Talk:Free Speech TV
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is Free Speech TV Biased?
[edit]I've noticed that with all the commercials and user submitted content sent in, the only ones that are aired are very liberal and biased toward the extreme left. Free Speech TV claims to be different, but how is bias (one way or the other) any different from mainstream media? (Sethc87 (talk) 13:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC))
99.148.244.81 (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC) Agreed. Free Speech TV is about as unbiased and objective as LINKTV. The word "progressive" doesn't fool many people.
It's an outright lie. In the countries around the world where the kind of liberalism this channel espouses is practiced, free speech in the media doesn't exist in the state it does in this country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.152.162.211 (talk) 09:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Amazing how Wikipedia AND FSTV fails to even mention this channel as having any left-wing tilt. I'm fine with right wing and left wing media. But if it lists Fox News and OAN as "leaning conservative" and never fails to disclaim conservative pundits as such, why are they so afraid to list FSTV as even "leaning left" or Thom Hartmann/Stephanie Miller, etc as liberal pundits? Obviously FSTV does more than just "lean" left, but Wikipedia and FSTV doesn't seem to have the courage to even admit as much as a lean. Is it any wonder why there is a popular phrase of "FAKE NEWS?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:C290:2C60:AC81:FFF8:6AD3:5073 (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- In the old days it had more documentary style programming from a range of (very often very marginal) perspectives, which I thought was interesting. I mean if you show people in their natural habitat the audience can take what they want from that. So its origins were more about literal free speech, i.e. airing programming that wouldn't be shown on commercial television. For many years now it's mainly shifted to televising "progressive" radio talk programs that can often run for many hours a day each. For less time (a year or two or maybe three) they've been airing a new age program (Aware Show with Lisa Garr) with numerology on the regular and all kinds of questionable stuff that is not examined critically. I find this show makes me feel bad for the channel, and subtracts from the credibility of shows like Democracy Now. I keep my TV tuned to the channel just because when I turn it on I don't want to see some really bad taste commercial crap. Democracy Now is indispensable in the U.S. It's something nice to wake up to --75.106.108.191 (talk) 03:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- Start-Class Freedom of speech articles
- Mid-importance Freedom of speech articles
- Start-Class Media articles
- Unknown-importance Media articles
- WikiProject Media articles
- Start-Class television articles
- Unknown-importance television articles
- Start-Class Television stations articles
- Unknown-importance Television stations articles
- Television stations task force articles
- Automatically assessed television articles
- WikiProject Television articles