Skip to main content

View Diary: Sinclair Advertiser DB up; Viacom (183 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Who pays the bills (none)
    The advertisers are the reason Sinclair exists.  That makes them part of the problem.  Given who runs the FCC the only way you can have an effect on Sinclair's actions is to threaten their revenue stream.

    That said, the only legitimate threat is to withhold business.  I would suggest the promise is to NEVER shop their again if they advertise on Sinclair's stations.

    Finally, remember what you are fighting for and who you are fighting against.  I am always reminded of that line in the Woody Allen movie (I think it was Annie Hall) where he is talking with a group of friends about an upcoming Nazi rally.  The friends are going on about devastating op-ed pieces, etc.  Allen's suggestion about how to deal with Nazi's involves baseball bats.  Words alone will not stop this crowd either, it requires action and boycotting advertisers is a damn good way to start.  

    Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter - Martin Luther King

    by Do Something on Mon Oct 11, 2004 at 06:33:44 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  They are part of the problem (4.00)
      But they may not realize it.  I was only vaguely aware of Sinclair after their Nightline stunt, and I consider myself pretty saavy.  I doubt Dan's RV Center in Sacremento is any better informed.

      I'd recommend dealing with them as you'd deal with an unruly child: kindly but firmly.  

      1. Inform them of Sinclair's actions.

      2. Note that you hold them responsible for those actions, for having advertized on a Sinclair station.

      3. Ask them to stop advertizing on the station.

      4. If they do not, tell them you will shop elsewhere, and that you will tell others to do the same.

      Fact is, a friendly-but-critical letter occupies as much space an angry-and-critical letter, and since volume, not vitriol, is what counts, you might as well send the former.  Who knows - a nice letter might even convert the person reading it to your side.
      •  Insurance vs Fast Food (none)
        As posted elsewhere, I have written my letter to GEICO, and I suggest any who are in the same position do the same.  Include your policy number(s)!

        Insurance is not like fast food: car insurance equals something like $60-100/month, and not many of us eat that much KFC.  But you pay that much every month, every car.

        And think of all the advertising that insurance companies like GEICO go through to get customers to switch.  A few thousand customers threatening to cancel their policy would make a MUCH bigger impact than switching where you buy your next lunch.

        Worst. President. Ever

        by TGos on Tue Oct 12, 2004 at 02:13:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  'consider who we are fighting' (4.00)
      exactly my point - it's NOT the secretary who is reading all the mail at Dan's RV: Here are some quotes from her:


      "We have had numerous emails regarding this matter...most of them threatening."

      and later in reply to an apology I wrote to her:


      "Speaking on my own behalf (not Dan's or his company's) I totally disagree with what KOVR is doing, but I have to say all the threatening `ultimatums' have only served to make me wonder about the mentality of the senders."

      and finally:


      I understand, and when I have a free moment or two I would be happy to draft what I believe would be a suitable response.  I follow politics rather closely and understand how tempers can flair.  No grudges :)

       Do you really want to go on with the Nazi comparisons at this point? Moral absolutism has no place in modern democratic politics - these are PEOPLE we are dealing with. Beyond the moral bankruptcy of demonizing our opponents, it is a truly horrid strategy for winning. If you want to succeed, learn to be scathing AND polite - it's not that hard and at the end of the day you don't go home feeling all icky.

      To reprint something I wrote earlier:

      If you don't know how to express yourself strongly without making threats then I strongly recommend you start reading the letters people have posted - it is perfectly possible to nail someone to the wall like a bug and still be civil: think Kerry at both debates.

      •  Depends on what you mean by threat (none)
        The people we are fighting are not nice, they punish those who are not with them, they make them sign loyalty oaths.  If your wife is a CIA spy and you cross them, they will expose her.  They are not impressed with what you have to say, they don't really care what you say.  They care only about money and power.

        My threat would be to stop doing business with the advertisers, that is all.  

        The comparasion was to how to deal with extremists, they are not Nazis, at least not yet.  However if a line is not drawn in the sand soon, who knows.

        Of course, be civil in your communication with employees of these companies, the reply above is an excellent template for this.  Also, do remind them though who put them in this situation.  Make it clear that there is an economic price to be paid for supporting Sinclair.  

        Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter - Martin Luther King

        by Do Something on Mon Oct 11, 2004 at 09:39:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "They"?? (none)
          Careful with that "they" there, cowboy!

          The people we're up against aren't a "they". Each is an individual with unique motivations and beliefs. Some are reasonable, some not; some are assholes, some are sweethearts; some would oppose us to the death, others really couldn't care less or are actively on our side-- maybe just doing what they have to do to make a living.

          I take a "questioning" tone when I write these, more on the lines of, "Are you sure you want to do this? It doesn't seem like a good business decision." This works with both those who are with us and those who are aganist us. Those who are with us, say, "Yep, you're right, it's not!", those who are against us have yet another seed of doubt. An avalance of "this doesn't seem to be a good idea" messages can cause even the most strident partisan to back down... if they value their profits enough. In any case, I want to instlll doubt, or at least some hesitation.  Threats don't instill doubt, they cause the opinionated to dig in even further, and turn thos who aren't opinionated into enemies. Doubts and questions, however, pique curiosity or maybe self-examination... which is just what I want.

          I want people to stop and think about their actions. I'm confident that, if they do in fact think, they will do the right thing, or at least drag their feet a bit before doing the wrong thing, which sometimes is more than enough to give us a win.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site