« Debate | Main | Atrocities »

October 11, 2004
Sinclair Broadcasting Strikes Again

I really just don't know what to say.

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner of the largest chain of television stations in the nation, plans to air a documentary that accuses Sen. John Kerry of betraying American prisoners during the Vietnam War, a newspaper reported Monday.

The network has ordered all 62 of its stations to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" without commercials in prime-time next week, the Washington Post said, just two weeks before the Nov. 2 election.


Note that this is in the "Money" section of CNN.com. It's also featured near the bottom of the New York Times' web site's front page.

The Sinclair Broadcasting Group is the same company that refused to air Nightline's special "The Fallen", during which Ted Koppel read the names of all the soldiers killed in Iraq up to that point.

Sinclair executives have given nearly $68,000 to political campaigns this year, 97% of it to Republicans.

If you're thinking that this sounds completely illegal, and the words "equal time" keep popping into your head, you're not alone. That's exactly what I thought. Sinclair's attempt to dodge this bullet is simply amazing.

Because Sinclair is defining the documentary - which will run commercial free - as news, it is unclear if it will be required by federal regulations to provide Mr. Kerry's campaign with equal time to respond.

New York Times

This is from the front page of Sinclair's web site:

We welcome your comments regarding the upcoming special news event featuring the topic of Americans held as prisoners of war in Vietnam. The program has not been videotaped and the exact format of this unscripted event has not been finalized. Characterizations regarding the content are premature and are based on ill-informed sources.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has been invited to participate. You can urge him to appear by calling his Washington, D.C. campaign headquarters at (202) 712-3000.

if you would like to make further comments on this matter, you may do so at:
[email protected]

Pretending to be fair by saying that Kerry has "been invited to participate" is the worst kind of garbage. They make completely baseless charges 2 weeks before an election, and then try to paint the target of their slander as refusing to engage the debate. It would be like me saying that the President of Sinclair Broadcasting fucks goats, which is what I'm saying, and then implying that it must be true because he has refused to respond to the charges. Well, goat-fucker? What do you have to say for yourself?

Please email Sinclair and tell them what you think of this. Be friendly, but be firm. Try to avoid the term "goat-fucker."

I'll try to find a list of Sinclair advertisers so we can start emailing and calling them, too. They don't care what we think, but they care about their bottom line.

UPDATE :: If Sinclair really wants to give John Kerry equal time, maybe they could air "Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry." I haven't seen this film yet, but I've heard it's good. I downloaded it using the bittorent from this site, which now appears to be down. You can see the trailer here.


Previous Comments

A list of Sinclair advertisers and other useful info can be found here: http://www.boycottsbg.com/advertisers/

And Michale Moore announced on Jay Leno an offer to Siclair to show Farenheit 911 for free. (Although it has now made half a billion $ world wide, OnDemand has backed out of their contract to show it before the election, even though by entering into that contract, Moore took himself out of the running for an Oscar).

Three-fourths of the national media can be accurately called, "DonkeyTV" liberals and hypocrits. Their constant praise and support for traitor John Kerry is dishonest and reprehensible as is their (and your) criticism of Sinclair Broadcasting for having the courage to air the truth and counter their tripe as well as that of propagandist Michael Moore.

John Kerry is a gutless wimp for refusing Sinclair's invitation and is dishonest to refuse the American public's right to know what the FBI has on file regarding his Vietnam era associations and activity that certainly include impuning the character of those of us who served our country during that war.

Cpl. Allan E. Brown
Greenville (S.C.) Police Dept.

Cpl. Brown,

Thanks for your comments.

For my part,
I find it dishonest of you to present your opinions as facts without a shred of evidence. You blithely claim that 3/4 of the media are liberal, even going so far as to label your own unsupported propaganda as "accurate." How about a little evidence? You're a police officer, so I assume you’re familiar with the term.

I forget, though, that we live in the Bush era, in which evidence is no longer considered relevant. Things are true because we say they're true. We simply state “the way things are” and leave it at that.

As for Kerry's refusal to dignify Sinclair's slander with a response, imagine a different scenario:

What if one of the many "liberal" media outlets decided to air Fahrenheit 9/11, or one of the many other anti-Bush films to be produced lately, in the next two weeks. They then "offer" president Bush a chance to respond on their stations. Would you encourage him to do so? Would you consider him a "gutless wimp" if he refused? I suspect not.

Your standards are not standards if you can't apply them across the board -- they're simply prejudices.

I would certainly never impugn the service you gave to our country in Vietnam. Nor, however, do I believe that criticizing that war, or any other, in any way impugns the service of those who serve. In fact, I believe that if I were to be in combat, I would find it comforting to know that people back home cared enough to debate the war. Debate shows that we're not just blindly pushing our soldiers into a meat grinder, but that we respect them enough to honestly examine whether their sacrifice is absolutely necessary. Isn't that the ultimate sign of respect?

We must always remember that the war is not the same as the warrior. The warrior is honorable, the war is not necessarily so.

The top six broadcast/media contributers are largely Republican Party donors, and Sinclair ranks sixth of the top 20 with 97% of contributions going to the Republican party. Also, Sinclair has refused to air the TRIBUTE to the fallen soldiers, which deeply offends me as three of my cousins are currently stationed in the Middle East and one in Korea, and I am to sit hear and idlely just take the word of a news corporation that can have an effect on the outcome of the election (many of the stations owned by Sinclair are in swing states) that this program in newsworthy, when all the soldiers in the book "Unfit for Command" were not even there with John Kerry in Vietnam? I think not Mr. Brown and shame on you, a public servant, for being so blind in your loyalty and scared to see the truth that lies right in front of you.

I would like to know what date and time this program will be on ~ I would like to watch it ~

Thank you,

Michael Moore's movie about 9/11 was aloowed in theaters with this big hype about finding the truth. I feel that Sinclair should be able to also show the public other views. The people will have their own opinions no matter what airs, so give us a little credit for being able to make up our own minds.

It is interesting how the liberal media
is picking this up and labelling
Sinclair Broadcasting "scurrilous"
and of low report.


You're overlooking a very important difference between Moore's movie and the Sinclair issue: Sinclair owns broadcast outlets and is therefore regulated by the FCC. The airwaves on which they intend to broadcast the program belong to the public, Sinclair has a license for their use and so is subject to oversight.

Moore's film, on the other hand, was shown in theaters for which admission was charged. It was not presented in a public sphere.


uhhh.. what?

Sinclair has every right to air this as news, or did everyone forget what sixty minutes did just a few weeks ago.