The thin-skinned “progressives” at NBC are really thenthitive about dissent (UPDATED)

UPDATE: NBC Changes its mind… Heh.

One of my favorite conservative pundits has been banned by NBC for life. Ann Coulter, a staunch conservative who is, to say the least, opinionated and controversial, has written a book exposing what is obvious to anyone who has even a stilted brain with which to reason with: liberal bias in the media.

Mon Jan 05 2009 17:50:57 ET
The nation’s top selling conservative author has been banned from appearing on NBC, insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
Banned for life!
“We are just not going to have her on any more, it’s over,” a top network source explains.
NBC’s TODAY show abruptly cut Ann Coulter from its planned Tuesday broadcast, claiming the schedule was overbooked.
Coulter was set to unveil her new book, GUILTY.
But one network insider claims it was the book’s theme — a brutal examination of liberal bias in the new era — that got executives to dis-invite the controversialist.
“We are just not interested in anyone so highly critical of President-elect Obama, right now,” a TODAY insider reveals. “It’s such a downer. It’s just not the time, and it’s not what our audience wants, either.”
For the book, Coulter reportedly received the most-lucrative advance ever paid to a conservative author.
The TODAY show eagerly invited the author months ago, for her first network interview on GUILTY.
The exclusive was to air during the show’s 7 AM hour. The cut came Monday afternoon.
Executives at NBC TODAY replaced Coulter with showbiz reporter Perez Hilton, who recently offer $1,000 to anyone who would throw a pie at Ann Coulter. Hilton is also launching a new book this week, RED CARPET SUICIDE.

Wouldn’t want a dissenting opinion on the Messiah now would we?

15 thoughts on “The thin-skinned “progressives” at NBC are really thenthitive about dissent (UPDATED)”

  1. First of all, this is not about Coulter herself. It could be anybody who’s politically incorrect. Are these people at NBC so far gone that they don’t realize how obvious their bias and hypocrisy are? Can you imagine the outcry if Fox News had banned Michael Moore for being too rabidly anti-Bush? I can, and so can anyone else who’s not retarded (or disingenuous). Of course, maybe NBC thinks people are just too stupid to see this for what it is. Unfortunately, to a large extent, they could be right about that (see Obama mania).

  2. I personally think that Coulter is bad for conservatism and is an embarassment. When I was growing he was already up there WFB, Jr. was the spokesman of our views. Intelligent, witty and an excellent debater. Coulter is crass, catty and annoying. That being said it is a slap in the face to all conservatives for her to be “banned”. Let’s see how this pans out, I doubt it will hold and will be chalked up as a misunderstanding.

  3. And by the way, if the Coulter ban is for real, it’s no “slap in the face”–it’s censorship, period.

  4. NBC is a private company and it can do whatever it wants. It is NOT censorship. That can only happen at the governmental level. What I wanted to point out was the hypocrisy of the left and their bullshit about “tolerance” and “diversity” of opinion. They only tolerate diverse opinions when they are the same as theirs.

  5. So they replaced Ann Coulter with Perez Hilton? The same Perez Hilton who offered someone $1000.00 to assault Ann Coulter? Offering money to put out a hit on someone? Isn’t that a felony?

  6. Universal Spectator, have you ever heard the expression… A litte knowledge is dangerous…?
    Well you are dangerous.
    Of course NBC censored Ann Coulter.
    I believe like most undereducated Americans you are confusing censorship with our 1st Amendment right to speak. NBC IS CENSORING COULTER and it perfectly legal to do so.
    Friend, you have it backward. Only GOVERNMENT CANNOT or is prohibited form censoring speech.
    Let me repeat so you will understand. NBC IS CENSORING. It’s really quite simple.

  7. Hey folktunes, a/k/a, how’s that trial coming along? From your IP address I see your ISP is in the Rochester NY area. I’m glad you’re out of Detroit. No matter. What I really wanted to say is that you are a moron. A blithering idiot. A flatline on the EEG. A pustule on the collective unconscious of the planet. An imbecile.
    A private organization, NBC and this blog included, can choose whatever content it wishes to host. If I choose to exclude your idiotic ramblings, it is not censorship: it is my right, under the First Amendment, to refuse to hear your opinion. That is also part of the First Amendment, but you must’ve slept through that part of class. If NBC decides to ban Ann Coulter, that is not censorship. They can choose who to put on the air and who not to put on the air. Of course, NBC has to abide by decency rules since they broadcast over the public airwaves, but we don’t, which is why I can say you are fucking stupid and an asshole without getting fined by the FCC. Government can prevent private organizations from disclosing material that is classified. Outside of those rules, though, they cannot tell me what to write or what not to write. That, my hapless moronic friend, would be censorship.
    So, kwame/folktunes, go back to Detroit, serve your time and leave us alone.

  8. I was not referring to whether NBC can legally ban Coulter or whoever. I expect they can. That’s not the real issue for me. The point is that NBC is supposed to be an objective, unbiased, all-inclusive news source, as they would themselves be the first to claim. Therefore, if they ban somebody because they don’t like that person’s politics, said claim is patently false and, in my opinion, the banning constitutes de facto censorship, legal or not. If any network or similar entity ever tried to ban Michael Moore for his politics, EVERYONE in the liberal camp would call it censorship.

  9. But that still wouldn’t be censorship. Censorship has a very specific meaning under our system. NBC can ban whomever they want, ad infinitum, legally without penalty. They are still a private organization. The problem here is one of semantics, i.e., the use of the wrong word to describe NBC’s actions vis-a-vis our current political environment.
    As for the news media being objective, I stopped believing that a long time ago…

  10. I never said I believed the claims made by the MSM, especially about themselves. It is a problem of semantics, but again, I’m not talking about legal technicalities or definitions; I’m talking about what banning Coulter (or anybody) for her politics would actually amount to, if said ban was made by any entity that purports to be objective or unbiased. In other words, NBC cannot have it both ways.

Comments are closed.