Tedd Rall gone from MSNBC?

[KareBear]

I was just checking the political cartoons on MSNBC and Ted Rall's link is completely gone now. Anyone know anything about this? I knew they pulled that one comic down but I didn't realize they were taking him off completely.

On a related noted I just found out that my employer blocks www.rall.com for the reason that it is a "Mature" website. WTF?

[wtmusic]

1. His strip on Pat Tillman put him over the edge

My guess.

[LittleApple81]

2. I like this one of Ted's:

[w4rma]

3. Yup, no link. General Electric has probably been hoping for an excuse

to take his cartoons off their subsidary's site.

Here is a Google cache of the page where his link used to be:
http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:mZGhDoolbkIJ:www.msnbc.com/comics/political_cartoons.asp

It's no longer there:
http://www.msnbc.com/comics/political_cartoons.asp

[markomalley]

4. look at this site:

www.washingtonpost.com

they have him along with other political cartoonists listed under a "comics" link on their front page.

[SpillTheLegumes]

5. I hope so

His attack on our brave soldiers was way over the top. If he wants a venue to preach his inorance and hate of American troops he can buy it himself. Good riddance.

[wuushew]

6. The first ammendment is still in effect even during war

n/t

[kiahzero]

7. The First Amendment doesn't apply to private organizations

Otherwise, we'd be infested with freepers.

[SpillTheLegumes]

9. Yep it does

Let Rall buy his own venue to preach his hate. No newspaper is required to post his trash any more than they are required to post mine.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SpillTheLegumes]

11. He can speech all he wants

But no news org is required to provide him an outlet. Let him buy his own free speech outlet of hate. Do you not get this simple fact of free speech?

[Rebellious Republican]

13. Well here is the rest of them for your benefit

I am not a chicken shit chicken hawk, at least I have put my life on the line to defend his freedom. Further more if my neighbor decided to fly the communist flag that is his right, the rights that I gave up 10 years of my life for, and for the very same right that you have to voice your opinion here at DU, whats on your chests, at least I have fought for the right to voice my opinion. Go Kerry!

[SpillTheLegumes]

14. What does this have to do with a news org providing a "comic" space?

Rall can stand on a soapbox all day long and preach his hate but no news org is required to provide him a microphone or space to preach it.

Is this really that hard to understand?

[Rebellious Republican]

17. Its real easy to understand what is going on, and you know it .....

Your dictator and fascist chief is putting memo's out to his corporate whores to shut down free speech in this country. When the media is as controlled as it is now, you have nothing more than Pravda style media. Which is what we are talking about here.

[pretzel4gore]

12. oh sheee...

it's a cartoon......and USA was a free country, which Ted Rall is trying to promote.

[SpillTheLegumes]

15. I write cartoons too

I don't DEMAND any news outlets to publish them. Why do you feel that Rall is owed more rights than you or me to publish his views?

[Rebellious Republican]

19. see post #17 N/T

[SpillTheLegumes]

24. See free speech reality 101 N/T

[Rebellious Republican]

36. Show me something a little more substantial, heres where you

can start your education on free speech reality 101 here http://www.beirut-memorial.org/history/
I was there, where were you, whats your military history look like? Can you tell what those JPEGS of ribbons mean?

[davekriss]

40. Legume, Legume, Legume

Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.
---A.J. Liebling

How often do we have to sacrifice public interest at the altar of private property?

Many of us believe that informed consent is an essential element of democracy and we'd like to see its continuance. This is in jeopardy, given the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine and the Rule of Sevens. So we worry about the narrowing of the agenda made possible by concentrating ownership of 29,000+ major media outlets into the hands of 6 mega-corporations (just 20 years ago these same outlets were in the hands of around 2,500 companies). So when we see someone express an unpopular dissenting opinion suddenly get yanked off a major platform of communication, we are alarmed; "property rights" are farthest from our minds. Even if this one instance, viewed alone, is not the end of the world, the damage does adds up...

MSNBC, owned by GE (amongst other things a major weapons system manufacturer), surely welcomes the opportunity to squelch dissident voices from within its ranks. It's happened before. Here's an old/recent example (May 2003): Ashleigh Banfield speaking about the "atmosphere" the corporate owner manages to cultivate and what happens to those that stray too far (http://www.cjonline.com/stories/042403/bre_landonlec.shtml)...

War's sobering realities never reached American TV screens during the recent U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, according to NBC News correspondent Ashleigh Banfield.

"We didn't see what happened when Marines fired M-16s," Banfield said during a Landon lecture appearance today at Kansas State University. "We didn't see what happened after mortars landed, only the puff of smoke. There were horrors that were completely left out of this war. So was this journalism? Or was this coverage?"

On the other hand, she said, many U.S. television viewers were treated to a non-stop flow of images presented by "cable news operators who wrap themselves in the American flag and go after a certain target demographic."

<snip>

"It was a grand and glorious picture that had a lot of people watching," Banfield said, "and a lot of advertisers excited about cable TV news. But it wasn't journalism..."

