I personally don't know why they would edit anything because of time constraints.  Every time I turn to that channel there is nothing on it but colored bars.  It doesn't seem as though the programming is crammed full

If this weren't so bizare, it would actually be scary.

Quoted from Rene

I personally don't know why they would edit anything because of time constraints.  Every time I turn to that channel there is nothing on it but colored bars.  It doesn't seem as though the programming is crammed full

Doesn't $$ buy the amount of time on air??

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Time cited in SACC tape editing Full version of District 4 debate to air today ’
BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Kathleen Moore at 395-3120 or moore@dailygazette.com

   A Democrat promised to work with the Republicans while another Democrat agreed with his opponents in the few minutes that were cut from the airing of the Oct. 3 county Legislature District 4 debate.
   Videographer Zeb Schmidt, who taped the debate and cut it before it aired on SACC-TV, showed the full version to a reporter Tuesday. The Gazette requested to see it because county Legislator Joseph Suhrada, R-Rotterdam, on Monday said the station censored the tape.
   Despite Suhrada’s statement, a question on patronage jobs did air, Schmidt said. Only one question – about whether illegal immigrants should be able to get driver’s licenses — was cut.
   He said he needed to squeeze the debate into a one-hour time slot and painstakingly edited out applause and pauses, but was still four minutes short.
   So he cut out one entire question, thinking that it wouldn’t matter since the candidates seemed to agree with each other on that question.
   “I figured since they all answered equally, it could be an equal place to cut,” he said. “I was just trying to get it done. I wanted to cut it under an hour, it was the day it was going to be on, and I was over. I wasn’t going to go back and keep trimming — it was getting time-consuming. So I picked that, wrongly, to cut short.”
   The debaters were able to be heard clearly. He said inaudibility had nothing to do with the cut.
   However, one of the reasons he was editing until just before the tape ran was because of an audio problem. The moderator couldn’t be heard, so he had to decipher every question, type them up and add them to the tape.
   After the tape aired, Suhrada accused SACC-TV of censoring the debate to hide the fact that the Democrats supported the Republicans’ proposal to block illegal immigrants from getting driver’s licenses.
   He also said Schmidt might have been ordered by Democrats on the SACC board to cut out the licenses question.
   But Schmidt insisted he made the decision himself without any thought of politics.
   “I’m apolitical. I’m not a Spitzer fan,” he said. “I was just trying to get it done. I didn t think nothing of it.”
   Suhrada said he wasn’t convinced.
   “Their story conflicts. We were told Friday the original tape was unavailable. They couldn’t give us a straight story for four or five days,” he said.
   He added that he’s happy the full tape will be shown.
   “They said they would back the Republican bill. Now the public will hold them to it,” Suhrada said.
   In the uncut version, county Legislator Carolina Lazzari, R-Rotterdam, was the first to answer the question.
   She said she’d just introduced legislation that would make it illegal to issue driver’s licenses to residents who don’t have a social security number.
   “Security is the main issue,” she said, adding that the issue is particularly important for border states. Residents want to be able to use the state driver’s license instead of a passport to cross into Canada, but issuing licenses to illegal immigrants would make that unlikely. “It would not be recognized as valid ID,” Lazzari said. “It would cheapen it.” Angelo Santabarbara, R-Rotterdam, said he also opposes Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s proposal.
   “My parents are immigrants. They did it legally,” he said. “Those laws are there for a reason. They’re there to protect us … I think [the proposal] poses a major threat.”
   Robert Godlewski, D-Rotterdam, said he couldn’t think of any reason to support Spitzer’s idea.
   “I recognize the governor’s former background as attorney general so I know he’s well versed in the law,” Godlewski said, before adding that he can’t understand why Spitzer would propose such a thing.
   Legislator Anthony Jasenski, DRotterdam, said he stands with the Republicans on this issue.
   “I fail to see the merit [of Spitzer’s proposal],” he said, adding, “Working together works.”
   Godlewski and Jasenski’s comments were slightly garbled, but still audible.
   The entire, uncut debate will air today at 3:30 p.m., Thursday at 9:30 p.m. and Saturday at 9 p.m., as well as repeating it next week. The question that had been cut comes at the end.

  
  
  

Quoted from JoAnn

If this weren't so bizare, it would actually be scary.

Actually, I wouldn't look at it as bizarre.  I see it as political editing of the media.  This goes against the first amendment.  And if it's a Public Access channel, shouldn't they want the ENTIRE story to be said?  It is a channel where the public can go to give their opinions, so what is the channel doing removing people's opinions from something that is handed to them?

As for the running ads that were probably on after it, I assume that these people pay an amount per hour / day / whatever to get their sign put up on there (because I wouldn't really call them commercials).  But my bet would be that they usually use them as filler.  There wasn't another actual show or meeting that came on after it, as it was scheduled, was there?  Was there any mention that it was shortened?  I'd place my bet the answer's NO.

I wouldn't call them "commercials". They are usually PSA which there is no charge for.

