Big-government media at it again

Started by Guest123_x1 December 20th, 2005 10:34 AM
  • 434 views
  • 6 replies
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=1423054

This AP Wire article, linked above from ABC News is so freaking biased, it’s not even funny.
The new House bill would initially provide up to $990 million for the converter box subsidy, including about $100 million for administrative costs. If more funds are needed, another $500 million would be made available.

The move to all-digital will free valuable radio spectrum, some of which will be allocated to improve radio communications among fire and police departments and other first responders. The rest of the spectrum would be auctioned by the government for an estimated $10 billion, though private estimates put that number higher.

The House bill also would set aside up to $1 billion for public safety agencies to upgrade their communications systems.
The second paragraph in the quote tag, which I boldfaced, clearly shows the article's bias. It presents no opposing point of view.
This article (and basically AP altogether) is obviously backing the government on their actions. Doesn’t matter whether it’s Democrat, Republican, liberal, or conservative.

The welfare for upgrading to digital was well intentioned, I'm sure. Give me a good ole analog signal any day

Just the way the article shows no opposing points of view makes me wanna #()*@!

I posted pretty much the same comments on the Michigan Buzzboard earlier this morning, and MW, the board's proprietor was shocked at how our Republican Congress has turned to deficit spending for some silly new welfare program.

Here are his comments...
A welfare program to help people buy TV sets! This is the biggest form of pork barrel spending I have perhaps read EVER! I share your frustration. Someone should be taking Congress to task for this!

OK, I understand the fact money will (supposedly) pour in from the auctioning of portions of the UHF spectrum (I presume), but couldn't this money be put to MUCH BETTER use elsewhere?

I've heard of outrageous subsidy programs before, but this one downright startled me. What will our government pay for next? New cars?

The converter boxes only cost a few hundred dollars now, and I'm sure they'll be even cheaper by 2009. With this amount of early warning, even the poorest of the poor should be able to stash away enough $$$ to afford a converter box a little over 3 years from now.

I guess they don't care about the fact we have a huge budget deficit.

I'm embarassed that the Republican leadership let this go through.
-ottermi619-
Replace “liberal bias” with “big government bias”, and you’ve basically described the mainstream media.
^Just what the intent of Congress (and the FCC) is. IMHO, they're just being greedy for money by auctioning off frequencies assigned to channels 52 and above. Virtually the same thing with channels 70 through 83 (as if there was any real use anyway)

-ottermi619-
Channels 70 through 83 were taken away from TV in the early 1980s. Their assigned frequencies are being used by celluar, PCS, and some other wireless services.
In Argentina
Seen July 18th, 2006
Posted June 28th, 2006
327 posts
17.5 Years
Really, the US goverment should stop focusing in changing TV frequences. Even in Argentina they focus in more important subjects than this. Bush will surely make USA collapse sooner or later.
The Legendary Star set continues in Pokemon Community!
Thanks to Alana for the T-Card! Secret mystery template!
I'm a Socialist! Take the Politics test:
http://www.okcupid.com/politics
How much do you know about Nintendo?
Take my quiz!