• 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

Fox News Channel - dumb, dumb, DUMB!

Don CT said:
Fox News put all of their eggs in the Trump basket, that turned out to be a bad move in the end.
Click to expand...
Fox set viewer expectations to always be Trumpy; the news division got in the way with some reality on election night. Now, Newsmax and OAN can cover the MAGA Government-in-Exile as the legitimate government, and Fox has to figure out what to do. The Trumpist fan base is upset that Chris Wallace praised Biden's inauguration speech.

We have 1/3 of the country that embraces authoritarianism and would have gladly supported an actual coup. We'll see if a more competent authoritarian shows up and captures the Trump/QAnon wing.
 
wadio said:
I was a regular viewer of Martha MacCallum's 7 pm show on Fox. When it was announced that they were bumping her out of prime time and I heard the reason is that Newsmax is beating Fox in the ratings in that slot with Greg Kelly I decided to check it out. Good show!

I've posted here before that I found Newsmax difficult to watch due to their low-budget presentation. And while much of that still exists, it's greatly improved. They've added new shows instead of broadcasting video of radio talk shows and this time I was pleasantly surprised. So surprised in fact that I've made the switch. I'm done with Fox. No more yelling at the screen every time Chris Wallace appears!

But my main point is that FNC themselves drove me to Newsmax by the stupid decision to move a good show. It will take it's replacement awhile to gain traction - they don't even have a permanent host yet - and meanwhile Greg Kelly will gain even more viewers.

Dumb, dumb, DUMB!
Click to expand...
So I believe this post is in the wrong place it should be in the politics on radio and television section. And by vocalizing your political views of not liking Chris Wallace that is starting or promoting a political discussion in a non designated political forum on here some of us do not come on this website to have to deal with politics so can this post please be moved or closed thank you.
 
Can an argument be made that none of this is in the public interest, convenience and necessity, since it isn't true and encourages anarchy, therefore subjecting the parties with loss of license?
 
b-turner said:
The only flaw is there is no license to lose for Fox as they are a program provider, not a licensee.
Click to expand...

However the Fox Corporation is the licensee of lots of TV stations. Trump at one time threatened the licenses of NBC stations because he didn't like their coverage.

www.cbsnews.com

Trump threatens to "look at" NBC license

In a tweet Tuesday morning, he criticized NBC News for its handling of Ronan Farrow's Harvey Weinstein investigation
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
 
semoochie said:
I was thinking of the corporations that own "conservative" broadcast Talk outlets, thus making ALL of their properties subject to revocation!
Click to expand...

It's doubtful they would revoke licenses for the words of on air talent. That usually gets dealt with in fines.

Revocation of license is usually done for actions by the owner. If an owner is deemed unfit to be a licensee.
 
TheBigA said:
It's doubtful they would revoke licenses for the words of on air talent. That usually gets dealt with in fines.

Revocation of license is usually done for actions by the owner. If an owner is deemed unfit to be a licensee.
Click to expand...
Can a cable network have any penalties? They are not over the air so they are free to say what they want. Unless they are promoting violence? Could you go after the satellite operator?
 
TheBigA said:
It's doubtful they would revoke licenses for the words of on air talent. That usually gets dealt with in fines.

Revocation of license is usually done for actions by the owner. If an owner is deemed unfit to be a licensee.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry; I thought I said that. I was referring to the station owners not taking action to stop it.
 
semoochie said:
I'm sorry; I thought I said that. I was referring to the station owners not taking action to stop it.
Click to expand...

That's not the kind of thing that causes licenses to get revoked. If the owner is convicted of a crime, then they're no longer fit to own stations. That's what happened to Ed Stolz. But programming issues just lead to fines. So far no one has been fined for disinformation.

www.rbr.com

Ed Stolz’s Fight To Keep Three FMs Ends | Radio & Television Business Report

A Form 314 filing transferring three FM stations stripped off ownership by Ed Stolz due to nonpayment of ASCAP royalty fees to a new owner has been made. The filing was submitted by the stations' receiver, and the buyer is a non-secular broadcast ministry with a significant presence in the...
www.rbr.com www.rbr.com
 
TheBigA said:
That's not the kind of thing that causes licenses to get revoked. If the owner is convicted of a crime, then they're no longer fit to own stations. That's what happened to Ed Stolz. But programming issues just lead to fines. So far no one has been fined for disinformation.

www.rbr.com

Ed Stolz’s Fight To Keep Three FMs Ends | Radio & Television Business Report

A Form 314 filing transferring three FM stations stripped off ownership by Ed Stolz due to nonpayment of ASCAP royalty fees to a new owner has been made. The filing was submitted by the stations' receiver, and the buyer is a non-secular broadcast ministry with a significant presence in the...
www.rbr.com www.rbr.com
Click to expand...
Are you saying that a talk show host can direct his listeners to go to the mayor's house, break the door down, try to kill him and if the owner takes no action, he isn't liable for the consequences? I see no difference!
 
semoochie said:
Are you saying that a talk show host can direct his listeners to go to the mayor's house, break the door down, try to kill him and if the owner takes no action, he isn't liable for the consequences? I see no difference!
Click to expand...

The difference is committing a crime. If the host does what you say, the host could be liable for murder. I can't remember the exact details, but there was a DJ at a NY station who carried out a personal vendetta against a former lover on the air, and that DJ was fired and fined. But the owner kept his license.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom