TLC’s Sarah Palin’s Alaska Jumps the Shark by Attacking Critical Blogger

TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” website has a Broadsheet section written by David Murray. Last night, Mr Murray actually attacked a Texas blogger who had the temerity to correct Ms Palin over her inaccurate claim that environmentalists were “limiting deforestation” in Alaska. Mr Murray adds to the spice of this late night musing by actually suggesting that this show isn’t political as he says, “once or twice per episode, Sarah does make a quick aside with some political content.”

Yes, that’s right, Mr Murray. Once or twice an episode Sarah Palin makes a dig at Michelle Obama or the President or the feds or some other evil liberal target. The rest of the time she’s busy rehabbing her image with narratives about “working hard” and “not quitting” and being a “tough” female. Why, in one episode she ran around looking like Rambo for the Ronnnie Reagan vote. Then she takes her petty attacks at her critics, like suggesting that “refudiate” was a typing error because the “d and the f are right next to each other”. A pause while we realize that if she had used the d, she would have made an even worse mess of the word. Image rehab, fighting critics and sending political messages all wrapped up in the neat flagship of a “reality” TV show.

At any rate, I wouldn’t say that was political either if I were working for a network that was engaging in paid political advertising for a very divisive candidate and receiving tax credits from the state of Alaska (for the star’s salary if nothing else), because you see, that would be propaganda for profit at the tax payers’ expense and on public airwaves and that would be uncool on many fronts.

And that wouldn’t be good for TLC to admit.

Only TLC gave Sarah Palin Executive Producer credit and control over editing (per her own tweets), so this is her message and everyone in America knows that Palin politicizes everything she touches. So TLC has to defend her from suggestions that she is making political attacks and we all know how Palin loves to be defended, so this is another cozy relationship of money, power and elite media congloms working to sell Palin, Inc to America. Nice work, TLC.

Let’s not forget that TLC “disinvited” media critic Jennifer Pozner from TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” podcast because they claimed she was “too political” for the show. In the past, Jennifer Pozner has criticized “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” as nothing more than a paid political commercial wherein the politician is getting paid by the network. Too political, you say? Gee, I’m flummoxed.

Now, on to the specifics of this particular fight.

Malia Litman, author of “Rebuttal to the Rogue”, who blogs on “Malia Litman’s blog” was watching last week’s episode of “Sarah Palin runs for President” (oops, I mean, “Sarah Palin’s America”…no, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska”) and she became offended that Sarah Palin claimed conservationists were somehow stopping logging and deforestation of Alaska. God forbid we should limit deforestation of our resources. However, let’s not get bogged down in that fight.

This is pure vintage Palin. She can make an enemy out of thin air. Because, see, no one is stopping loggers in Alaska. No evil environmentalists are stopping “progress” in Alaska. This is another Palin v No One fight, where the viewer gets to plug in the evil guy (who is always a liberal and usually in the White House).

Watch here. The rant against no one starts at 8:22:

Then Malia Litman does due diligence and corrects Palin:

“In the same episode, Palin criticized environmentalists for their opposition to logging and deforestation. Although nothing about Obama was mentioned by Palin, the viewer certainly assumed that Palin was critical of the Obama administration for any efforts to limit deforestation in Alaska. In this instance it was Palin’s total absence of acknowledgement of the attempt by the Obama administration to allow the expansion of logging in Alaska, that was so offensive. Just this year the Obama administration has come under harsh criticism for its approval of the sale of timber from the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. The Obama administration has approved the sale of timber from the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. The 17-million acre forest is the largest stand of continuous temperate rain forest in the U.S. and contains a lot of old-growth trees. This first sale will come after seven miles of roads are built for the 381-acre clear-cut. Either Palin didn’t know or purposefully failed to mention that the Obama administration had worked to limit the laws regulating the limited removal of trees in Alaska. The Obama administration allowed the cutting down of trees, in spite of the knowledge that deforestation now accounts for nearly ¼ of global CO2 emissions in the world.”

Do we all know whom she means? This is the woman who can’t stop making petty jabs at Michelle Obama’s healthy eating initiative, after all. Yes, if you live in America, you’re aware of whom Palin thinks of as her mortal enemy; he who stole her crown. Or as they call him on her heavily moderated Facebook page, the “usurper” President. He whom Palin can not, will not, stop criticizing at every turn until the Russian newspaper Pravda called her out as a traitor to her country. But Mr Murray wants us to pretend that we don’t have any idea whom she means. I mean, we can’t prove she meant that! She never said it. So there. That get’s TLC off the hook for Palin’s misinformation.

