Even if it doesn't get fux nooz's license removed, it will send a big message to these right wing media assholes that they need to start trying to tell the truth for a change!

FOX News on cable and satellite doesn't have a license as you point out.

The tweeter omits this information.

Edit: I see you already posted this down thread

...whcih is what I've come to expect from Occupy Democrats.

Or at least so say the allegations.

Yes, the Occupy movement...you know, the American left really hasn't accomplished all that much since the old USSR fell. Not sure if you like such things, but I read a good book recently by an experience activist born in Appalachian Ohio who moved to and lived in Seattle during the WTO protests in '99.

In the book, he speaks of intersectional oppression theories and so on. The book made me quite uncomfortable, which is why I'm recommending it - because it smacks of truth. Much like Howard Zinn.

Anyway, the title is "Here be Monsters: How to Fight Capitalism Instead of Each Other."

There's no difference as far as the misleading signals are concerned. The end results are the destructive right-wing propaganda and lies show up on color-television screens whether by air or by wire. One mean of transmission requiring a license and the other not requiring the same is a dangerous precedent to the well-being of the nation.

A Dem-led Congress and Presidency should legislate to force cable providers to get a FCC license to keep operating as equally as non-cable broadcasters have to. Once again, it's a question of equal justice for ALL.

The Government cannot pass laws regulating free speech. However, the government CAN pass a law regulating broadcast frequencies (TV and Radio). And acquiring a broadcast frequency requires agreement to adhere to FCC rules. Cable networks make no use of Government resources and are not subject to any FCC regs.

It is the JOB of lawmakers (when in the majority) to find it and make equal justice for all a reality.

Allowing the destructive propaganda to dominate communications which create and nurture cults of any kind is very, very DANGEROUS as we've seen for the last three decades FFS!!

Not something I would recommend.

I doubt anything so extreme would be necessary.

That the RIGHT says the very same things about the left, yes? So who's propaganda REALLY is destructive and who decides? Free Speech is great. It is also a double edge sword. You can't have it both ways. So, are you all for getting rid of free speech or would you just prefer it be stripped for "certain people"?

Either A: A constitution convention. We are in the event right now that it is virtually impossible to pass any constitutional amendments and will continue to be that way for many, many decades and generations. So the next best thing is to push, campaign, and elect pro-convention state, not federal, representatives into office. It is they and they alone that vote their represented state(s) to the convention.

Or B: The use of civillian remedies. Which will take great sacrifice and swallowing of pride. This usually is referred to as the last resort and only the last resort for which we are close to right now but not yet there.

Times are very desperate nationally.

Tell me when your local TV or radio stations ran land lines to broadcast content to you.

You can't? Know why?

Because TV piggy-backed off the idea of the "wireless" radio. The content providers used transmitting units know as towers to share content without wires so that anyone with a receiving unit (radio/TV) could pick them up.

Not having to use wires to receive the signal was the whole bloody point of "wireless." That very wireless transfer of data is why radio *and* TV succeeded as media providers.

When a cable company like Comcast (Xfinity ), or Charter (Spectrum ), or Verizon (Fios ), etc puts cable in the public rights of way it does so pursuant to a franchise agreement entered into with the state or local government. If you think that use of the public rights of way provides a basis for the government to license the users of that cable, then presumably you think the government should be able to license any entity that delivers content over those cables -- like DU, for example.

The difference is in who is in control over the broadcasts.

The FCC controls over-the-air channels. These are the stations you can pick up without a cable or satellite subscription. To broadcast over public airwaves, one needs an FCC license, and to follow the rules attached to said license.

The FCC does not have control over cable/satellite. Those are private broadcasters, not public. They pay for their own transmission and reception, rather than making use of public airwaves. That's why they don't have to apply for an FCC license--they're a private system, not government-controlled. Since they don't have to get FCC permission to broadcast, they don't have to follow FCC rules. This is why they can broadcast more adult content, be it language, sex, drug use, violence or whatever that you don't get to see on most FCC-controlled stations.

That's why Fox doesn't have to follow FCC rules. Even if the Fairness Doctrine were still around, they wouldn't have to adhere to it.

This has only been explained about a billion times, and yet it never seems to sink in with some people.

Sort of like the fact of the earth being a sphere is to flat-earthers--something that the latter refuses to beleive...because I don't wanna, that's why!

A "special" TAX to force them to "regulate" their own CONTENT?

There is always a solution available somewhere. Washing hands saying it's not our problem isn't one.

Ever look at your cable/satellite bill?

