Originally Posted by
casual observer
That's a fair answer. I'll bet many people feel the same way about CNN that you feel about Fox.
I agree with you about objective truth. I'm not here to defend Fox or CNN. I also agree with your point about the influence of money.
My question is this: In the hypothetical in which you would be sitting there disappointed and hoping people would complain to change it, I would ask why.
Why should a paying passenger have to ensure ideological propoganda just because airport management thinks it's a good idea?
Why would we knowingly subject either half of the people that make our jobs possible to the propoganda of the other half?
I think we're too polarized lately. I feel the same way about listening to alternative positions in airports as I do on college campuses: Americans shouldn't shout down perspectives they disagree with. I think it's inappropriate to interrupt or attack speakers on campuses. If one doesn't agree with a speaker, one can boycott the event. If one doesn't like the news, one can request a different channel, or boycott a facility (airport). We have individual rights, but it doesn't seem practical (or wise) for them to include not having to hear things we don't like. This doesn't mean we can't work, peacefully, to change things.
Is this reasonable?