Wait, see how that worked? That’s called moving the goal post. Because you see, Palin did misinform her viewers and one would like to think that as former Governor she knows what goes on with logging and deforestation laws in her state. But perhaps I give her too much credit. I hear she gets her information from Fox, so maybe we should give her the benefit of the doubt.

Here comes TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” Broadsheet to rebut the rebuttal! December 30, 2010 by Broadsheet:

….Here’s the excerpt, with the weaker assumption in bolded text:
…” Palin criticized environmentalists for their opposition to logging and deforestation. Although nothing about Obama was mentioned by Palin, the viewer certainly assumed that Palin was critical of the Obama administration for any efforts to limit deforestation in Alaska. In this instance it was Palin’s total absence of acknowledgement (sic) of the attempt by the Obama administration to allow the expansion of logging in Alaska, that was so offensive.”

Now, Palin has of course been critical of Barack Obama in the past; that’s not the part of that statement that seems (to me) to be unreasonable. It’s that, even though Sarah said nothing of Obama, the viewer would immediately think “she’s talking trash about Obama!” And if she’s not talking about Obama (which we really don’t have very much reason to believe she is, her not mentioning him at all), then why would it be offensive not to bring up his track record on logging in Alaska? She didn’t mention a lot of people’s track records. Is that offensive? I don’t think it is…

No, see, what’s so offensive is that Ms Palin attacks outward over false issues and implies that enemies like evil liberal environmentalists are out to get hard-working loggers, while Mr Murray, Malia and I know this isn’t true. That is the issue. Let’s stop moving goal posts, shall we?

I wonder why Mr Murray left that part out of his quote from Malia’s blog? I wonder why Mr Murray didn’t even have the courtesy to link to Malia’s blog so people could make up their own minds about what she meant. Maybe he didn’t want people to see the truth. After all, that would look like TLC was funding baseless attacks on the Left and we all know they aren’t doing that. They certainly aren’t funding a misinformation campaign or a political ad.

Now if only the rest of America would kindly swallow this lump of coal so TLC could collect it’s monies and move on before things get too dicey. Oh, and maybe TLC should supply us with the information about exactly how much money they get from the film tax credits and incentives if they qualify for them. We already know that the people of Alaska are paying 44% of Sarah Palin’s salary per the film incentive. After all, TLC is using public airwaves and they’re using tax-payer money, so this is our business.

If you’re ready to read more from the unbossed and unbought Politicus team, sign up for our newsletter here!

76 Replies to “TLC’s Sarah Palin’s Alaska Jumps the Shark by Attacking Critical Blogger”

  1. Egads, I almost jumped out of my seat when I saw that picture at the head of the post, Sarah. Trying to scare me?

    The politicization of anything Sarah Palin touches is too well attested for anyone to refute and the idea that anyone else could be too political for Palin’s Alaska is hilarious. The one person who is too political for the show is Sarah Palin herself.

    Excellent article, Sarah, thank you for putting this information in front of us, and shame on TLC for making Joseph Göbbels proud. It’s not The Learning Channel anymore: it’s The Propaganda Channel.

  2. Since I couldn’t (they WOULDN’T) POST THIS over at TLC in response their Rebuttal to the Rebuttal to the…. oh, never mind… I’ll post it here instead. Thanks, Sarah!

    “… I thought this show wasn’t supposed to be political in nature, but was to be showcasing the great state of Alaska. Guess not. Every. Single. Week. there is a political dig, a “dog-whistle” for the Conservative Right’s benefit. Which, of course, everyone is picking up on, it’s so blatant and transparent. And it is diminishing Palin’s Brand right before everyone eyes but the most die-hard of her followers. Her brassy, harpy, critical, cutting tomes are blatantly obvious.

    SP’s Alaska IS, however, a series showcasing everything $arah. And “$arah’s Husband.” And “$arah’s Daughter(s).” And “$arah’s Son(s)” – as they are referred to on-screen in the first few episodes. Poor Todd – what a downer for him to be simply referred to on-screen as “$arah’s Husband” in that season opener. Oh, and then there are “The Uniquely Alaskan Adventures.”

