Hijexx wrote:
] Decius wrote:
]
] ] Sinclair's statement on their decision to cancel the Koppel
] ] broadcast. I meme this because I prefer raw arguement to a
] ] journalist's summary thereof. Reach your own conclusions. [ In support of Decius' call, here's the post I made on the initial story memed on this topic by Acidus : http://www.memestreams.net/thread/bid12512/blogid4004079 ] I think his statement is reasonable. As the owner of these
] stations it is Sinclair's choice to make. In the sense that all companies have the right to choose how to run their business, this is correct, and I can't necessarily offer a legal challenge to what they did, but as I tried to convey in my post, I believe they have an ethical obligation that should be paramount in their decision making process. ] I agree that ABC is going to use this to send a message. It
] is no coincidence that they are broadcasting this on the eve
] of the anniversary of the end of "major combat operations."
] That the insurgency happened this month and the news of
] coalition torture of Iraqis is hitting will only serve to
] soften where ABC was going to put the dagger anyway. I have
] no doubt this was planned for April 30th for a long time. It's incredibly disturbing that soldier's sacrifices are used to political ends, by both sides of the debate, but they simply are. The right, the obligation i think, for the public to truly understand the costs of war outweigh the concerns of the relatively few. I don't believe enough people get it... they hear about soldiers dying and insurgency and they turn off their minds, or else the reports become an everyday background noise, which ceases to be meaningful in any way. Senator John McCain offered specific words about that in his letter to Sinclair (here: http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=1276) :
every American has a responsibility to understand fully the terrible costs of war and the extraordinary sacrifices it requires of those brave men and women who volunteer to defend the rest of us; lest we ever forget or grow insensitive to how grave a decision it is for our government to order Americans into combat. It is a solemn responsibility of elected officials to accept responsibility for our decision and its consequences, and, with those who disseminate the news, to ensure that Americans are fully informed of those consequences.
McCain, of course, was before and remains now an ardent supporter of the Iraq war. Also, I'd like to point out that I don't believe Sinclair's decision was altruistic at it's heart, though I'm not so cynical as to believe this was purely partisan. Publicly denying this show is just as political as ABC deciding to air it, and the execs know that full well. They're playing the same game. I'll leave by addressing one more concern raised by Sinclair :
Before you judge our decision, however, we would ask that you first question Mr. Koppel as to why he chose to read the names of 523 troops killed in combat in Iraq, rather than the names of the thousands of private citizens killed in terrorist attacks since and including the events of September 11, 2001. I'd like to think the answer to that those who lost their lives to terrorism were not put in the face of danger by an active order, a specific decision, in the way that soldiers are. That makes them no less worthwhile and no less deserving of honor and remembrance... but the fact remains that the war in Iraq was a decision made on questionable intelligence and questionable motives (and I don't say wrong or false here, on purpose... that's a separate discussion... but they were and have been questioned by many). The dead in Iraq were preventable in a much more specific way than those deaths at the hands of terrorism were preventable. The link between prewar Iraq and the terror networks is tenuous, at best, and our actions there are arguably creating more fodder for terrorist recruitment activities than would ever have existed otherwise. The WMD argument is largley considered straw, and our ability to implement a stable postwar Iraq in the absense of any clear strategy or plan is putting more and more people in danger, both military and civilian. As I said in my earlier post, this show does (i guess "did" at this point) have clear political ramifications, but that seems to me a greater, not a lesser, reason to give it public currency. Opposing viewpoints are certainly welcome, understandable and in fact necessary. Dissent is patriotic... without it we're sheep. -k] RE: Sinclair Broadcast Group: For the record | 