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
SACC TV official urged to resign role
BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Kathleen Moore at 395-3120 or moore@dailygazette.com

   Schenectady’s public access station is run by so many Democrats that it appears biased, Republican county Legislator Joseph Suhrada said, his concern later echoed by a Republican member and a former board president.
   Suhrada called on Chris Gardner, county attorney and former Democratic committee chairman, to resign from the SACC-TV board, saying the “top political boss of the county” should not help run an independent public access station.
   “The presence of that political boss will be like a stone around SACC-TV,” he said. “SACC should be apolitical. To preserve its integrity, it needs to be apolitical.”
   Suhrada said it was bad enough that only one Republican serves on the 15-member board, while city Councilman Gary McCarthy is board president and Councilwoman Barbara Blanchard is cosecretary. But adding Gardner to the mix on Oct. 4 went too far, he said.
   “How would you feel if Karl Rove was appointed to the board of PBS?” Suhrada asked. “Would you be comfortable with this? I wouldn’t. It’s supposed to be above politics.”
   He debated the issue Monday morning on Schenectady Today, a live show broadcast on SACCTV. Defending SACC was former board president Anneke Bull, but by the end of the debate, she agreed with Suhrada.
   “If you take Chris Gardner, I know what you are saying,” she said. “I can see that. I would share that too … I certainly ask the question as well about the wisdom of the choice of Chris Gardner.”
   But, she said, she’s certain the Democrats on the board do not influence the station.
   “I would stick my hand in the fire, I would put my hand on the Bible — there was no political interference,” she said, referring to a recent editing error that was later fixed after Suhrada complained.
   McCarthy also insisted the board is nonpartisan, saying in an interview later Monday that if Democrats expect favoritism, they will be disappointed.
   “It will be apolitical,” he vowed, adding that he wanted Gardner on the board because SACC needed a free lawyer.
   “I have a hard time getting people to serve on that board. I need an attorney,” he said. “I hope Chris isn’t going to resign.”
   Gardner said he plans to stick with it. He insisted that he’s “just a poor county attorney” with no power among local Democrats, despite remaining active in local campaigns and even helping candidates oversee ballot counting in tight elections.
   He said his only goal with SACC is to help turn it into a local CSPAN.
   “That’s an apolitical agenda,” he said, adding that the lack of Republicans on the board is meaningless.
   “There’s more Democrats in the county than Republicans,” he said. “There’s a wide variety of viewpoints on the SACC board.”
   But longtime board member Cathy Lewis, who describes herself as “the only recognizable Republican” on the board, said his presence creates an unfortunate perception of bias.
   “I expressed my concern at the time the new board members were suggested, that there’s a possible conflict of interest,” she said. “I think the perception is there, that it’s entirely too political.”
   She doesn’t believe Gardner or any of the other Democrats have misused their power, but said the perception is a problem.
   Katherine Delain, who hosted the Schenectady Today debate, said Monday evening that she, too, was convinced by Suhrada’s arguments.
   “They are simply setting themselves up for trouble. This kind of accusation is going to come up again and again,” she said at Monday’s city council meeting. “In a perfect world, I’d like to see the whole board resign.”  

  
  
  

The dems are in control of everything. They are not only controlling the government, they are controlling the businesses, the media, and the  metroplex. This is not good government for any party to have this much control. It would appear to not be as dreadful as it sounds, however, this current elected government, does not even listen to the people. They are arrogant and disrespectful. They have hand picked their partner's in crime and took the ball and ran with it. With no regard to the citizens. They have manipulated the system to benefit themselves only.

Access TV should not have the government controlling the 'people's voice'. And proof of that is just watch CNN and then watch FOX. Can ya tell what party control what media outlet?

They need to be booted out and the sooner the better.

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

EDITORIALS
Political partisan ' wrong choice for public access TV board

   Was it just a coincidence, or did partisan politics influence the way an engineer from Schenectady’s public access television station edited the videotape of a recent candidate’s debate from county Legislature District 4 before airing it?
   County Legislator Joseph Suhrada, a Republican, is sure the choice was political because the question that got cut, so the telecast could be squeezed into its designated onehour time slot, had the potential to embarrass county Democrats. But the SACC employee who did the editing said he chose to cut the question that he did — concerning Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s illegal alien licensing scheme — because Democrats and Republicans gave essentially the same answers.
   We find the engineer’s explanation satisfactory, but the incident points to a larger question that’s come up at SACC — the political makeup of the board, especially the recent appointment of County Attorney (and former Democratic Party chairman) Chris Gardner.
   Suhrada is disturbed that almost all of the 15 board members are affiliated with the Democratic Party. Among them are board President Gary McCarthy, a highly partisan Democratic city council member; Democratic City Councilwoman Barbara Blanchard; and Beth Petta, wife of Democratic County Legislator Mike Petta. And, as of three weeks ago, Gardner joined the list. He may no longer be party chairman, but as a close confidant of Legislature Chairwoman Susan Savage, he still pulls a lot of the party’s — and the county’s — strings.
   Gardner’s motives for being on the board may be entirely apolitical, but the appearance is already otherwise among Republicans. And because questions about its objectivity are the last thing any media outlet — and particularly the struggling SACC — needs, Gardner should step aside gracefully at the earliest opportunity.