In a series of tweets on Wednesday night, the Sinclair Broadcast Group — which owns more local television stations than any other broadcaster in the country — addressed remarks made in one of its must-run commentary segments that has sparked outrage in recent days.
In a commentary segment by former Trump campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn, which ran on hundreds of local tv news stations, Epshteyn defended the use of tear gas against migrants approaching the U.S.-Mexico border over the holiday weekend. In another segment that aired recently, Epshteyn defended an anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist.
On Twitter, Sinclair said the comments “do not reflect the views” of the company and reiterated that the segments are labeled as commentary, not news.
We'd like to take a moment and address some concerns regarding a commentary segment by @borisep that was aired on Sinclair stations this week. The opinions expressed in this segment do not reflect the views of Sinclair Broadcast Group.
— Sinclair Broadcast Group (@WeAreSinclair) November 28, 2018
When Boris’s segments are aired on our stations, they are labeled clearly as commentary. We also offer our stations reporting from the Beltway and beyond that are not partisan or bias in any way.
— Sinclair Broadcast Group (@WeAreSinclair) November 28, 2018
It’s not the first time Sinclair — whose executive chair is known to be a staunch conservative — has come under fire for its must-run segments. While the Epshteyn monologues are labeled as commentary, the broadcast company also often requires local news anchors to read controversial company-authored scripts on the air, like the fake news script that sparked outrage in the spring.
We forced every station to air right wing propaganda, but it’s not who we are…
Just a suggestion Sinclair exes. if Boris’ commentaries do not reflect your company’s views then don’t make them “must run” pieces, and then you could also air an opposing view. Wouldn’t life be more sane if you used some common sense?
Hey we only provide the megaphone, we don’t control what the idiot behind it says…wink wink…
I wonder if the House can exert any pressure on the FCC in cases like this?
WHY if this was marked a MUST RUN piece to the affiliates are they now claiming it does not reflect company views.
Sinclair should explain this anomaly