    Each week seems to be an episode in the “Adventures of the Perils of Pauline” – Ooops, sorry. “Adventures of the Perils of Palin.” Salmon, chainsaws AND bears, oh my! Each plot line is so contrived, so manipulative that the viewer is compelled to stop their hand mid-rise in a palm-smacking-their-forehead move and saying out loud without thinking “Oh, no she didn’t!” exclamation each and every week.

    But, I must disagree on many points and premises about the show. Traveling by old Beaver planes is NOT how MOST Alaskans travel. Most Alaskans DON’T spend tens of thousands of dollars on EACH hunting trip, glacier expedition or mountain climbing trip via HELICOPTER.

    On SP’s Alaska, there are safety issues – and then there are putting children in danger issues. Thankfully, most Alaskans with young children seat belt them in their vehicles – unlike $arah Palin. Her children are never shown on-screen wearing seat belts. They bounce around loosely on 4 wheelers, in backseats of cars, moving around unsecured while barreling around mountain roads in motor coaches, always unrestrained… while $arah, it is noted, is buckled-up, such as she was during last week’s show…

    While Kate Gosselin is not my cup of tea, she seems to have genuine concern for the welfare and well-being of her children. She always buckles her kids in on her show. She has child-appropriate activities planned for them. She doesn’t issues edicts, and then fails to follow-through (Piper’s homework; Willow’s use of her i-phone, and on and on). But mostly, Kate isn’t trying to sell herself at the expense of her family. You don’t feel like Kate is pitting her kids against each other, like $arah seems to do each week – and seems to immensly enjoy. Kate talks with her kids. $arah talks AT her kids. Big difference. Big, big difference…”

  3. I have read Malia’s blog and if you haven’t read it you need to take the time to read it. She is funny and non-offensive. Now to quitter Palin and yes even John McCain I would like to say these 2 people are the worst losers in the world. Both haven’t been able to get past losing the last election. I don’t know why they haven’t been able to other than they lost to a black man. That hate they have for the Obamas just drips from their mouths. It is unabelievable and childess to see 2 has beens act this way. I want to tell them to get over it you lost the election. You never had a chance to win in the first place.

  4. Sarah Palin is the poster child for being tiresomely and pointlessly confrontational by politicizing everything, no matter how trivial. Her palpable disdain and dislike for the First Couple are painfully obvious, since she really does look upon the president as a “usurper.” This hatred clouds her judgment to such a degree that she is incapable of acknowledging that some of the administration’s policies and ideas might actually benefit her and hers. The First Lady’s campaign against childhood obesity is a case in point. In her alternative universe, liberalism is the enemy. The irony that fellow conservatives are leveling pointed and richly deserved criticism against Palin is
    completely lost on her. I hear that her reality show is tanking, just as it should, since it’s nothing more than a transparent and equally futile attempt to improve her image.

  5. Oh man! A Gater said you were working on a post about this…and here it is!!
    LET’S MAKE IT GO VIRAL!!

    Big TLC takes on little Blogger from Texas.
    Oh man! Thanks Sarah! Thanks Katie for posting at Gates!

  6. $5.00 says that Willow would beat her mother over the head with a stick if they were not on TV. TLC should be fined for putting that voice on the TV weekly.

    I am shocked that she mentioned reforestation. That is direct from the environmentalists & the conservationists . Were it not for these people, logging would be gone 50 years ago. But yet she is bashing the very people that makes it possible for logging to go on.

  7. I’m aghast that they attacked Malia Litman.. and defend their Political Star..

    Fortunatly even die-hard Republicans are watching the show and being turned off by the former governor, who should know a bit about her state.

    What I am annoyed with is the heavy handed handling of those Palin e-mails that the state is holding up.

    Till Mid May they say in their umpteenth delay?

    I’ll be calling the state, at 907-465-3500 to protest. They are canabalizing them, so what are they so afraid that people will find in these e-mails? We know the Palins are all potty mouths..

  8. That’s a great point. But that’s reality and so irrelevant to her; she scores points with the folks who give her money when she hates irrationally on liberals. For TLC to spread such lies and hate is low but money talks. Basically they are giving her a platform to hate on 50 % of this country for their wallet.

  9. Tick tock tick tock, the mouse ran out the clock.
    They won’t be giving those emails to anyone until after her 2012 run. The question I have is WHY.

  10. Sadly, while the ratings have dropped a lot, I think TLC still considers this a win for them – remember that TLC is a small cable backwater if you will. They’re catering to the rural fundie crowd. They don’t need big numbers to have a winner. That said, this wasn’t a winner for Palin if she has political ambitions.

