Pac

[MikeB]

PAC did not look good at all today. Their leader knew nothing about the Rush and Savage situations and said she tries to stay away from the drudge report. Add that to the fact that the website has been pretty much dead since the O&A trouble has eneded and it does not look very good. Pretty difficult to defend them against the claim that they are Opie and Anthony's very own special interest group, as Opie said.

[DolaMight]

PAC did not look good at all today. Their leader knew nothing about the Rush and Savage situations and said she tries to stay away from the drudge report. Add that to the fact that the website has been pretty much dead since the O&A trouble has eneded and it does not look very good. Pretty difficult to defend them against the claim that they are Opie and Anthony's very own special interest group, as Opie said.

PAC have lost their way since they peaked way back in mid 2007. Somebody needs to say something really racist on-air for them to avoid becoming sterile.

[Midkiff]

PAC have lost their way since they peaked way back in mid 2007. Somebody needs to say something really racist on-air for them to avoid becoming sterile.

I blame the n*ggers

[Arch Stanton]

I hate a sham.

[Snoogans]

The main thing I worry about is bias. I'm not sayin there is, cause honestly, I have no fuckin idea about what PAC has been doin, I don't check the site or keep up.
But what I would worry about is would they fight the same for someone they hated? Like, if something like this happened to Hoo Hoo, would PAC, being mostly OnA fans, stand up as hard for him since they probably hate him.

[Tenbatsuzen]

...and yet I'm the bad guy for pointing this shit out back in May. Face it. The PAC is just the Pests with a shower and a lower blood alcohol content.

[Tenbatsuzen]

And before I'm misrepresented:

What the PAC stands for is a good thing. But the execution has not been good outside of O&A related topics. They absolutely must get involved with issues outside of radio (and O&A and XM etc), and be well-educated on the subject.

The Drudge Report is simply a news portal with a conservative bent. To say that you avoid it is a sham.

People like the anti-video game lawyer, etc. are seen as shams because they are ultra-focused on one topic and it shows they have an agenda. The PAC, to be taken legitimately, cannot be shown to have ulterior motives - which is being a O&A fan group. It literally makes them no better than Sharpton.

[ShowerBench]

PAC is fine. Not only don't the people who tune into the news nets have a clue as to how big or small or narrowly focused an interest group is -- neither do the producers and hosts at those news networks.

If they are largely an O&A (and by extension R&F) interest group, it doesn't really matter. In fact, it might be a good thing. For example, if I knew they were defending Limbaugh as vociferously as they defend the XM personalities, I'd be a lot less likely to donate, sign their petitions, show up for protests, etc.

The fight right now is about which interest groups can threaten the corporations with the biggest revenue loss. If PAC were too broad-based, their impact as an interest group would actually be diluted. There aren't enough people who are hardcore supportive of the general proposition that all media personalities are entitled to remain in their jobs regardless of the content of their shows - and their aren't enough of that mindset who are going to show up at a protest. People become atuned to this issue because their own ox is being gored at any particular time.

If PAC did want to avoid a producer of a news show getting the impression that they are focused only on a few shows, that would be easily remedied. They could simply put in a few calls to Ron and Fez or O&A and briefly comment on any number of "controversies" that pop up, and then add that issue to their website as one on which they advocated for the free speech side.

[Snoogans]

PAC is fine. Not only don't the people who tune into the news nets have a clue as to how big or small or narrowly focused an interest group is -- neither do the producers and hosts at those news networks.

If they are largely an O&A (and by extension R&F) interest group, it doesn't really matter. In fact, it might be a good thing. For example, if I knew they were defending Limbaugh as vociferously as they defend the XM personalities, I'd be a lot less likely to donate, sign their petitions, show up for protests, etc.

The fight right now is about which interest groups can threaten the corporations with the biggest revenue loss. If PAC were too broad-based, their impact as an interest group would actually be diluted. There aren't enough people who are hardcore supportive of the general proposition that all media personalities are entitled to remain in their jobs regardless of the content of their shows - and their aren't enough of that mindset who are going to show up at a protest. People become atuned to this issue because their own ox is being gored at any particular time.

If PAC did want to avoid a producer of a news show getting the impression that they are focused only on a few shows, that would be easily remedied. They could simply put in a few calls to Ron and Fez or O&A and briefly comment on any number of "controversies" that pop up, and then add that issue to their website as one on which they advocated for the free speech side.

Don't you think that is kind of a dick move? You would stop supporting them if they supported everyone equally? So basically what you are saying is people should only helped things you like when being treated unfair, but not help anyone you don't like, even if they are being treated with the same unfairness?

[ShowerBench]

Don't you think that is kind of a dick move? You would stop supporting them if they supported everyone equally? So basically what you are saying is people should only helped things you like when being treated unfair, but not help anyone you don't like, even if they are being treated with the same unfairness?

I didn't say people should or should not be helped if I didn't like them. Just that I wouldn't want to be a part of the helping, depending on the group's advocacy. I'd be much less enthusiastic about getting aggressively on board if I thought my donation were going to ultimately end up in Limbaugh's pocket, as opposed to only going toward keeping my favorite shows on the air.

I'm not completely sold on the idea that the media personalities who are currently on the air are entitled to stay there regardless of what they say or do if their employers determine they are more likely to lose money for the company than bring it in.

I'd think differently about this if there were no other outlets for free speech outside of major media broadcasting companies, but anyone can put a show on the internet. So there isn't really as compelling free speech argument to be made as there would be were there no internet, cheap publishing available to anyone who wants it, etc.

So as it stands, I view it as a fight between interest groups to convince corporations that their favored programming will result in bigger profits. Therefore, a more narrow interest group might be more effective.

If you stick with a pure "free speech" argument, pretty soon you're going to have to explain why a company should be required to lose money, especially when the media personalities aren't really being legally prohibited from saying what they want (on the internet, on a streetcorner), they are just not going to be paid for it or given a time slot by a particular company.

[epo]

Isn't the PAC kinda irrelevant? I couldn't care less...but don't we already have the ACLU?

[Tenbatsuzen]

Isn't the PAC kinda irrelevant? I couldn't care less...but don't we already have the ACLU?

shhhhh, you blew up my spot. I was saving that for later.

see, here's the interesting thing, the ACLU knows what true censorship is. The ACLU is also known for tackling both "positive" and "negative" issues pertaining to free speech. But the PAC doesn't.

[conman823]

I think I'm gonna go smash my XM radio tomorrow in front of the XM Building THAT will get results........

[Doogie]

Shut your mouths. You are all player haters.

[Freitag]

Shut your mouths. You are all player haters.

People against... censorship?

[Doogie]

I was only joking.

[MikeB]

Still saying HTG is the leader of the PAC is like saying Rhino is the current ecw champion.

I found it funny when Ron asked her what they were working on and she said it was a slow week. I guess it has been about a dozen slow weeks...back to around the start of june.