Why tax them for broadcasting--which we don't? They get taxed on ancillary things, but not for being broadcasters.

We don't often tax public businesses that provide services similar to those of the government, simply for providing that same service. We tax them on their profits. But not for how they run their businesses.

Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue, 460 US 575 (1983), which struck down as unconstitutional a "special tax" imposed on newspapers.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/460/575/#tab-opinion-1954975

Or maybe you''re familiar with it and are a fan of Rehnquist, who dissented.

The broadcast (electromagnetic) spectrum used by "radio-waved signals" (over-the-air broadcast) is owned by the federal government & the use of specific frequencies is leased to broadcasters. As the owner & lessor of that spectrum the federal government has the right to set conditions for their use, including the now-defunct "fairness doctrine."

The federal government does not own electrons traveling down copper coaxial cable (traditional cable), nor do they own photons traveling through glass fiber optic cable, nor do they own the frequencies used by satellite TV services. Therefore, they don't have the legal right to impose the same kind of requirements they can when broadcasters are using frequencies that they (the federal government) own & are leasing to those broadcasters.

Another important point: "Fox News" is not a broadcaster, they are a cable content provider. They don't have an FCC license because they don't need an FCC license because... well... they're not a broadcaster.

The local Fox affiliates, however, are broadcasters & therefore they need (& have) FCC licenses.

I'm an electrical engineer with decades of experience with the broadcast industry so I'm sure I could bore you to tears with the details, but I hope that explanation was clear.

the difference is that Broadcast license is a license to use a sliver of the broadcast frequency spectrum. This is so that you don't get overlap or adjacent "Channel" interference. It is a not a dba or LLC.

And yes, there are restrictions that have been in place since the beginning of broadcast TV - back when pushing lies was unthinkable. Remember, Canada simply banned Fox altogether for lying / propaganda. The US should do the same, AND put the same regulations on cable news.

Check the list of non-Canadian programming services and stations authorized for distribution in Canada, as published by the Canadian Government's Radio and Television Commission.

https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/satlist.htm#bm1

You might want to consider editing your post so it is not untruthful.

Maybe we can start with you post.


Or, maybe we could just stick with freedom of speech, even when it's wrong. Because were eventually all wrong at times.

I hope it spreads from coast-to-coast.

an extremely dangerous precedence.
Some should spend a little more time thinking this one through.

deliberately.

only potential ramification you can possibly imagine resulting from government deciding what a lie is, and silencing the press as a result?

between the anchors that were made public. This isn't about a governement deciding. This is about irrefutable proof that they KNOWINGLY lied.

They're using our collective infrastructure and should be responsibly regulated like other corporations.

Should.

This is not going after the cable channel. It's a local affiliate.

Last edited Mon Oct 23, 2023, 12:52 PM - Edit history (1)

FOX NEWS doesn't have a broadcast license in Philadelphia or elsewhere. WTXF is an affiliate of Fox TV, which is an entertainment channel that broadcasts MASTERCHEF, THE SIMPSONS, LEGO MASTERS and other similar shows. It has its own local news program, which is highlighting stories such as: NJ Sen. Menendez returns to New York court to enter plea to new conspiracy charge, Amazon's newest Prime drones promise to deliver packages in under an hour and 'We are like family': Beloved neighborhood diner 'forced' to close in South Jersey. . The Fox News programming everyone hates is ONLY on their cable channel, which isn't regulated by FCC (see: 1st Amendment).

As for: "FCC is launching process", they following the same procedure they would follow for any complaint someone filed. Nothing especiallially incriminating in the local station's programming.

In my experience, OCCUPY DEMOCRATS posts items for the sake of Twitter clicks and likes, and has no proven ability to actually aid the success of the Democratic Party.

and usually carries the NFC games which include the Philadelphia Eagles. Woe to the FCC if their action results in no Eagles football on TV.

This is all about a local affiliate. What's going on doesn't apply to any other Fox entities such as the sports network or the cable channel.

When I first read the headline I was confused because I’ve seen a hundred posts on DU about the FCC getting rid of FN and the reply is always “the FCC does not regulate cable”.

Occupy Democrats is a BS group and I hope people learn to stop posting their disinformation here.

hold you breath waiting.

The FCC is not "launching the preliminary process of stripping FOX News of its broadcasting license".

Here is an article from Axios
https://www.axios.com/pro/tech-policy/2023/10/19/advocates-ramp-up-pressure-on-fcc-to-revoke-fox-tv-license

seriously checked, and removed if needed.