  11. It is appalling behavior on both of their parts and makes me so grateful they didn’t win the election. If they’re this petty over losing an election, imagine how they would have been in office. Shame on both of them. Sarah Palin was at one time a person who got along with Democrats, just like McCain.

  12. It’s a real irony that they are called The Learning Channel. Ever since they decided to air this transparently political reality show, I have boycotted them. You are right that it has done nothing to improve her image, and in fact is self-defeating for someone with political aspirations.

  13. hi Katie,

    I am afraid you’re right; this show isn’t working to rehab Palin’s image as she intended, but that is her own choice. She either doesn’t know how she comes off or she can’t get over her need to one up people for even 30 minutes. Neither is good.

    I hope you have a wonderful New Years!!

  14. That picture is J’s brilliance:-) And I had the same reaction when I saw it. Lord love a duck! It’s a real shame to see what TLC has opened the door to — they had best hope she isn’t the political albatross she appears to be. The sad thing is that this is just about money for them; they don’t give a hoot about politics. They found an untapped market and they’re going after it.

  15. @Hraf @Sarah Jones

    Thanks, I am glad you two like the pic. I actually grabbed a couple of different ones, but when I saw it, I thought, “That’s the one!!!!”

  16. Love each and every post on this site. Happy New Year to each and every single one of YOU!

    While the Snowbilly Grifter is so self-absorbed, she and McLoser truly are the most PATHETIC SORE LOSERS seen in my lifetime of 56 years – every utterance is full of vile and hate for the Obamas and the Administration. Snowbilly Grifter cannot open her mouth without dissing someone or being victimized by the evil liberal elites.

    Last night on Rachel Maddow’s show she had a “true exclusive” regarding the moving of enriched uranium from the Ukraine to Russia – apparently, that mission was number 19 of some 39 “loose nukes” missions the Obama Administration has undertaken in coordination with the Russians. These missions are rightfully secretive and dangerous to the WORLD – apparently the agreement the USA has with Russia is to complete these missions in 4 years and thanks to the cooperation of all involved, it appears the missions will be completed by 2012 – YIPEE FOR THE WORLD. This is probably one of the main objections the Rethugs had against the START Treaty – they just could not see past their politics to make the WORLD a safer place for all of us.

    Imagine, what would have happened if McLoser and Snowbilly Grifter had been involved in the negotiations of these missions? The ignorance of Snowbilly and the hate inside McLoser, would have, undoubtedly, never allowed these missions to go forward and they would have started at least two more wars (North Korea and Iran) with their ignorance, hate and stupidity.

    Snowbilly Grifter cannot complete a word salad rant of idiocy without politicizing EVERYTHING and playing the VICTIM.

    The sooner this show is over, the better for the WORLD – just like the nuke missions will make the WORLD safer, as will the demise of the Snowbilly Grifter’s constant utterances being spewed on every media outlet in existence.

    Here’s looking at 2011 and the final leg of the Snowbilly Grifter’s Tour of Stoopidity. Surely this is the year the Pathetic Pack of Palinites will grow bored with her ego.

  17. You hit this one out of the ballpark, Sarah! Multiple congrats!!!!

    BTW, I hope you mailed this to several high-level people at TLC.

  18. It’s all been said above .. Great piece Mz Jones. I must admit, I swiped the pic, & will be using it on Facebook. Can’t wait for the comments .. :p Wishing you and your family a healthy and happy New Year!

  19. Just imagine, TLC is considering re-uping this show for a second season. It’s definitely a winner for them, as the ratings are doing as well, if not better than some of their other shows.
    One whole Saturday, there was a tiny spot, left bottom of every show on TLC that day advertising the Palin show for the next day. I kid you not.
    TLC is like the degenerateness of reality television, with the lowest common denominator their set point.
    Sarah got it exactly right when she said that Palin vs no one. Palin has taken inventing fights for publicity to new heights.
    I still refuse to listen to her screechy, whiny voice on my television. Talk about a lot of Hot Air, her voice and presence might well have contributed to the glacier melt going on in Alaska.
    Hot Air brings us to Arizona. There sure seem to be a lot of political ties between Arizona and the Palin’s these days and I don’t mean McCain. Interesting.

  20. Thanks, Sarah. And at the same time, exposing their actual lack of commitment to learning. At least they found the right vehicle – the Queen of Grifters herself. Like attracts like, and that was never more true than here.

