Local Fox affiliate censors Ron Paul (PV)

[cucamelsmd15]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZNlXSn_vC8

I guess the truth is too much for some people to handle. Support the status quo Faux News! So much for fair and balanced

[jdavionic]

I must have missed something...I thought he only said that he didn't want shots of Ron Paul's people. It sounded like more a producer/director's guidance on background camera shots.

[cmcarlile]

You're absolutely right. He wants shots of people eating because he can't handle "the truth." Can I get you a ladder? That sure is some reach!

[cucamelsmd15]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

I must have missed something...I thought he only said that he didn't want shots of Ron Paul's people. It sounded like more a producer/director's guidance on background camera shots.

Its a Republican dinner. Oh sure, we can have shots of Frudy McRomneys people, but NO, I repeat, NO Ron Paul people. That would be unheard of!

Thats essentially like a director walking into a mall and having someone say "I only want shots of white people. No blacks, no Hispanics, no Asians, only white people".

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by cucamelsmd15

Its a Republican dinner. Oh sure, we can have shots of Frudy McRomneys people, but NO, I repeat, NO Ron Paul people. That would be unheard of!

Thats essentially like a director walking into a mall and having someone say "I only want shots of white people. No blacks, no Hispanics, no Asians, only white people".

I listened again and sorry, but I don't hear him distinguishing that it's okay to have shots of Fred, Rudy, ...people but not Ron Paul's people. Granted he's crude in his directions, but I still don't see an intentional snubbing of one group over another. And it is far from saying no blacks, no hispanics, etc. Again, it sounded like he was just trying to give direction for shooting video. I would admit that he has tone in his direction that may indicate he is not a big fan of Ron Paul...but it didn't sound like that's why he was directing the shot in that particular way.

And no, I'm not an anti-RP person either. I like the guy's position on several issues...but not all of them. And so far, the attempts that I've read where folks have tried to paint him as some nutjob have all been unfounded.

[cucamelsmd15]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

I listened again and sorry, but I don't hear him distinguishing that it's okay to have shots of Fred, Rudy, ...people but not Ron Paul's people. Granted he's crude in his directions, but I still don't see an intentional snubbing of one group over another. And it is far from saying no blacks, no hispanics, etc. Again, it sounded like he was just trying to give direction for shooting video. I would admit that he has tone in his direction that may indicate he is not a big fan of Ron Paul...but it didn't sound like that's why he was directing the shot in that particular way.

And no, I'm not an anti-RP person either. I like the guy's position on several issues...but not all of them. And so far, the attempts that I've read where folks have tried to paint him as some nutjob have all been unfounded.

Huh? You dont call him specifically saying "No shots of Ron Paul supporters" snubbing one group in particular? Sure, its far from discriminating based on race, but the principle is the same.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by cucamelsmd15

Huh? You dont call him specifically saying "No shots of Ron Paul supporters" snubbing one group in particular? Sure, its far from discriminating based on race, but the principle is the same.

No...I don't. You have no idea what area they were setting up in & it may have simply been one where RP supporters were the only ones in that particular area. Point being, you're making a lot of assumptions to get outraged over this one. It's not to say you're wrong...but judging from the video alone, I don't see an issue.

[Judge]

You don't even know the meaning of censor...

It's not censoring - only the government can censor...

When a TV station uses it's better judgment, as in this case, it's called good taste.

Originally Posted by cucamelsmd15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZNlXSn_vC8

I guess the truth is too much for some people to handle. Support the status quo Faux News! So much for fair and balanced

[cucamelsmd15]

Originally Posted by Judge

You don't even know the meaning of censor...

It's not censoring - only the government can censor...

When a TV station uses it's better judgment, as in this case, it's called good taste.

Get out Judge. And get a dictionary, youre wrong. Censorship is the removal and witholding of information by a person or controlling group in power. You cant even get the definition of censor right, much less anything else

[Judge]

See, this is the ridiculiousness of responding to your posts... nothing but pure insanity.

Here are the definations from Dictionary.com, you're welcome to go to LEXUS/NEXUS and look up the legal term/usage also:

1.	an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.

2.	any person who supervises the manners or morality of others.

3.	an adverse critic; faultfinder.

4.	(in the ancient Roman republic) either of two officials who kept the register or census of the citizens, awarded public contracts, and supervised manners and morals.

5.	(in early Freudian dream theory) the force that represses ideas, impulses, and feelings, and prevents them from entering consciousness in their original, undisguised forms.

–verb (used with object)

6.	to examine and act upon as a censor.

7.	to delete (a word or passage of text) in one's capacity as a censor.

Originally Posted by cucamelsmd15

Get out Judge. And get a dictionary, youre wrong. Censorship is the removal and witholding of information by a person or controlling group in power. You cant even get the definition of censor right, much less anything else