Supreme Court says violates the first amendent.
Here's what he said.
The people of Miami did have a chance to hear the other side and rejected it firmly. It aired on WINZ 940 and the station's own website said "the progressive talk format was causing the station to lose money and that sports talk is more profitable" when it went to all sports in April 2009. Rush on the other hand, did great numbers in Miami.
Popcorn anyone?
That's OK. No one is guaranteed an audience. So if the same people react the same way to the Latino Media Network, that's just fine.
Wow, what a great dodge of what you admit was a fair question. Since you seem to be unable to bring yourself to do so, I will bring myself to answer the question. No, DeSantis did not make any threat against anybody. You are fanning flames hoping nobody will actually read the article. The money quote from the article says:
“Warning, voters! The Left is taking control of our local media. Billionaire George Soros, known for financing extreme leftist causes, is now financing the purchase of Hispanic radio stations right here in Miami. They are coming with their ideological agenda. Soros and his minions know what this community represents in the fight against socialism in America. This community will not get confused. Under Governor Ron DeSantis’ leadership Florida is standing against the corporate media and leftist disinformation.”
You may not like what he says, you may even find his description of the ownership as being "socialist" disparaging, but in no way was it threatening. Also there is no disparagement exception to the first amendment.
Fantastic. We'll see what law he passes next.
Simply as a point of order, Governors don't "pass laws". That's the job of the state legislature. A Governor's only role in the legislative process is to sign said legislation into law, or reject it (veto).
But in his case, he has been telling his legislature what laws to pass. They are told what he wants in the law. That was the case with the latest redistricting law as well as the Disney law. So yes they go through the motions because they have to, but they're his laws.
And this differs from what Obama, Biden, or Newsome does?
He may tell them what he wants, but he cannot control their votes. To act like he is doing anything different from any other elected executive is to demonstrate a lack of understanding as to how things get done in the real world.
What you don't like is that the duly elected legislature agrees with him on most issues and thus are glad to pass his agenda. They win, you lose.
In the words of DJT, they appear weak.
Game, set.... match? 🤣
So Salem doesn't spread "leftist disinformation" as you describe it, and that makes it somehow different than the new owners of these stations targeted at Hispanic listeners? Who you're alleging are completely ideological and intend on programming a "leftist" programming format.
The point stands - both sides are free to buy stations and program it with whatever views or programming that conforms to FCC regulations and they believe will make them money. Even if these new owners were pure leftists and it was the relaunch of Air America in Spanish, they're as entitled to do it as Salem or iHeart or anyone else that provides conservative (or reactionary far right) programming that has spread misinformation about COVID vaccines, election integrity, and in some cases (just scan the social media of Bongino, et. al.) promotes the possibility of armed uprisings against the United States government.
Salem, by the way, spreads "disinformation" about the integrity of elections, and exiled conservative hosts (Joe Walsh and Michael Medved) for not toeing the Trump base line. You're looking to hold a new company who hasn't even presented one minute of programming accountable for a bias considered worse than the one you favor.
I also reject the view that simply because the owners are moderate to left that they would need to program a "liberal" or "progressive" talk format to push back against what they view as misinformation. There are numerous talk stations in America that provide large amounts of news and general talk with enough editorial discretion to not broadcast those things. There are numerous local and syndicated conservative hosts that don't spread alarmism but simply articulate conservative beliefs. Many of these stations have strong newsrooms and drive time news magazine styled programming, and shows that cover topics from health to finance to gardening without a political bent. The new owners of these stations could do many things without hiring a single "liberal" talk show host.
That being said, so what if they do? There's an absence of moderate to left hosts on the airwaves, and if they can find those and put them on their stations and are interested in doing so - good for them. It's expanding choice on the airwaves and trying something new. I have no idea what they'll do, or if it will work. But for supposed "free market" conservatives like Ron DeSantis to be fear mongering and raising alarms about it before it's even happened is not only pointless, but hypocritical given their advocation for consolidation in radio for decades. Liberals and moderates get to have free trade and free speech too.
The point stands - both sides are free to buy stations and program it with whatever views or programming that conforms to FCC regulations and they believe will make them money. Even if these new owners were pure leftists and it was the relaunch of Air America in Spanish, they're as entitled to do it as Salem or iHeart or anyone else that provides conservative (or reactionary far right) programming that has spread misinformation about COVID vaccines, election integrity, and in some cases (just scan the social media of Bongino, et. al.) promotes the possibility of armed uprisings against the United States government.
Salem, by the way, spreads "disinformation" about the integrity of elections, and exiled conservative hosts (Joe Walsh and Michael Medved) for not toeing the Trump base line. You're looking to hold a new company who hasn't even presented one minute of programming accountable for a bias considered worse than the one you favor.
