What is wrong with the FCC's news monitoring

[The T]

I don't start many threads but feel free to point out an example.








Didn't think so. And this isn't my thread.
Nice try at deflection, but the fact remains, you don't start a thread with some rambling incoherency you think you heard somewhere and can't link.

But feel free to make the case for that too.

Just one?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/329216-the-reason-for-the-season.html

The fact remains, this thread was a response to another thread, and is intended as a defense of the FCC, yet you attacked it because you were scared that someone might have a legitimate argument against the government taking control of something.

Do you actually practice at being an imbecile, or does it come naturally?

That thread isn't a news story at all. Plus, it's got two videos in the OP as background.

Obviously you were wrong. Again.

And how in the blue fuck is this thread a "response to another thread"? Where is it?
No stupid, the fact remains, you don't just start a thread with some nebulous ramblings that aren't linked to anything. That is pure bullshit.

Which kind of explains why you're here. Nice to see ya. Safe trip home now.

EXPLAIN to us why YOU'RE here son.

 

[S.J.]

The Obama presidency can be summed up in two words - Crime Spree. He has attacked the foundation of our republic from every possible angle, in every possible way, and by any means he can find. Executive orders, IRS, NSA spying, recruiting cable companies to snitch, banks, ACA to obtain medical records, FCC, TSA, FBI. I'm sure I've missed a few, as the assault has been non-stop for 5 years now.

 

[Politico]

Wow five pages for something that is not going to happen.

 

[mudwhistle]

Wow five pages for something that is not going to happen.

Well, the FCC is submitting news stations to questioning isn't all that bad. They do the same thing with conservative talk show hosts through the IRS. Questions after questions after questions.

Do you have something to hide? Huh? You can end all of this if you just give Obama a break once in awhile. Maybe even try to give him a little positive spin while he's trying to transform America.

Do that and we might leave you alone.



Now it's the FCC.

Are you broadcasting what we in the government feels is suitable programming?

That would never stifle anti-government programming. No sir. Uh-uh. No way.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I'd assume it's because 'news channels' fall under a certain category, and given how Fox and MSNBC are now little more than propaganda outlets, they might have to be reclassified.

 

[bedowin62]

I'd assume it's because 'news channels' fall under a certain category, and given how Fox and MSNBC are now little more than propaganda outlets, they might have to be reclassified.

what else are you willing to bend over for genius?



i mean really einstein; you want the government to decide what is "real" news or not?


cuz it's not like govvernments ever engage in propaganda or anything; when has THAT ever happened in the history of civilization?





idiots and hypocrites

 

[mudwhistle]

You actually want me to link to nothingness?

I'll get right on that.

This isn't my first message board; I've been in this issue before and I've repeatedly put out invitations to any poster anywhere, to cite me even one case of FD censorship. This goes back about ten years.

Know how many responses I've gotten to that challenge in ten years?


Zero.

Good luck.

They tried it back in the 80s. That was more than 10 years ago.

Prove the nobody ever got their license pulled or STFU.

I don't need to. That would be attempting to prove a negative. What do you want me to do, list the entire license histories of every broadcast outlet ever, with a note on the side saying "not censored by the Fairness Doctrine"?

Don't be absurd. If you claim such exist, then burden of proof is all yours.

As I said.... rotsa ruck on that.

To any rational person it should be clear that just because it hasn't happened before, this Administration would never do it. That's just not a valid argument. Not anymore. Obama said he's going to go around Congress, and in effect, go around the Constitution. It has become clear that he doesn't really believe in following our laws, so what makes you think this case is any kind of an exception? This Administration has given us plenty of reasons to be skeptical. It doesn't matter how much you want to insult our intelligence, we don't have any reason to trust anything Obama and his regime does.

I wonder why we always have these liberals who show up on this board who seem to know everything about what's going on, they tell us all kinds of things no average American should know, and after years of listening to them harp about how great it's going to be, it turns out that just about everything we were afraid of was true.

Greenbeard had all of these facts and he effectively countered every claim, yet now that we have found out what's in Obamacare, he doesn't have all that much to say. Mainly because the jig is up. Unfortunately it's too late for anyone to do anything about it.