  21. Jason, I’m just glad I didn’t see that picture last night. It would have ruined the image of Sarah’s pandas. Just try to respect my tender Viking sensibilities :)

  22. What’s going to be the theme of that one? Sarah clubs baby seals to death with the rifle she doesn’t know how to use while Bristol dances?

  23. TLC used to be semi credible and somewhat fun. It is now being used as a political commercial enterprise for the Palin 2012 campaign.
    What is hilarious is that the show does Palin NO favors – and in fact, it shows who she really “is”. That is not a good thing for our SociopathicSarah. The woman is mentally ill and probably on massive amounts of drugs in an effort to keep her “together”. Her family is full of dysfunctional bratty ill-raised teens who have already been in trouble with the law – and one daughter who is single handedly populating Alaska with multi-fathers in order to collect her annual Alaska citizen “dole” from the state.
    TLC is paying this cretin (whose ratings are tanking) to do a political ADVERTISEMENT on their less than credible cable channel. Everything on the show is phony and faked. The hike was accomplished by flying then via helicopter (it was all in the Anch Daily News when the chopper got delayed by weather). And every other word out of this vicious idiot’s mouth is a slam against the President’s WIFE?
    On the other hand, we are seeing a bit of the “real” Paylin – a money grubbing mother who ignores her kids – and is mean to everyone.
    Charming TLC – just absolutely top of the line.

  24. Good god. I don’t know where you found that picture Jason, but it is Not for the faint of heart!
    (pour a tall glass of wine and hope for oblivion from such images!)

  25. The theme of that one is going to be “Frontierswoman Sarah Palin moves her family into the Whit House” ! The C4P are lining up right now to get first dibs on who gets to work for Sarah in the White House. Truly a moment of the people! Then, since that can only be one episode, TLC will build a suspenseful narrative around Palin’s many fights with defenseless Americans. She may get in her helicopter and fly over America looking for liberals like Dog. Then, at the mid point, Palin will realize she is bored in the White House and the AIP really wants that WH in AK where it belongs, she’ll announce that “we’ll” be “governing” from AK. We will all pay the tab for that. Anyone who grumbles will be brought before the queen like a target.
    The finale will be Palin’s hand hovering over the red button after she “refudiates” our “north korean allies” into a tizzy, Todd telling her to show them who’s boss, and her kids lined up behind her rolling their eyes. And then we fade to black. Fini.

  26. NO MODERATION AT REBUTTAL NOW.

    Posted yours everywhere on HP….but damn, forgot to leave it THERE.
    DUH.
    Off to do that right now.

  27. The Learning Channel is supposedly doing an educational show on the wonders of Alaska. Somehow TLC and Mr. Murray are now wrapped around the axle, addressing/defending political comments by the narrator. The need for a rebuttal by TLC is further evidence the program should be moved to an issues discussion network. A learning channel should be presenting facts not opinion.

  28. It’s a shame they have to advertise her upcoming shows because I change the channel when her name appears even if I enjoy the show that is on. Just the sight of her name disgusts me.

  29. “A learning channel should be presenting facts not opinion.”
    Yes and it shouldn’t be POLITICAL, which her show is. I hope it “suffers” major losses over this. I’m a big fan of Alaska. Read books about it all the time. And still plan on visiting. I won’t let Palin ruin that dream for me. But I DO want…my ultimate goal is, always has been, is to expose Palin until she’s out of politics for good.
    To think the bloggers have been at that for 3 long years?!?! It blows me away that she’s still HERE … and so are WE. That’s SICK! But I wont stop until SHE GONE, GONE, GONE. Could we be on the cusp of that? I pray to God we are…

  30. Bravo! I’m applauding your well written article and thank you for expressing my feelings on the quitter through your words.

  31. Sarah, Amazing job once again.
    Jason, Love the picture. You and Annes_123 @palingates need to compare and share your collections.

    JMO re: the delay in releasing the emails. I believe the State of AK is waiting for a Statue of Limitation to expire for something that is revealed in those emails. Otherwise there is no logical explanation on why it is taking so long. (Yes I am aware logic is a bad word choice in regards to anything Palin)

    If I remember correctly in AK- after a person is out of office for 2 yrs no more ethics violations can be filed against that person. 7/2011 will be 2 years correct?

    Happy New Year Everyone at Politicususa!