Hmmm. "Go after a certain target demographic" and "a lot of people watching" leading to "a lot of advertisers excited" -- would the media's P&L-driven infotainment (formerly known as "news"), wholly dependent on those that controlled the flow of information (the military), be so one-sided if something akin to the Fairness Doctrine was still in effect? I don't think so.

Ashleigh goes on to say:

"As a journalist, I have been ostracized just from going on television and saying, 'Here's what the leaders of Hezbollah, a radical Moslem group, are telling me about what is needed to bring peace to Israel,'" she said. "And, 'Here's what the Lebanese are saying.' Like it or lump it, don't shoot the messenger, but that's what they do."

So that's the dynamic -- we see it with Ashleigh (how much have we seen her on the air since last year?) and we see it again with Ted Rall. One of the 6 mega-corporations, GE, which owns NBC and MSNBC, and happens to be a major supplier of military technology, creates a news environment bent on appealing to and packaging a safe demographic, neatly wrapped in red, white, and blue, to sell to advertisers and, to in effect, promote an atmosphere in which GE can thrive.

Does GE want to see its NBC/MSNBC share with its audience messages critical of the war -- a war that it benefits from? No. Does it want to see messages that might embarrass (and thus reduce) its advertisers? No. How does it ensure the party line is adhered to? By creating an institutional awareness that there are bounds to what can be said, and by punishing (ostracizing) those that stray beyond those bounds. Ms. Banfield's is a case in point. And now so is Ted Rall's.

An aside: Just why is a major weapons system manufacturer buying broadcast (NBC) and cable networks (MSNBC) and maintaining complementary web-sites? To narrow the media agenda? Drown out dissenting opinion. Craft messages favorable to advancement of its corporate agenda? Which is to sell arms? And how best to sell arms? Why, promote wars of course! All those smart bombs need to be replenished, you know. And now you know why CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/CNBC/MSNBC/FOXNEWS all rose in uniform chorus about how the war should be fought rather than if it should be fought. No less than a Pravdaization of the American media.

If you have the time, take a look here to see in detail how this dynamic works: Necessary Illusions:
Thought Control in Democratic Societies>.

[Rebellious Republican]

42. That was very well read DK, its obvious I do not have the

eloquence that you displayed with that post. I am just a blue collar kinda of guy who's education only taught me right from wrong, never went to college. But you are right on target, thanks for adding your insight. Unfortunately it will probably be lost on this individual.

[corporatewhore]

20. They Are RAPISTS and should not be called brave

[Mountainman]

27. Who are rapists? All the troops?

That's one of the saddest things about the prison story. Now some people will us it to smear all the troops. Those folks didn't need a negative story to do that but they can now use it as cover when they climb out from under their rocks.

[corporatewhore]

31. I thought the orginal poster was referring to the rall article

"An army of scum" where he called the RAPIST guards nazi ss troops. I have no respect for RAPISTS. the rest are troops who are taking part in an unjust occupation. I will not be apologist for colonialism or RAPE

[Mountainman]

35. No one is asking you to be an apologist for killing and rape

I would hope you have some consideration for people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time and got caught up in Bush's war.

There are events in time that coincide with your life and you are swept up and forced to be a part of them through no choice of your own. Those in the service and National Guard that were sent to Iraq simply because they were there when Bush Co. took over this country and decided to occupy Iraq are victims just as much as the Iraqis are in my opinion.

[SpillTheLegumes]

28. They? Who are "they" Corporate Whore?

All the military? Is that what you are trying to say Corporate Whore?

I don't think so Corporate Whore.

[corporatewhore]

32. You were refering to Rall's Army of Scum article

he called the RAPIST guards nazi ss troops. The rest are soliders serving an unjust occupation.I will not be an apologist for western colonialism or RAPE

[mitchum]

26. Actually, Rall's cartoon attacked the media outlets who cheerled...

for the war. Rall did not call any soldier an idiot ( that was done the media figure in the last panel) It wasn't very subtle. Even an idiot should be able to decipher a freakin' cartoon.

[SpillTheLegumes]

29. The Rall attack on Tillman did him in

I hope to never see this Rall trash in mainstream media again. Good riddance to bad rubbish. See ya ted...get a real job and rot in hell.

[mitchum]

33. Okay, apparently NOT every idiot can decipher a freakin' cartoon!

(That's what I get for being an optimist)
GO BACK AND READ THE CARTOON, BIG BOY!

[SpillTheLegumes]

37. Maybe you should go back and read it

Rall insulted Tillman and disgraced his bravery and heroism. Rall sucks in my mind and damn near every other thinking American. I have no use for a scumbag like Rall and not one person I know agrees with him.

[mitchum]

44. The only thing I'm reading is your tombstone

Good riddance to bad freepish...IDIOT!

[Rebellious Republican]

39. So Rummy is allowed to commit atrocities, then is given an

opportunity to make a public apology and keep his job. However a cartoonist is not, things that make you go HMMMMMMMMM!

