Do you agree with censorship?

[hislegacy]

Love him/hate him is irregardless to the question.

Do you support certain media outlets censorship of the Presidents daily briefing. To the point of not airing them, but deciding for you what is fit and unfit to hear.

is the American public so ignorant, so vapid of intelligence, that we have to rely on media to tell us what we should hear?

How do you feel about someone saying this through their actions?

I know it is a great temptation to bash the President and use all manor of name calling and innuendo, but I would ask the moderators to please help us stay on the topic.

So here is the question.

Do you see a need in today’s society that we need to have a source tell us what is and is not acceptable for us to hear?

Second, do you support censorship?

 

[Hank77]

Do you see a need in today’s society that we need to have a source tell us what is and is not acceptable for us to hear?

No, I don't but I don't see anyone is doing that.

Second, do you support censorship?

No, I don't. However, I don't support a private company being forced to air material that they choose not to. That's just as bad as censorship.

 

[Big Boo]

Love him/hate him is irregardless to the question.

Do you support certain media outlets censorship of the Presidents daily briefing. To the point of not airing them, but deciding for you what is fit and unfit to hear.

is the American public so ignorant, so vapid of intelligence, that we have to rely on media to tell us what we should hear?

How do you feel about someone saying this through their actions?

I know it is a great temptation to bash the President and use all manor of name calling and innuendo, but I would ask the moderators to please help us stay on the topic.

So here is the question.

Do you see a need in today’s society that we need to have a source tell us what is and is not acceptable for us to hear?

Second, do you support censorship?

I support the censorship of pro-abortion views. For everything else, I'm pro-free speech.

 

[Josheb]

Love him/hate him is irregardless to the question.

Do you support certain media outlets censorship of the Presidents daily briefing. To the point of not airing them, but deciding for you what is fit and unfit to hear.

is the American public so ignorant, so vapid of intelligence, that we have to rely on media to tell us what we should hear?

How do you feel about someone saying this through their actions?

I know it is a great temptation to bash the President and use all manor of name calling and innuendo, but I would ask the moderators to please help us stay on the topic.

So here is the question.

Do you see a need in today’s society that we need to have a source tell us what is and is not acceptable for us to hear?

Second, do you support censorship?

What you are describing is not censorship; it's propagandization. The editing skews the original meaning. Censorship is suppression; what we see on a daily basis is manipulation.

Yes, much but not all of the American public is ignorant, but they are not "vapid of intelligence" (an intelligently vapid phrase). We do rely on the media whether we should or not because we can and it is convenient to do so. No, I do not need to have anyone tell me what is and isn't acceptable for me to hear/see; I can make those decisions on my own. Yes, in some cases I do support censorship. I don't want the newscasts presented with profanity, subjectivity, or nudity. I expect the news media to self-censor based on the rule of law and community standards and the government to intervene accordingly. I hope the purveyors of news will use their power as agents in the marketplace to support news providers that don't manipulate.

 

[hislegacy]

No, I don't but I don't see anyone is doing that.

CNN, MSNBC Bosses Ignore Staff Pleas to Cut Trump Coronavirus Pressers

It has not happened, but it is being discussed.

No, I don't. However, I don't support a private company being forced to air material that they choose not to. That's just as bad as censorship.

I am not saying they should be forced to do anything. Perhaps a better way for me to ask the question is:

Would you watch a newscast that does not permit the President's daily briefings live, but offers only sound bite of it. Is that a better way of saying it?

Personally, I want to hear from the leadership, including the president directly and make up my own mind.

 

[Beanieboy]

I don't like censorship, but there are limits. If the President is spreading misinformation that is causing people to not take the spread of this thing seriously, then he should be held responsible for reckless endangerment.

 

[hislegacy]

I support the censorship of pro-abortion views. For everything else, I'm pro-free speech.

I am 100% pro life - but I am also 100% against silencing voices, even if they are on an opposing side of an issue.

What you are describing is not censorship; it's propagandization. The editing skews the original meaning. Censorship is suppression; what we see on a daily basis is manipulation.

On this we agree to an extent. IMHO, the daily briefings hinder the propaganda machine and that thought is being shown in the approval rating of the President and his team growing.

Yes, much but not all of the American public is ignorant, but they are not "vapid of intelligence" (an intelligently vapid phrase).