  32. The only party making out in this seems to be TLC. With her popularity tanking, it sure isn’t Her Griftress. From what I read, I have to think at least some of that is due to the show exposing a picture of her that doesn’t jibe with the image she so desperately (but ham-handedly) tries to project.
    It’ll be satisfying if there is a season 2. With any luck (or sense of justice), it’ll continue to push her in her slide to the dumper. But I wager she wouldn’t see it that way, and is too graspingly vain anyhow to turn down the opportunity for more time in the public eye. And she’s likely contractually obligated. Poetic justice either way.
    For the record, I haven’t seen a frame of the show. Don’t think I could stomach it.

  33. I Thank you Sarah and Malia ! My Son in Law Thanks you! Whatever the other side thinks I hope is painful.The tide is turning against them, everytime they open up the lies become more apparent

  34. @Dusty

    Thanks Dusty,

    Sarah is the Palin pic expert. I just help out when I can.

    Happy New Year to you and yours as well.

  35. We all know she had Todd as shadow governor since she is an incompetent and always was and will be.

    Even Refudiate, or redudiate, or any of her excuses for something so simple to spellcheck on a single sentence tweet is bizarre.

    Everything she does is bizarre and off kilter. She has some cross wiring in what passes as her brain. Even her husband has said it, “Sarah is wired differently.”

    But I and others are going to put a bit of pressure on the state of Alaska, since the media is doing nothing. The media focus is off of this woman, for whatever their reason. (her victimhood?)

  36. I haven’t watched it either, Geo. Just the thought of wasting my time watching anything to do with Palin turns my stomach. She never offers any solution to any problems, only criticism of what others are doing to try to solve them. I guess it’s too difficult to formulate alternative solutions since that requires studying the problem. Most sane individuals know how Palin loves to open her mouth and say the first thing on her mind. It doesn’t have to make sense or be true. She just has to say it and her supporters will defend it. I visit malia’s blog everyday, and can say that everything she posts is backed by facts and links to the sources she uses. Palin’s supporters refuse to admit that with Palin, there is no “there” there.

  37. Sarah Palin is a national embarrassment to be sure, but my guess is that TLC has no interest in politics whatsoever. Like any company they’re interested in one thing…. money. So as long as people tune in to watch this buffoon stumble her way through one inarticulate jab after another, advertisers will buy time and TLC will give her a platform.

  38. Ha! The pic looks like a rabid gopher! lol! Love it. Maila has linked to this post and Thanks Sarah Jones… :)
    TLC really did jump the shark on this and it makes them look really bad.
    Yesterday they were moderating comments today no mod?

  39. I believe those are her fans:-) I’m sure they are upset.

    But remember, people, to be kind. Palin is going through a rough patch re her polls and this is a hard time for her fans. Think about how Britney’s fans felt when she shaved her head:-)

  40. @sarah jones

    Comparing Palin to Britney is classic. Although, I tend to think of Palin fans as the people who sitting around in an empty field on New Year’s Eve waiting for the mother ship to take them and their messiah back home.

  41. If the idiot woman ever got into the White House (which is unlikely) they’d have to put it on wheels with a trailer hitch.

  42. Another great article. Thanks for writing it. I would if I could.
    Could barely believe a TLC page singled out Malia.

    One thing, tho, (haven’t read all the comments so excuse me if it’s been covered) broadcast stations, available free w/ rabbitears, are the only stations referred to in any “public airwaves” legalese.

    Happy New Year (almost-ish) everyone & may the site’s success snowball to new heights .. . .. . .err . . .. . .weights? .. .volume? . …

  43. @tm

    Let me see if I can help you out. The air waves themselves are all public. What you might be thinking over is over the air TV a.k.a. bunny ears versus cable or satellite. All the airwaves are public. This is why stations have to have a license to operate and are subject to regulation.

    Happy New Year to you and yours.

  44. I’m inclined to agree with the random spokesperson (Mr. Murray) I get the feeling I’m supposed to hate.

    She never mentioned the president once. She has no problem mentioning the president when she disagrees with him. She took issue with a separate and distinct group from the president.

    We’re expected, however, to assume it was code and that she really meant the president and therefore, since he has been good for loggers, she is being disingenuous? There’s really a simpler explanation. She meant precisely what she said.

    Listen, I don’t even like Sarah Palin, but this sort of blogging about absolutely nothing at all needs to stop. There are plenty of rational reasons to attack Sarah Palin at a policy level, but instead we get senseless mud slinging like this that has us reading volumes into every word politicians/celebrities/whatever like Palin utter.

