Sunday, January 29, 2006

ROGERS TELEVISION ARE DENYING NEW BRUNSWICKERS TO SPEAK! IS ROGERS RADIO NEXT???


2, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

Makes you wonder how can fascists people from Ontario come down here and deny New Brunswickers our right to asks some straight forward question?

What's next for Rogers???

Rogers radio talk show???

7 comments:

Blogger Charles LeBlanc said...

I got a question? I called them Facists???? Is there another word when someone denies you your freedom of speech???

Anonymous said...

There's a whole lot of them Charles, but not appropriate for posting on your site :>)

Anonymous said...

Someone that denies you the right to speak? I would use the word reasonable.

They aren't stopping you from talking at other forums.

I don't have a TV station. Thus I don't let you talk on TV. I'm not a fascist. Just because they have a TV station and don't let you speak on it doesn't mean they are in any way wrong.

Anonymous said...

Charles:

As informative and useful as your blog site is, the bottom line is this.

Nothing will change when it comes to local media unless we as New Brunswick Residents, stand up and be counted to both the managers and owners of the local radio & TV Media outlets.

I copied and pasted the below urls into my browser and I was shocked to see, what the other chap had written about on your site.

And from what I saw and could see He Was And Is Right. There's no way in heavens we are getting the same service as he pointed out from the Rogers Toronto Operation.

Just maybe if people protested the same as they did in the Saint John Harbour Election, and the LNG Issue, maybe things would change ?

But if we as New Brunswickers just sit back and say, yeah we're getting ripped off, but there's nothing I can do, so the heck with it.

http://www.680news.com/

THEIR HEAD HONCHO STATION IN TORONTO

SAINT JOHN OPERATION WEB SITE

http://www.news889.com/

Blogger Charles LeBlanc said...

I repeat- What do you call a group like rogers or the irvings who denies your freedom of speech????

PLEASE LET ME KNOW?????

Merci!!!

Anonymous said...

Charles,

I hate to align myself with 12:21. (I'm not big on hypocrisy. He or she calls you on namecalling, and calls you names while he/she is at it. Sheesh.)

But anyway, i have to say this: in my opinion, neither Irving nor Rogers, is denying you your freedom of speech.

Your freedom of speech is to say what you want, without beign censored or punished by the government. Your freedom of speech does not include a right to be published in someone else's newspaper, nor a right to be heard on someone else's radio station or tv station. The owners of the media have freedom of speech too, and it's their right to decide who/what they publish/broadcast and who/what they do not.

How can it be any other way? if all of us has a right to be published in the Telegraph Journal, that means if the TJ gets a letter from every NBer it has to publish all 700 thousand letters! No, they get to pick and choose.

There are limits to media freedom, of course. They can't publish slander or obscenity or hate propaganda, and they have to provide a diversity of opinion. But no one has a right to be published or broadcast by anyone else.

You're entitled to your opinions, and to publish them yourself, as you do on this blog. But you're not entitled to make others print or broadcast you.

That's my two cents' worth.

Anonymous said...

How is it showing 'diversity' if certain people are denied speaking? Most of these issues never come up if it weren't for Charles, in this it as Charles says, he IS speaking for all the voiceless children in this province who are put on drugs with absolutely no say. I was a lousy student and I would just be horrified if my teachers, parents, doctors and the government all came in and said 'we don't like how you are behaving so we are going to drug you'.

These people have no voice, and ironically if they ever committed a crime everybody would be hollering for them to be tried as adults, and wouldn't care a whit whether they were 'forced drug addicts'.

How many other voices do you hear objecting to government policy? So how can you say that Charles is just speaking for himself? Charles is free to choose between being medicated or not, those children aren't, and we know that the government and medical establishment is not paying to have children adequately tested before FORCING them to go on it. In case you didn't know, children have NO rights.

So try this sometime, say there is some organization that you are connected with which is being affected by government or society and you want to talk about it. Call up Rogers for one of their shows and see how you feel when they arbitrarily tell you that you will not be heard. I think Charles is being kind in calling them fascist because I can think of other words, but he's restricted since he tries to watch his language.

Anybody who thinks the Irving press provides a 'diversity' in their editorials, is simply so locked into the propaganda box that they can't even think outside it. This is, of course, why New Brunswick is the poorest province, with the worst economic record, bleakest economic prospects, lowest standard of living, and a good percentage of people don't even know it thanks to Rogers and Irving.

Thank goodness for the internet because at least the next generation gets access to the whole world online and doesn't buy into the Irving view of the world like the geezers.