 

[Mac1958]

I'd assume it's because 'news channels' fall under a certain category, and given how Fox and MSNBC are now little more than propaganda outlets, they might have to be reclassified.

I agree with your point about Fox and MSNBC, but going forward it's going to be flat-out impossible for a governing body to police the media for bias and propaganda. It just can't be done. And that doesn't even count the freakin' internet.

Rather than expecting the Feds to choose the winners and losers, the best thing to do is educate the populace to the fact that our media is simply one source of information, get them to understand that traditional journalism has (sadly) morphed into advocate journalism.

At least then people know to take this crap with grain of salt, perhaps (hopefully) it will motivate more people to get multiple sources on any given issue.

.

 

[mudwhistle]

New Obama initiative tramples First Amendment protections | WashingtonExaminer.com

The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.

The initiative, known around the agency as "the CIN Study" (pronounced "sin"), is a bit of a mystery even to insiders. "This has never been put to an FCC vote, it was just announced," says Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's five commissioners (and one of its two Republicans). "I've never had any input into the process," adds Pai, who brought the story to the public's attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.

 

[bedowin62]

Regardless of what you think of Fox News; or even the raging, angry, hypocritical, unhinged idiots at MSNBC; it boggles my mind that people think it's a good idea for people to allow the government to decide what is "real" news or not. have you no sense or notion of history?

 

[mudwhistle]

A president who was raised a communist would never try to infringe on freedom of the press. Never.

Too bad freedom of health care from government oppression wasn't written into the constitution.

 

[editec]

The ONLY think the FCC ought to be concerned about is their willingness to allow media

Monopolies​

to exist.

Who to blame?

BLAME BTH PARTIES, that's who.

 

[Unkotare]

Obama Administration?s Plan to Study Newsrooms Is Drawing Plenty of Public Opposition | TheBlaze.com

Another bullshit source/bullshit story.

How many times are you going to feel compelled to repeat that mantra now that you've dug your hole this deep?

Take off the cheerleader outfit and start thinking instead of nuthugging. You're embarrassing yourself.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

It was resently announced that the FCC would be doing investigations into the content (and reasons behind it) of news outlets.

First Amendment breach anyone?
(Anyone else scared as all #}//)

What’s ‘frightening’ is the extent of your ignorance and stupidity, and anyone else who believes this constitutes a First Amendment ‘violation.’

Yes, because the FCC is now questioning the free speech of the news organizations. That you don't see that is beyond frightening...considering your profession.

 

[HenryBHough]

Apparently it's been a long time since you were behind an RE-20. Weren't they using stone tablets back then?

RE-20?

Oh, those thing used by pajama-boy disc jockeys!

Last good American made mic was RCA's 77-DX but the 44's could put balls on even a pajama-boy jock. Too bad they'd all be snapped up by collectors before your day.

You remember it your way; I'll remember it mine.

But really, do something about that speech problem.

 

[Pogo]

Apparently it's been a long time since you were behind an RE-20. Weren't they using stone tablets back then?

RE-20?

Oh, those thing used by pajama-boy disc jockeys!

Last good American made mic was RCA's 77-DX but the 44's could put balls on even a pajama-boy jock. Too bad they'd all be snapped up by collectors before your day.

You remember it your way; I'll remember it mine.

But really, do something about that speech problem.

yup, pajama Lush Rimjob has his gold plated. Hey, it's the standard. I ween that when you were on the air the Dixie cup had just been invented. And by the time the end product gets to the listener's ear you might as well have used an SM-57 anyway.

What speech problem is this then? Proximity effect? Are my words too booming and profound for you? Want me to roll off the bass?

 

[williepete]

Echoes of the IRS in the FCC Snooping Scandal

By David French

The IRS targeting scandal is of course multi-faceted, but one of its key elements was the use of comprehensive IRS questionnaires to determine everything from tea-party donor and member lists to the actions and activities of family members and even identifying “persons or entities with which you maintain a close relationship.” In other words, the Obama administration IRS was abusing its regulatory authority to essentially discern the inner workings of an entire political and cultural movement.