    President Obama, thankfully, knows better than to engage on such a petty level and focuses on substantive policy issues. I may not agree with him on much, but I at least respect his desire to keep the national discourse at that level. I wish blogs that support him would follow his example.

  45. I am a Canadian fan of Politicususa and enjoy each and every article that is published – they are truly insightful and well written. My daily visits to this blog is a mandatory to-do on my daily task list. With that in mind, I wanted to take this brief opportunity to wish you both, Sarah and Jason, my sincere wishes for a happy, healthy and safe 2011. Keep up the good fight!

  46. Jason,
    Uhhhhhh .. . .I’ll try to disregard the condescension & just quickly wonder aloud how licensing became a topic.

    Re: Broadcast vs Cable
    Legally, there is a difference.
    Specifically due to the literal “public airwaves” usage, there *is* greater regulation on broadcast channels. (Turner v FCC 1994)
    I don’t get how this isn’t obvious.
    The chasm in “indecency standards” is an easy example.

    The term “public airwaves” is out-of-place in a discussion of a cable-only channel.

  47. @tm

    You do understand that the term public airwaves applies whether a channel is cable or broadcast right? The airwaves, which a cable channel also uses, are legally considered part of the public domain, thus making them….wait for it…..public airwaves. No matter how is signal is transmitted. It still uses airwaves.

    Here is FCC Commissioner Michael J Corps in a 2007 NYT piece explaining what you are clearly not grasping:

    “It doesn’t have to be this way. America lets radio and TV broadcasters use public airwaves worth more than half a trillion dollars for free. In return, we require that broadcasters serve the public interest: devoting at least some airtime for worthy programs that inform voters, support local arts and culture and educate our children — in other words, that aspire to something beyond just minimizing costs and maximizing revenue.

    Using the public airwaves is a privilege — a lucrative one — not a right, and I fear the F.C.C. has not done enough to stand up for the public interest. Our policies should reward broadcasters that honor their pledge to serve that interest and penalize those that don’t.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/opinion/02copps.html

    The 1994 Supreme Court decision that you referenced actually has nothing to do with the discussion. The question of the case was must carry, and the court ruled that broadcast stations get regulated with greater discretion. The case did not address ownership of the airwaves, and you have completely failed to make the argument that the term public airwaves in not appropriate in this piece.

    The airwaves are part of the public domain. TLC uses the airwaves, thus Sarah Palin’s show is being broadcast over public airwaves. There are no private airwaves any more than there is legally private oxygen. The question of whether or not airwaves are in the public domain, really is up for debate by anyone, except you.

  48. I’ll just echo tm’s passing stylistic observation and suggest that valid points translate much more effectively when not weighed down by a condescending tone. It looks like you’re doing good stuff here. Keep it up and Happy New Year.

  49. The U.S.–driven by conservationists–*do* limit the timber harvests in Alaska. So I think it’s quite irresponsible for you to pose as a wannabe journalist and criticize Sarah Palin for saying so. Your writing style is excellent though, so I hope you’ll eventually mature into the kind of writer that can be fair and balanced. But to the point: environmentalists do get various administrations to limit the logging of Alaska; for example, the area open to logging in Tongass was reduced from 810,000 acres to 576,000 acres by Clinton in 1999… which is what I (as a “viewer”) understood when I saw the excerpt. However, the blogger Litman was obviously incensed that Palin–who she admits never mentioned Obama–was talking about Obama. So here’s my concern: when did it beome okay to criticize someone (even Palin!) for what we THINK they’re thinking?!

  50. Don’t forget, though, that an old FOX stooge now works in a high position at TLC. Palin being on this channel is not a mistake… it’s completely planned. And the money is just a nice side effect.

  51. Fair & balanced? You must be a fox snooze watcher.
    When does it b/c ok to criticize someone for what we THINK they are doing? You are doing this to Sarah Jones & Sarah Palin does this ALL THE time!
    Sarah Palin does nothing BUT criticize The Obama’s, Joe McGinnis and everyone & all of them who SHE perceives slights her!
    Her show is a total Whine fest!

  52. Fair and balanced means you didn’t let Palin get away with her usual crap but this isn’t even about palin as much as her influence of pettiness and still they whine.

  53. Sheesh, now I’m accused of thinking public airwaves are or should be private?

    Is that really how things are discussed here?
    Pretty illuminating.

