The Biden Economy

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

1) Must be periodically renewed
2) Require that the owner of the permit/license use the spectrum to serve the public interest.
3) The government can revoke such licenses and permits, taking back control of that portion of the spectrum for re-allocation/re-auction.

A similar idea that no one owns Lake Michigan, but I might still need a fishing license to fishing on the lake.

Yeh, right. A single auction in 2014 netted the government $34 billion. That's not exactly the same as a Michigan fishing license which costs $26 and the capacity to bring in that kind of money at auction certainly qualifies as an asset.

Translated in private industry parlance, the ownership of such assets (to include mineral rights on federal lands/waters) that bring in billions annually in perpetuity (i.e., accounts receivable) does count as assets.

I can if you want, but it's not a subject I care much about...

Correction: It's not a subject you care about if conservatives are the guilty parties. You've squawked plenty about the wingnut teenager on the mall's story which is of no particular consequence compared to Fox spreading the Big Lie that ultimately led to a violent insurrection.

And yes, I would like you to address this scandal on the thread you created to discuss "fake news" in that it is the most flagrant transgression against journalistic ethics in a generation. While doings, please address, in addition to their blatant lying to shore up their stock price, why this story has had exactly zero coverage on Fox News (both TV and website, including their own hour-long Sunday show, Media Buzz, dedicated solely to covering the media).

[Chicks]

But.... Her emails! His laptop!

Whell's World.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

You know, I predicted that last part, whell's response to the extreme embarrassment lately of Fox news, almost exactly. Nearly posted a message saying so. It was:
1. I never always believed Fox.
2. Your side does it too.
3.Insult

Not half as predictable as what passes for debate from some of you:

1. Build a strawman - he's not a lefty so he must watch Fox News
2. Use that strawman to support your position - he's ducking the topic because he's really a Fox News watcher.
3. Pat yourself on the back for your assumed victory while employing the strawman fallacy.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Yeh, right. A single auction in 2014 netted the government $34 billion. That's not exactly the same as a Michigan fishing license which costs $26 and the capacity to bring in that kind of money at auction certainly qualifies as an asset.

Translated in private industry parlance, the ownership of such assets (to include mineral rights on federal lands/waters) that bring in billions annually in perpetuity (i.e., accounts receivable) does count as assets.

Now, you're being stubbornly stupid. Ask your local TV station if they own their broadcast frequency. A broadcast license is not a certificate of ownership.

Originally Posted by finnbow

Correction: It's not a subject you care about if conservatives are the guilty parties. You've squawked plenty about the wingnut teenager on the mall's story which is of no particular consequence compared to Fox spreading the Big Lie that ultimately led to a violent insurrection.

Tell a lie often enough and folks will start to believe it. I really don't care, but you've lied about my assumed viewing habits for so long you're starting to believe your own bullshit.

[Chicks]

It's impossible to believe that anyone as stubbornly ignorant as Whell gets his news from legit sources such as NYT, The Atlantic, WaPo, etc. Or are they "lefty" news sources to the moron?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

And yes, I would like you to address this scandal on the thread you created to discuss "fake news" in that it is the most flagrant transgression against journalistic ethics in a generation. While doings, please address, in addition to their blatant lying to shore up their stock price, why this story has had exactly zero coverage on Fox News (both TV and website, including their own hour-long Sunday show, Media Buzz, dedicated solely to covering the media).

There are allegations in a lawsuit against Fox. I think you already know that any attorney worth their law degree would advise against making on-air comments about a lawsuit against the company. Or did you simply forget about such basic, common-sense guidance because you were being too smart by half?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

There are allegations in a lawsuit against Fox. I think you already know that any attorney worth their law degree would advise against making on-air comments about a lawsuit against the company. Or did you simply forget about such basic, common-sense guidance because you were being too smart by half?

You still did not say what you felt about the revelations showing the level of craven deceit and disrespect of its audience by the predominant news source in conservative America - deliberately lying and trashing a private company with resulting death threats to their employees and amplification of the Big Lie contributing to a violent insurrection in order to protect their stock price is OK with you, the self-proclaimed watchdog of fake news?

[Chicks]

Fox News 2020 Election Coverage Decisions Demonstrate that Demand for Misinformation is a Bigger Problem than the Supply
Major Fox talk show hosts knew that Trump's claims of a stolen election were false, but chose not to say so on air, for fear it would anger their audience.

https://reason.com/volokh/2023/02/20...an-the-supply/

Even the libertarian lawyers of Reason will admit that Faux lied about the elections, yet Whell remains a stubborn ass.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You still did not say what you felt about the revelations showing the level of craven deceit and disrespect of its audience by the predominant news source in conservative America - deliberately lying and trashing a private company with resulting death threats to their employees and amplification of the Big Lie contributing to a violent insurrection in order to protect their stock price is OK with you, the self-proclaimed watchdog of fake news?

LOL! Where did you get this?? "...self-proclaimed watchdog of fake news"? Good lord!

Sure, there's been a ton of crap that passes for news in the press. You folks tend to limit your focus only to certain types of news that don't risk damaging your narratives or make the news sources you don't favor "look bad".

You demand that I must comment on Fox News - which I really don't watch - yet you elected not to comment (AFAIK) on CNN's recent foibles (ratings tanking, affairs, divisive comments by on-air staff, etc.). I've not commented on those either because...well...I don't care!

You also want to assume that accusations/selected communications made by the plaintiff in a civil suit should be taken at face value. Well, OK. You do that. Your assumption that these are examples of "... the level of craven deceit and disrespect of its audience by the predominant news source in conservative America..." is interesting since you defended WaPo and NY Times for similar behavior.

Did Fox take their bleating about the 2020 election results too far? Maybe. I didn't watch their programming at that time so I have no way to make an objective assessment of that. We'll see what happens at trial.

By the way, just to level set: we finally did get access to "cable" programming at casa de Whell about a year ago. I didn't want to pay the cable company for their programming. It was too damn expensive. However, I do like college football and basketball. So, we decided to give YouTube TV a try. I don't have as much time as I'd like to watch the stuff I want to see. And...wait for it... I still don't watch Fox News.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

LOL! Where did you get this?? "...self-proclaimed watchdog of fake news"? Good lord!

Sure, there's been a ton of crap that passes for news in the press. You folks tend to limit your focus only to certain types of news that don't risk damaging your narratives or make the news sources you don't favor "look bad".

From you and the thread you started:

FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

For all of you concerned about the proliferation of so-called "fake news" sites, I'm here to help. I know you're all so very concerned that "gullible people" might not be able to discern between internet news stories that are parodies versus those that are "real" and put out by "reputable" journalists. As patriotic Americans, we just can't let such misinformation go unchallenged.

You also want to assume that accusations/selected communications made by the plaintiff in a civil suit should be taken at face value. Well, OK. You do that. Your assumption that these are examples of "... the level of craven deceit and disrespect of its audience by the predominant news source in conservative America..." is interesting since you defended WaPo and NY Times for similar behavior.

Over the past several years, we have all seen video excerpts of Fox News personalities lying through their teeth about Dominion (behavior that cost Lou Dobbs his job) and now we have all seen their texts internally refuting their own reporting as crazy lies in order to keep their market share and stock value up. WaPo and the NYTimes have done nothing similar.