My local FOX station here in San Diego took to saying "President Biden" and stopped with the election denial once COVID vaccines became available for everyone in Feb 2021.

The anchors on that station even had a look of incredulity and *WTF?* on their faces on Jan 6, and Dumpster's continual losses in court.

Does this mean they have actually been broadcasting it over their OTA holdings as news and not just "opinion?"

Despite what the article says. This would only affect the local Fox affiliate, which is an Over The Air (OTA) broadcaster, and thus needs an FCC license. Faux News itself, however, is a cable channel, and is distributed solely via cable/satellite not via OTA. Murdoch’s flagship therefore does not have nor does it require an FCC license.

I’d love to see Murdoch and Faux Nuz punished, but killing the regular TV channels isn’t really going to hit his bottom line. Murdoch makes most of his money on cable/satellite carrier fees for Faux Nuz and advert $$.

Apparently it’s okay for the Government to regulate speech that THEY don’t like.Of course, the next Republican Government would never try to do the same thing…..

and this is not a cable affiliate but a regular one that the FCC has a say over. So the case can be made.

objections and legalities listed in some of the responses to this. In principle, I can agree. *However,* regardless of what R's might or might not do should anything come of this, I think a line has to be drawn when outright lies are repeated night after night to the detriment of the public. Can R's claim the same thing of our "socialism?" Sure they can -- and they already do it right now, and have for years. But silence is tacit approval. And continuing to air their lies without consequences only empowers and emboldens them to go further across the line until you have a society such as we have now. Society that is broken. And the blame can be put on primarily extremist right wing radio and TV "news" programs. A civilized society has to draw a line somewhere to protect the greater part of that society. WE will always be harangued, censored, and demeaned. It makes no difference whether we are quiet or loud; whether we tolerate this trash or act against it. And yes, after having their cake and eating it, too... while serving tiramisu on golden platters to their shareholders, these extremists are not going to like being told they can't tell lies any longer. But it might be a start towards real journalism once again.

Besides, somewhere, somehow, someWAY, we have to start differentiating between extremism and stochastic terrorism and pure ideological difference of opinion. R's aren't going to do this. It's going to take the adults in society to make it happen. If something like this cracks open a door, or starts the conversation, I'm for it. I really don't want to live someplace where society has completely broken down. We don't need morality police (which is what the R's are forcing on the U.S. right now), but we do need to start educating people on how to tell truth from lies. Maybe give them a little help in learning to think critically... like Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather and a few other journalists from that time frame used to do. Of course, I recognize YMMV and you have excellent points to make for the other side. For me, it's about differentiating between real "news" and stochastic terrorism masquerading as "news." People are entitled to the Truth. They are not entitled to the "truth as they want to hear it," IMNSHO.

lies so far. I don't think it's a far flung issue.

I believe most of us would agree.

You think NO ONE else in news or on the public airwaves ever Lie? Never?

Now let's take it national!

Last edited Mon Oct 23, 2023, 03:42 PM - Edit history (1)

Wed Jun 14, 2023: Ex-Fox News exec says the FCC should consider revoking Rupert Murdoch's licenses Gideon Rubin June 1

But wait! You also get last week's DU thread about the FCC and Fox:

Fri Oct 20, 2023: Please file a complaint with the FCC about this blatant lie by Kaleigh McEnany. It has to stop

I have practiced communications law before the FCC for over four decades and the Occupy Democrats tweet is misleading and and, in certain respects, false.

For starters, the tweet, dated October 22, says that "Today, the FCC announced that it is moving forward with its investigation by opening up an 'evidentiary hearing'" regarding the petition to deny the pending application for license renewal of Fox 29, the Fox broadcast station in Philadelphia. Well, October 22, 2023 was Sunday, and the FCC doesn't announce anything on Sundays.

What the tweet apparently is based on is a Public Notice that the FCC issued on AUGUST 23, 2023 announcing that it would treat the license renewal proceeding as one that is exempt from the "ex parte" rules, thereby allowing interested members of the public can submit comments on the petition to deny (either pro or con).
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-23-752A1.pdf

Just because the FCC allows third party comments doesn't mean that it is conducting a full blown evidentiary proceeding. For example, in 2007, the FCC issued a nearly identical Public Notice with respect to the pending renewal of other Fox-owned stations. Those renewals ultimately were granted without having been designated for an evidentiary hearing. Moreover, while the petitioner asking the FCC to deny the renewal of Fox 29, The Media and Democracy Project, filed a motion in early October with the FCC asking for it to compel discovery of various documents in Fox's possession, the FCC has not acted on that motion.