    Oh well, Rose bowl now, reply later.

  54. Hi :-)

    A few things: number one, around here someone will correct you if you’re wrong, but I don’t see why that’s rude.

    number two: your first comment seemed nice, but misinformed. no biggie. that’s what we’re all doing here is to learn things.

    number three: Jason is not condescending- or rather, his comment to you wasn’t. He was genuinely trying to be helpful or he wouldn’t have ended it with happy new year. If he’s being condescending on purpose, you will know it, but your comment didn’t merit that kind of response. He saves that for trolls and clowns.

    I didn’t know about the airwaves either – so I don’t see why we can’t all just admit we learned something and move on. I hope you enjoyed the game and that you don’t come back and accuse me of being condescending.

  55. again, i don’t see what’s condescending about helping someone wiht the facts. Is there some way to correct people without correcting them? I thought he was nice. said happy new year. whatever.

  56. by the way, how was your comment not condescending towawrd sarah jones when you corrected her about something you were wrong about? If you’re going to go out on a limb and tell a writer their facts are wrong, you might be willing to take the feedback when it turns out that you’re wrong.

  57. I posted a comment on here but it has been deleted. Interesting to see how this site deals with an opinion different to theirs….

  58. Mathew, Palin doesn’t have a problem in directly criticizing Obama, but that’s only on her FB, twitter, speeches, or on FOX. On a show that’s not supposed to be political, she does it on the sly, or so she thinks. Anyone who has watched this woman over time knows her MO.

  59. “Let me see if I can help you out.” “You do understand that the term… right?” “…what you are clearly not grasping” “…thus making them….wait for it…..public airwaves.” “The question…… really is(n’t) up for debate by anyone, except you.”
    I think what isn’t up for debate is that the tone is condescending.

  60. By the way, I should say (if there’s any misunderstanding) that my point is not to criticize Jason’s rhetorical style (in these replies) just for hell of it. The issue of tone (as any good author knows) is in fact extremely important.
    Quality arguments can be easily bogged down by rhetoric that adds unnecessary conceptual baggage and distraction to the issue. It tends to alienate your audience. In any case, I just think that a professional, even handed, non one-upsmanship tone (especially from a sites leadership) always serves the argument (which is what’s truly important) to it’s best advantage.

  61. Oh jeez what have I gotten mese’f into?

    Your “FCC Commissioner Michael J Corps in a 2007 NYT piece explaining what you are clearly not grasping:” quote doesn’t appear to make any claim re cable vs actual thru-the-air signals.

    The Turner case did, however, differentiate betwixt the two. Of course the point was unrelated to ‘must carry’, but the point was, as you quoted –
    “…the court ruled that broadcast stations get regulated with greater discretion.”

    The authority for greater reg stems **directly and entirely** from the fact that broadcast stations use these contentious “public airwaves” – the same public airwaves whose spectrum rights are sold by the govt.

    You say
    “No matter how is signal is transmitted. It still uses airwaves.”,
    but I doubt that you say it w/ confidence.
    It makes no sense.
    Some signal paths are wireless, others aren’t.
    As an electrical engineer, this convo may be a new low.

    I think part of the issue is that the term “public airwaves” fell out of favor when satellite tv came along, sending signals through the air directly to the consumer.

    Quick peek at FCC.gov – adv search “cable airwaves” and 1st result includes:
    “No. If you subscribe to cable service, the DTV transition did not affect any TV sets that are connected to your cable services. The DTV transition applied only to full-power broadcast television stations -– stations that use the public airwaves to transmit their programming to viewers through a broadcast antenna.”

    While a bit off-handed, aren’t they defining broadcast as using public airwaves?
    (the “broadcast antenna” qualifier is simply to exclude other antenae, particulary the parabolics we call dishes)

    I’m now curious – do people besides Jason think that cable tv is using the airwaves?

    I truly thought that public airwaves vs cable was more widely understood. I regret commenting at all.

  62. Kinda jumpin’ the gun here Saddle.
    Hard to see any out-on-limb-ness in my 1st comment. I actually praised the article & mentioned that cable isn’t through the airwaves.

    You said you “didn’t know about airwaves either” – I’ll assume the “either” refers to the non-ElecEngrs in the audience.

    Here’s a potentially illuminating excercise – ask a few friends whether there’s any difference betw cable & broadcast tv w.r.t “public airwaves” (and content regulation?).
    Please ask the smarter friends first.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.