I also reject the view that simply because the owners are moderate to left that they would need to program a "liberal" or "progressive" talk format to push back against what they view as misinformation. There are numerous talk stations in America that provide large amounts of news and general talk with enough editorial discretion to not broadcast those things. There are numerous local and syndicated conservative hosts that don't spread alarmism but simply articulate conservative beliefs. Many of these stations have strong newsrooms and drive time news magazine styled programming, and shows that cover topics from health to finance to gardening without a political bent. The new owners of these stations could do many things without hiring a single "liberal" talk show host.
That being said, so what if they do? There's an absence of moderate to left hosts on the airwaves, and if they can find those and put them on their stations and are interested in doing so - good for them. It's expanding choice on the airwaves and trying something new. I have no idea what they'll do, or if it will work. But for supposed "free market" conservatives like Ron DeSantis to be fear mongering and raising alarms about it before it's even happened is not only pointless, but hypocritical given their advocation for consolidation in radio for decades. Liberals and moderates get to have free trade and free speech too.
The issue here is that Radio Mambí is the recognized conservative voice in Miami and has owned that position for decades.
There is a reason why Cuba has over 20 stations with up to 100,000 watts on 710 to keep Mambí from being heard any place in Cuba (Source: World Radio Handbook 2022). They are afraid of the truth.
Not when for purely political reasons a popular conservative voice is silenced in the process.
I think someone said it earlier on this thread - lest we forget, these are all Ancient Modulation stations. Frankly the new owners are getting press they never ever could have expected - think they're happy about that? Damn skippy they are.
But back to the AM thing - if a tree falls in the forrest and no one is there, does it make a sound? If radical left wingers (or right wingers) put a politically driven format on AM radio in 2023, does it make a sound? (And for the slower among you, yes, my tongue is firmly in my cheek.)
But back to the AM thing - if a tree falls in the forrest and no one is there, does it make a sound? If radical left wingers (or right wingers) put a politically driven format on AM radio in 2023, does it make a sound? (And for the slower among you, yes, my tongue is firmly in my cheek.)
Remember, the bulk of Hispanics in Miami come from Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia and Nicaragua. They are all refugees of socialist violence, property confiscation, guerilla attacks and the like. This is not about differences in a traditionally democratic nation that has stood for two and a half centuries... it's about confiscation, violence and even the death of friends and relatives.
There is a huge group in Miami that considers Radio Mambí to be their voice in exile and to have it eliminated and replaced by the voice of everything they justifiably fear is a bit different than disagreeing with some ultra-right nitwit on Salem.
I appreciate your providing context for what they're afraid of. But I find DeSantis and company attempting to capitalize on that fear before this company has even taken possession of the stations to be pandering.
That aside, what can be done about it? If they're legally approved to buy these stations and make format changes, they'll have to deal with the PR and financial fallout or reward of it. And in a free market, another Miami operator can pick up the talent and serve the conservative audience. Isn't the usual argument "let the market decide?" If the exile audience is loyal and profitable then a struggling station in the market would be wise to serve that audience should the new owners abandon them.
These protests have happened with the loss of college eclectic formats, classical, and religious stations. Each interest group decrying the loss of something essential, important or irreplaceable. Each group equally passionate. And every one of them moved on and found something else, because the FCC does not regulate formats.
That aside, what can be done about it? If they're legally approved to buy these stations and make format changes, they'll have to deal with the PR and financial fallout or reward of it. And in a free market, another Miami operator can pick up the talent and serve the conservative audience. Isn't the usual argument "let the market decide?" If the exile audience is loyal and profitable then a struggling station in the market would be wise to serve that audience should the new owners abandon them.
These protests have happened with the loss of college eclectic formats, classical, and religious stations. Each interest group decrying the loss of something essential, important or irreplaceable. Each group equally passionate. And every one of them moved on and found something else, because the FCC does not regulate formats.
That's OK. WSUA also had heritage when it was sold two years ago, and that heritage was wiped away by its new owner. When people objected, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said this:
"I call on my FCC colleagues to join me in publicly rejecting this attempt to inject partisan politics into our licensing process. Doing so would go a long way in assuring the public that the FCC will review this proposed transaction free from political pressure and according to our long-standing rules and precedents.”
I assume that view also stands now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Yet you are missing the socio-political context of the Miami refugee population. The people who are vehement in their support of Mambí and its programming are people with enormous fears and horrible experiences related to extreme leftist governments.
Or he is doing what his electorate expects which is to defend their interests.
However, there may be a variety of outcomes, such as not buying two AMs in Miami and spinning Mambí to a local group.
But don't you expect people who were the victims of creole socialism to greatly fear its intrusion into their new country?
- Status