Last week, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai disclosed the existence of the FCC’s new “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” a study that would send FCC researchers (monitors?) into newsrooms across the nation to determine, among other things, whether news organizations are meeting citizens “actual” as opposed to “perceived” information needs. As designed, the study empowers researchers to not only ask a series of questions of news staff, it also provides (in pages 10 and 11) advice for gaining access to employees even when broadcasters and their Human Resources refuse to provide confidential employee information. The Obama administration FCC is abusing its regulatory authority by attempting to discern the inner workings of American newsrooms.

And what will these FCC monitors ask when they do get access? Here’s the list of questions to station owners, managers, or HR:


• What is the news philosophy of the station?

• Who is your target audience?

• How do you define critical information that the community needs?

• How do you ensure the community gets this critical information?

• How much does community input influence news coverage decisions?

• What are the demographics of the news management staff (HR)?

• What are the demographics of the on air staff (HR)?

• What are the demographics of the news production staff (HR)?

And here’s the list of questions to on-air staff:


• What is the news philosophy of the station?

• How much news does your station air every day?

• Who decides which stories are covered?

• How much influence do you have in deciding which stories to cover?

• Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?

o If so, can you give an example?

o What was the reason given for the decision?

o Why do you disagree?

Since when is a station’s “philosophy” or its inter-office disputes any of the federal government’s business? For that matter, how is the federal government qualified to determine what a citizen “needs” to know. Are citizens not qualified to make that determination themselves?

The Obama governing philosophy combines the regulatory state with an intolerance of dissent. Taken together, this means an extreme level of government intrusion into private activity. Any entity whose business touches the federal government (and given the vast scope of the government, it touches and regulates virtually every entity) is deemed an open book for bureaucratic inquiry. The chilling effect is obvious and broadcasters decline to participate at their own risk.

I spend a lot of time in our own radio studio (at the ACLJ we have a daily radio program that broadcasts on 850 stations nationwide), and I was trying to imagine today’s broadcast with an FCC “researcher” in the studio. It’s not hard to guess what they’d think, what their report would say, and what it would recommend. We believe the public has a “critical information need” to hear about Obama-administration overreach.

I suspect his FCC disagrees.

Echoes of the IRS in the FCC Snooping Scandal | National Review Online

 

[Pogo]

The ONLY think the FCC ought to be concerned about is their willingness to allow media

Monopolies​

to exist.

Who to blame?

BLAME BTH PARTIES, that's who.

Bingo, Double Bingo, and BOOM. The mouth breathers sweat bullets about trivial shit like this; where were they when Telcom 96 was being pushed through and signed by Bullshit Clinton? Where the hell were they in 2001 when Michael Powell (walking example of both the DC revolving door and proof that talent skips a generation) answered a question about the digital divide by stating, "I think there's a Mercedes divide. I'd like to have one". Where were these voices when Powell and his ilk tried to hand over the entire airwave spectrum to corporatia and had to be overturned in court, Congress and public opinion? Missing in action, that's where. Over on the side murmuring "yes master, may I have another".

Puppets...

 

[Pogo]

I spend a lot of time in our own radio studio (at the ACLJ we have a daily radio program that broadcasts on 850 stations nationwide), and I was trying to imagine today’s broadcast with an FCC “researcher” in the studio. It’s not hard to guess what they’d think, what their report would say, and what it would recommend. We believe the public has a “critical information need” to hear about Obama-administration overreach.

I suspect his FCC disagrees.

Echoes of the IRS in the FCC Snooping Scandal | National Review Online

David French is a commentator, not a news reporter. And once again, the FCC is not part of this or any administration. It conducts studies all the time. Always has.

This entire list, and the entire survey, was posted last night. In full.

 

[Pogo]

Regardless of what you think of Fox News; or even the raging, angry, hypocritical, unhinged idiots at MSNBC; it boggles my mind that people think it's a good idea for people to allow the government to decide what is "real" news or not. have you no sense or notion of history?

It would be outrageous. If there were such a thing going on. Y'all are fueling yourselves off an OP that is linked to absolutely nothing, and you swallowed it whole without question.

There's some lesson there about gullibility. Think about it.