[BattyDem]

10. A possible loophole when viewing at work?

Yahoo let's you create a personalized homepage when you sign up. (It's free)

Sign in to your account and create your My Yahoo Homepage. You can add lots of different content (including Ted Rall) to the page by clicking the "Choose Content" button. When you get to the list of content choices, choose "Comics" (it's in the "Entertainment" section). Click "Finished" - you'll now see you're My Yahoo homepage with the "Comics" section added. Click the "edit" button in the "Comics section" - Ted Rall is one of the choices in the Editorial Comics list. Check the box next to his name and you'll always see his latest comic right on your homepage. (I doubt your boss is blocking Yahoo.) :)

http://my.yahoo.com/

[w4rma]

18. It only appears to be MSNBC which has dropped him. (nt)

[Bombtrack]

16. I sure hope so. Associating with Ted Rall is like associating with Ramsey

Clarke or Fred Phelps. MSNBC is not a fringe news organization. And it is also an American new organization.

Mocking 9-11 widows and widowers, the family of Daniel Perle, advocating through "satire" on behalf of Iraqi's who murder our troops, presenting an American hero like Pat Tillman as a racist ignoramous, these are not offenses to republicans or democrats, they're offenses to the core of America.

Not to mention the fact that he just makes shit up based on his own delusions of grandeur. He just reports through his never funny cartoons or his never insightful or original columns that the whitehouse basically had him fired from the NY Times and that he is a victem of political censorship, which is an utterly baseless claim. That is the hight of megomaniacal arrogance and self importance and in line with his suing of another journalist who pissed him off. He's a spoiled, sheltered little bitch and deserves nothing less than the long overdue shunning from credible news services.

By the way, look who gives him the spotlight to represent liberal values. UPI, the Moonie newswire. Bill O'Liely gave him top of his show booking to do the same. Rall gets to plug his stupid book, and O'Reilly gets to hurt the left and the democratic party by showcasing the worst of the left in Rall.

[Rebellious Republican]

22. Bombtrack, its not about hate, its about freedom of speech.....

Its about fascism in government. If you do not agree with it, I never said I did, simply do not read it. There are a lot of things I do not agree with, say freerepublic.you know. Do I think we should shut them down just because I think they are a bunch of corporate/fascist assholes. Absolutely not, do I have to go over there and be exposed to their sick way of thinking, absolutely not. Its my choice!

[Bombtrack]

25. Nobody has the first amendment right to be linked to a news organizations

website. Or get a paycheck from them. Rall isn't a good columnist. He's a blowhard and a juvenile wannabe-intellectual contrarian. His hypcracy on many issues including his double standards for Dean and Dean's opponents are well documented on the DU archives.

I'm absolutely certain that Fred Phelps would be overjoyed if his Godhatesfags website was linked to MSNBC but the people there have somewhat of a requirment to maintain mainstream credibility.

[Rebellious Republican]

30. He was obviously picked by them, so he must have had ....

something going for him. I do not even no the cartoonist, I have not seen the cartoon, but it is easy to figure out why he got yanked, I have seen equally disgusting material put out by the right. He was collecting a paycheck by them, they must have liked his work, why does he get yanked so fast. If Don Rumsfeild gets the opportunity to to make a public apology for committing atrocities in Iraq prisons, and then keep his job. I would think some damned cartoonist who was not responsible for torture and death, should be allowed to make amens, and keep his job. What part do you not grasp about what is happening under this admin. See Ladyhawks post for more!

[Bombtrack]

34. Well this is the perfect question for you. Were they wrong about Savage

Michael savage, firing him for saying a gay caller should get aids and die? Or was it in violation of his first amendment rights to let his idiotic ass go.

[Rebellious Republican]

38. They were wrong, no one was beaten, raped or killed over it...

like I said, I do not always agree with what some one says, I do not have to listen to it, simple! Now back to Rummy, should he be allowed to make a public apology and keep his job?

[Bombtrack]

41. It's completely apples and oranges

How Bush conducts foreign policy and public relations which is what this Rumsfeld issue has to do with has no direct parallel to a news organization letting dumbasses like Ted Rall and Michael Savage go. They weren't making them alot of money and there views probably offended 93 percent of the MSNBC audience, they have no reason as a responsible news source and bussiness to keep giving these creeps cash spew their idiocy.

This isn't like Bill Maher and Howard Stern. They were/are getting the job done and then some in the ratings. They were popular and had a big fan base.

MSNBC did not fire them because they were bad for democrats, republicans, gays, or straight people. They fired them because they made no sense for MSNBC

And it sure has nothing to do with the Rumsfeld situation. One is a news organization, the other is the executive branch of the united states. Not exactly Pepsi and Coke.

[Ladyhawk]

21. That Pat Tillman cartoon was over the top, in my opinion.

But Rush Limpballs goes over the top all the time and doesn't get canned. So do Insanity and Weiner. What we have is a systematic clamping down on free speech that doesn't line up with *'s agenda.

Tedd Rall should have been warned and perhaps censured, but one goof usually shouldn't be enough to end a job, especially in light of the latitude given to the zoo crew working at Clear Channel.

[Rebellious Republican]

23. Right on Ladyhawk!!!!!!!!! N/T

[wtmusic]

43. Agree

Ted Rall has been right on the money many, many times. This time he fucked up, bigtime. The strip, and his 'Army of Scum' article, were both hysterical and ignorant. He's done the left a disservice.