The RNC's ban further breaks down the intention of news media.

Yes, I know it's been a while since I posted on the blog. I'm guilty of being sucked into the work routine and becoming negligent of other responsibilities. However, I read something today that got me steamed enough to post. I'll try to keep it short and sweet.

I also want to note that I am posting on the Tau Beta blog as myself on my own Blogger account and my opinions do not reflect the opinions of other Tau Beta members; hence why I have not been posting as Tau Beta in many cases. 

On MSN, I saw an article about the Republican National Convention (RNC) banning CNN and NBC from covering their event in 2016, when there will be new presidential candidates again. Really.

Whatever happened to the Republican party's intent to "rebrand" itself? I suppose they are still opting to alienate everyone (aka, getting back to their old ways) in the hope to accentuate their extremism. I understand that the allegation that the "liberal media" is to blame for the many liberal-leaning population. What I do not understand is why they would pull this stunt. After all, Fox News as well as CNN and the like all reported on 2012's RNC, antics included. The conservative media can point fingers, but can't be good sports about receiving it back.

Eastwood talking to "President Obama."

If you've forgotten about the RNC last year, envision Clint Eastwood talking to a chair. This video is among the antics that went on that night.Was it the supposed "liberal media's" choice to hire Eastwood for entertainment? No. You couldn't have even edited that level of awkwardness. Whether on supposed "liberal" or "conservative" sources, the same events occurred in real time.

The Democrats are right in their response; by banning CNN and NBC from reporting on the next RNC, they are alienating more voters instead of drawing more near. Democrats also cite that Republicans are pushing away the valuable votes of women and minorities even further by banning news source coverage in general. Again, shortly after losing the presidential election, Republicans said they they need to find a way to draw on minority and women voters. Clearly, that has changed.

What's even more interesting is the balance these new sources have and how the GOP is trying to stagger the intention of new media. While the RNC refuses to have CNN and NBC air their next "event," they are doing so because the media are behaving as they should -- being neutral.

Reince Priebus.

RNC chairman Reince Priebus says that airing programs dealing with Hillary Clinton shows an unfair bias. Because these networks want to air Hillary Clinton programs, the GOP are opting to ban them from also airing conservative events (aka, being neutral by covering topics on both sides of American politics), as if they are "too good" to be on the same network as a female liberal presidential candidate.

Maybe the real problem isn't the '"liberal new media," but the conservative ones. It is hard to take them seriously when they ban news sources from coverage, as the public has a right to know what occurs on both sides of the political spectrum.

Granted, news media is owned by only six corporations...that cannot be denied and complicates matters. Still, the intention of news in general  (whether achieved or not) is to be open to the public, and by preventing the public from seeing a program, it is infringing on First Amendment rights. While the GOP can choose who hears their voice (their freedom of speech), it prevents others from hearing it (in theory if they only stick to one news source, which you shouldn't do) and therefore prevents others from being able to express their point of view based on the perceptions they get from the program.
 

From a corporate standpoint (if you lean towards this perspective more than philosophy), the GOP will not have as many "customers" exposed to the ads the RNC will bring in 2016, therefore, less attraction to advertisers. Not too smart for the party that (openly) endorses capitalism. Also, how can one organization prevent a corporation from reaching "customers" (i.e. viewers)?
All-in-all, while it irritates me in general based on my own political views, the intention of news media is infringed upon in this instance and therefore justifies my annoyance logically and financially (for the corporate folks). Has the GOP sunken themselves for 2016? We'll just have to see. This blog post is one record of their antics prior to the next election that can be used later as proof for something.