And, finally, as others have pointed out, this proceeding, even if it eventually led to an evidentiary hearing and a denial of Fox 29's license (highly doubtful, in my opinion), it wouldn't impact Fox News, which is a cable network not licensed by the FCC.

It doesn't take much to get folks all excited about the idea that Fox is going to be shut down by the FCC. Misleading posts such as the one by Occupy Documents are knowing and intentional efforts to get folks worked up.

There's this imagination that Fox News or right wing talk radio turns liberals who accidentally listen into conservatives. It doesn't. It tells people with conservatives biases that their biases are correct.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/occupy-democrats/

https://www.politifact.com/personalities/occupy-democrats/

Wikipedia bans Breitbart, InfoWars, and Occupy Democrats as fact sources

https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/latest-links/wikipedia-bans-breitbart-occupy-democrats-fact-sources/

Why the GOP is not being treated as if they are a hostile force in this country is totally insane. They tried to overthrow the government and establish a fascist dictatorship. Fox News was a huge part of that scheme. They are traitors. None of this is normal.

this kind of garbage should be dealt with IMMEDIATELY

They went way too far with their bullshit. Why they weren't punished immediately remains a mystery.

but why the FUCK have the ELECTED REPUKES been allowed to continue to participate in a government THEY CLEARLY DO NOT BELIEVE IN

The entire GOP has been compromised by MAGA insurrectionists. It's time to root out these traitors. I blame Steve Bannon, he was one of the architects of getting Trump elected.

good LAWD

As has been noted several times in this thread.

The Occupy Democrats story is almost entirely false.

more cities are added to the list. These lies have to stop, it's a beginning, but there are many more red wing outlets that should be neutered. Bannon needs his Leninist ass to go to jail.

Go for it!

It would be nice if we'd stop falling for this shit. Alas, no.

Occupy Democrats is basically our Fox News, and only slightly more credible. As others have noted, this has exactly zero to do with Fox News.

if we were more courteous when attempting to correct others.

K&R.

years, and now we are seeing the beginning of the end of the corporate/Republican news propaganda organ.

It has nothing to do with Fox News, and the FCC hasn't started any process other than announce an initial hearing.

The entire part about "launching the preliminary process of stripping FOX News of its broadcasting license" is completely false. They haven't done anything of the sort.

Occupy Democrats is basically our Fox News. They shouldn't be taken seriously on anything.

big lie. This might open the way for some actions against the Sinclair Network - a right wing organ for sure. If enough local affiliates get pasted, then maybe local stations won't be so eager to be gobbled up by Sinclair.

A petition to deny the license renewal application of Fox 29 in Philadelphia was filed in July. The FCC, in August, issued a public notice allowing members of the public to comment in writing, pro or con, on the petition. However, the FCC has not designated the license renewal for an evidentiary hearing (or any other kind of hearing ) -- a necessary step before the license renewal could be denied. In 2007, the renewal of other Fox licenses was challenged. The FCC put out a public notice allowing the public to comment in that situation as well. And when all was said and done, the FCC decided, without having designated the matter for an evidentiary hearing, to grant the the renewals.

For the record, I've practiced communications law before the FCC for over four decades.

But to each his or her own, I guess.

As has been explained, this "article" is false and misleading.
This is about a local affiliate, not Faux Snooze on cable.
Local Fox affiliates are nothing like the cable network, I watch local Fox stations all the time for shows like Family Guy, American Dad, The Simpsons, etc., also for sporting events, like MLB, also they do a pretty good job with the local news.

Hope this creates a precedent to shut up right wing lies and propaganda forever.

See post 35 for example.

NAUSEATING HIGH VOLUME OF TV COMMERCIALS.

Already been done. It's called cable or streaming! Both commercial free. And, there is nothing to be done with because the article is false. For the 100th time!

Whatever the hell that means.
Care to explain?
Did I say something false?
You think I don't know what the phrase "Bless your heart" means?

No one is actually reading the article as evidenced by how many completely missed the many posts saying it was false. We're a headline society. Don't bother with the actual content of the article, read the headline and run with it. And oh yeah, get all of your news sources from Twitter! I'm confused, do we on the left like Musk or Hate him?

Stay classy.

In 2010, Congress passed the "Commercial Advertising Loudness Mitigation Act" aka the "CALM Act" The FCC adopted rules implementing that law in 2011 and those rules took effect in 2012. Under those rules, commercials are required to have the same average volume as the programs they accompany.

If you think the rules are being violated, you can filed a complaint.

https://www.fcc.gov/media/policy/loud-commercials