|
I don't think it's pathetic at all.
I think he is using his money and his attorney to present a case before the public.
Obviously he knows he is going to lose. He also knows he has somehow "consented" to the programming by watching it at all. That's not what he's saying however. This is an inexpensive way to promote the platform that network TV is full of shit content.
It's not a frivolous lawsuit in the sense that his point is socially important. But frivolous in the sense that it has no legal merit. Of course, it will be rejected and he will have to bear the costs--not the taxpayers.
So what's with the animosity? Would people prefer he go the route of FCC complaint? Letters to the editor? This is a perfect opportunity to break the hypnosis and rouse people to strong opinions on either side. Galvanizing public opinion is a very respectful endeavor in my opinion so we can put notion to notion and see where the public ultimately stands.
I've personally had enough of shlock programming. Yeah, I could refuse to watch it, and I do. But that's not really the point to me--use our public airwaves for investigative reporting on the conduct of the UN.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann
"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
|