Perhaps a dictionary would help in the understanding of the comment:

vapid
adjective
lacking or having lost life, sharpness, or flavor; insipid; flat:vapid tea.
without liveliness or spirit; dull or tedious:a vapid party; vapid conversation.​

When being inundated hourly by the same talking heads our intelligence (our understanding and comprehension), can grow dull, tedious and that leads to inactivity. We can become so overwhelmed that we stop reading different sources and make judgments not based solely on one line of rhetoric.

So you see, it certainly is NOT and "intelligently vapid phrase", but quite accurate based on it's use. Thank you for your time.

We do rely on the media whether we should or not because we can and it is convenient to do so. No, I do not need to have anyone tell me what is and isn't acceptable for me to hear/see; I can make those decisions on my own.

Bravo - I believe the vast majority of Americans can do so also. That is why viewership of the daily briefings is through the roof.

Yes, in some cases I do support censorship. I don't want the newscasts presented with profanity, subjectivity, or nudity. I expect the news media to self-censor based on the rule of law and community standards and the government to intervene accordingly.

That is an extreme - community standards are just that - standards that the community agrees to for use in their community. The FAA has standards if you want to be a broadcaster. Those standards are completely different on cable, the internet and satellite.

I'll give you a great example: My wife and I were fans of Designated Survivor. It was a weekly thing we watched. Great suspense etc. When it went over to Netflix, the community standards for the program changed and suddenly vulgarity was throughout the show. That is when we stopped watching.

The FAA community did not allow it - the Netflix community did. They were not under censure when they were on broadcast television, just in a different community. Sorry to be so wordy.

I hope the purveyors of news will use their power as agents in the marketplace to support news providers that don't manipulate.

Agreed - hopeful, but really beginning to doubt it.

 

[Hank77]

CNN, MSNBC Bosses Ignore Staff Pleas to Cut Trump Coronavirus Pressers

It has not happened, but it is being discussed.



I am not saying they should be forced to do anything. Perhaps a better way for me to ask the question is:

Would you watch a newscast that does not permit the President's daily briefings live, but offers only sound bite of it. Is that a better way of saying it?

Personally, I want to hear from the leadership, including the president directly and make up my own mind.

Yes, I'm going to watch a newscast that only plays selected pieces because I can watch the whole thing somewhere else.
I can watch the complete daily briefing on C-Span. I only have local news channels, no cable channels.
I don't think that any of the local channels are running them live. C-Span plays them live on YouTube and they leave the recording up so anyone can watch all of them at any time.

 

[hislegacy]

Yes, I'm going to watch a newscast that only plays selected pieces because I can watch the whole thing somewhere else.
I can watch the complete daily briefing on C-Span. I only have local news channels, no cable channels.
I don't think that any of the local channels are running them live. C-Span plays them live on YouTube and they leave the recording up so anyone can watch all of them at any time.

cool!

 

[tulc]

If it was up to me I'd prefer to read transcriptions of the things he says. You can then look at exactly what was said.
tulc(finds that's the best way for him to keep track of things)

 

[charsan]

Do you see a need in today’s society that we need to have a source tell us what is and is not acceptable for us to hear?

Second, do you support censorship?

No to both. Even liberals should voice their opinions though I think liberalism is repugnant, but thy are free to be that because this is America and I would fight for their right to free speech and no censorship

 

[jgarden]

Love him/hate him is irregardless to the question.

Do you support certain media outlets censorship of the Presidents daily briefing. To the point of not airing them, but deciding for you what is fit and unfit to hear.

is the American public so ignorant, so vapid of intelligence, that we have to rely on media to tell us what we should hear?

How do you feel about someone saying this through their actions?

I know it is a great temptation to bash the President and use all manor of name calling and innuendo, but I would ask the moderators to please help us stay on the topic.

So here is the question.

Do you see a need in today’s society that we need to have a source tell us what is and is not acceptable for us to hear?

Second, do you support censorship?

Wasn't the Vice President supposed to be the "face" of the federal government's COVIR-19 response - apparently President Trump realized this venue allowed him 60 to 90 minutes of free national, daily, prime time television exposure that could serve as an infomercial for the 2020 Election!

Trump may wish that he had remained offstage and let Pence take the slings and arrows once COVIR-19 begins to penetrate into Republican strongholds and the number of fatalities begin to soar!