Ed Asner Attacks Progressive LA City Council on Public Access Demise

Los Angeles CA Full Disclosure Network® presents a nine minute video news blog with Ed Asner who appears to attack the "progressive" members of the Los Angeles City Council and challenges them to stop the neglect of the public cable access television channels and to start funding the facilities here in the heart of the media world and Hollywood California. Asner, was especially critical of the City's practice of diverting the vast majority of $25 million in annual cable franchise fees, paid by the cable operators, into the city's general fund rather than supporting the public access channels, as it was intended

Ed Asner is considered one of the most prominent activist actors of his time. He has emerged as the second political powerhouse to voice concern about government actions that would destroy America's public access cable television system, joining Stanley Sheinbaum, the former UC Regent and President of the L A Police Commission who has been waging a campaign to convince the California Attorney General Edmund GO. Brown, to file for injunctive relief to stop the closing of the Time Warner Cable public access channels in Los Angeles.

Without opposition from the Mayor or the City Council of Los Angeles, Time Warner Cable has shut down public access cable channels in I.A. as of January 1, 2009. The City has failed to designate or provide for even one public access channel to fill the void, while approving a plan to retain four government controlled public cable channels.

Asner, who won seven Emmy awards for his “Lou Grant” TV series focusing on the news gathering and reporting operations, tells Full Disclosure of his concern that the “Progressive"members of the L. A. City Council have lost their way and forgotten about the importance of free expression and the public's right to public "venting" their issues of concern.

Comments to date: 58. This is page 1 of 6.


hkwnejdwg WPolCJQAdl	Posted: 07:46 am [PST] on July 08 2011
82z1Ic , [url=http://ulgbehodskdi.com/]ulgbehodskdi[/url], [link=http://cnedvtnsilsg.com/]cnedvtnsilsg[/link], http://irhivteepgbo.com/

gjqfbvvcc qQEZOCoHbl	Posted: 01:48 am [PST] on July 07 2011
rpYNjQ yeiculvrtnsz

Kaed HFeeTlZEQXQuP	Posted: 12:04 am [PST] on July 04 2011
Holy Toledo, so glad I ccliked on this site first!

Carole Moresi Kenosha, WI	Posted: 12:08 am [PST] on April 25 2011
Are there any 2011 videos on this subject?

gary leigh granada hills	Posted: 02:38 pm [PST] on November 09 2010
we all must fight to save what is left of public tv to communicate ideas. we need more not less of this peole can petition it on care2.com a petition site and their are others. it one way to add to our numbers.

Leslie Dutton Los Angeles	Posted: 06:24 pm [PST] on July 20 2010
Mr. John W Anonymous, NBC employee, I wonder how seriously people take the opinion you have stated here. This is not the only video where Full Disclosure provides a discussion of Public Access television. Your anonymous opinion does not mean much when you listen to the prominent guests who are featured here. The only reason one would suspect that you are a "shill" is the fact you have referred to any other discussions provided on this website regarding Public Access. Perhaps there is are limitations to the Internet and that communication is limited to the subject on this particular page. That being said you must not agree with what Ed Asner is saying. But instead of attacking him you attack Full Disclosure. Why do the folks at NBC want to silence us? Is it possible that you are in truth an accountant at NBC concerned with the bottom line and the "reality" shows of public access may be been a threat? It is interesting that they let you use the computers at work to launch the attack.

John W Los Angeles	Posted: 05:27 pm [PST] on July 20 2010
To Leslie Dutton – of Marina Del Rey – I work for many companies including Universal and Warner Brothers. And while I prefer NPR or PBS to the local news, if you want to argue that Public Access does a better job than the local networks, be my guest. Show for show, I doubt people will agree. As I said before (and I think we agree here) ,the fact the city has collected $30 million in taxes and hasn’t delivered what they promised is wrong. No dispute there. However, where we disagree strongly is on the issue of being taxed in the first place. You would make a great politician--- you still have yet to address my specific question. Why do you feel it’s fair for the public (cable subscribers) to be forced into supporting your show? And please understand I actually think Full Disclosure is a decent program…a bit one sided…but I give you credit. If only all Public Access shows were as thought provoking. But virtually none are. It’s usually some kids in a cheap studio talking about nothing, religious shows, the Francines of the world, or people who want to get their face out there but add little substance to the community discussion. As for the first amendment, I think it’s alive and well…doing better on the web than it ever has on Public Access. And last time I checked, the first amendment says nothing about forcing people to pay a tax on their cable bill for something they didn’t choose. And btw, since you’re investigating all your guests IPs, you may want to look at Gertrude’s …something in her tone seems oddly familiar.

Leslie Dutton Los Angeles	Posted: 02:00 pm [PST] on July 20 2010
TO: John at NBC Universal in Burbank California Regarding your posts here: Cable subscribers lost 14 public cable channels in 2009 but they got no reduction in their monthly cable bills. Yet, the city continues to collect $30 million in cable franchise fees that were intended to support the public channels. just listen to what Ed Asner is saying in the video on this page. LISTEN. This is not about ONE show this is about the PUBLIC's VOICE and the First Amendment. Corruption is rampant in the City and County of Los Angeles and the mainstream media has turned a blind eye to local corruption, instead, focusing on trivial news stories, car chases, Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan while the crooks are pilfering the public treasury. The only voices to examine local public corruption were coming from the public access shows. And subjects covering nutrition, family counseling, law enforcement, antique collections, sports programs, etc. used to offer a real down home conversation on public access. As an operative for NBC, are you suggesting that by removing the public's participation on cable, the commercial channels have filled the void with their slanted news programming, violence, incivility, anti-social dramas? Again this is not about ONE public access show it

John W Los Angeles	Posted: 01:11 pm [PST] on July 20 2010
I'm glad we've established it's not coming from a cable company as you keep assuming. Leslie, why not answer my question? Why do you feel subscribers should subsidize your show?

Leslie Dutton Los Angeles	Posted: 12:41 pm [PST] on July 20 2010
John your messages are coming from the following IP address 69.8.247.232 that is registered to NBC Universal in Burbank California. Our Website monitor shows that you have posted these messages while on our site two times today as follows: 11:32 a.m.(30 min) 1:39 p.m (31 min) WHO IN THE NBC UNIVERSAL ORGANIZATION HAS ASKED YOU TO DO THIS AND WHY?