Imus

FLYBOYJ · 05-10-2007, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timshatz

Not neccesarily. CBS is a brand. I believe is a subsidiary of Viacom. All entertainment stuff. If you don't watch much TV and don't go to the movies, Imus can Bankrupt them for all you care and it won't affect you.

On top of that, and this goes to the economics arguement, the free market system means if somebody craps out 'cause their business model is flawed (plain english- the idiots run the company into the ground), somebody else will take up the slack and continue producing the product/providing the service in the failed company's place. So if CBS goes bankrupt (as highly unlikely as it is highly desireable), you click over to Fox, NBC or whatever.

BINGO!

Matt308 · 05-10-2007, 12:15 PM

One word. Vote.

I'm not an advocate for zero gov't. I'll leave that to the wackjob fringe libertarians. In fact, I believe that some modicum of gov't is necessary because we are a nation of laws, not men. Too many laws? You bet. But the dichotomy that you identify is a mindset that can be self-perpetuating. Once the social programs are in place, it is hard to remove them. The recipients tend to vote for those who will continue to support them. But punishing MSNBC, one of a dozen news organization, has no relavence that I can percieve to our nations welfare.

renrich · 05-10-2007, 12:57 PM

Matt, agree. If CBS went away to day it would have no effect except possibly on my liquor bill for celebration on me whatsoever. The Golf Channel would take over their golf broadcasts.

Njaco · 05-10-2007, 01:59 PM

Matt, I am with you 100%! Vote Vote Vote!

There is a place for gov, i.e. protection of the State, etc.
There is no positive for attacking any of the media in this way. It just serves to forward the agenda of the likes of Al Sharpton, Al Gore, the ACLU and the three-headed Glorias. But my point is that all this crying by Sharpton and his cronies will only result ultimately with us paying for it. Not only thru lawsuits but do you think any politicoes are even now looking at how to refine FCC regulations to prevent this in the future? Free speech be damned when it might bring a tear to a minority. Its another brick for them to restrict our freedoms.

Its not so much as making MSNBC pay for what was done, thats small fry. But using this as an example of "How racists are we" and "You can't say that ever" to bring more laws and more sucking from my pocket. What was said was no more bigoted than what Professor Jefferies or Farrakhan has spewed and there's no uproar over that. But this will bring a scrutiny on radio, TV etc. All to our loss.

Damn, thinking too fast and getting uptight too much here to be objective. Gotta take a breath!

Matt308 · 05-10-2007, 02:27 PM

And this is one area that I do blame Bush (note there are others

). He should have throttled the FCC Chairman for being so aggressive with radio and TV. The reaction of Powell to indecency allegations is inept, non-standardized, political and at times oppressive. I'm all for some level of decency on free broadcasting, but Powell pushed the envelope and the White House turned a blind eye.

Njaco · 05-10-2007, 04:10 PM

I feel like we're two kids arguing which team is better, the Cowboys or that football team in Dallas.

pbfoot · 05-10-2007, 05:18 PM

Lets see what they say when Chrysler rolls over .
I don't care it filters down somehow . They might have a little cost on your insurance rates or your investments might have lower dividends your still going to wear it somehow.

timshatz · 05-10-2007, 08:11 PM

Chrysler tanking is a totally different matter. They produce products, value added, that sort of thing. That WOULD be a big problem for everyone in NA.

CBS blah, who cares. Chrysler...bad ju-ju.

Matt308 · 05-10-2007, 08:14 PM

yeah PB. You talkin unemployment? Even then MSNBC is a drop in the bucket. Chrysler? Much different.

FLYBOYJ · 05-10-2007, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbfoot

Lets see what they say when Chrysler rolls over .
I don't care it filters down somehow . They might have a little cost on your insurance rates or your investments might have lower dividends your still going to wear it somehow.

I really don't think you comprehend how big CBS is. There are pro ball players making the same amount of money. And to the teams that own their contract, 40 million is a common business transaction. For a company like CBS it's not a drop in the bucket, more like a half glass of water. In most of their quarters last year, CBS had revenue of over 3 Billion - That's billion with a "B." Net income per quarter over 200 million. Now you tell me how CBS giving up 40 million to Imus is going to effect me?!?!?!?

Here's their financial report: CBS Corp (CBS) Income Statement | Stocks | Reuters.com

pbfoot · 05-10-2007, 08:52 PM

Its not just Imus its all the Imus"s out there that add up

Matt308 · 05-10-2007, 09:51 PM

suppress them all. No offense meant PB, but Canada is notorious for outright bans on radio. Reference Howard Stern. I hope we don't precipitate in that direction.

pbfoot · 05-11-2007, 06:09 AM

Howard Stern came got no ratings and went away .

the point I'm trying to make although not very well apparently

is that everything is a law suit in the US lawyers advertising 24/7 to sue someone or everyone its gotta cost you somehow

FLYBOYJ · 05-11-2007, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbfoot

Howard Stern came got no ratings and went away .

the point I'm trying to make although not very well apparently

is that everything is a law suit in the US lawyers advertising 24/7 to sue someone or everyone its gotta cost you somehow

That's a given and that's why people are pushing for tort reform and in some situations its law - it's built into "the system." Bottom line, Imus could get his 40 million, CBS could go bankrupt (I doubt it) and it's not going to effect anything. This is big league money for you and I but normal business dealings for these individuals and companies.