Dismantling Constitutional Freedom of the Press part 1

[PoliticalChic]

In discussing what more the Left could, or wished to do, the discussion turned to the internet, and the curtailing of information. That is their fondest wish.

Most folks don't understand the web of Leftists involved....but with the current President revealed to be a liar and a power hungry megalomaniac, now is the time to learn what is going on, and the direction of his power-grab.





1. The Left understands the importance of control of the avenues of information dissemination. And, the protocol is usually the same....they are doing it for our good...or for the good of the children:

"PARIS — Leaders of the Group of 8 industrialized countries are set to issue a provocative call for stronger Internet regulation, ... The G-8 leaders will urge the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy,..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/technology/25tech.html?_r=0


Regulate? Exactly what does that mean?




2. A peek inside the juggernaught begins with "Free Press," founded by Robert McChesney, and on his board sat Marxist Van Jones, former ‘Green Jobs Czar’ for Obama. Insight into Free Press, and the Center for American Progress can be seen in “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,” co-authored by Mark Lloyd. The following from their policy report:

a. “…more than 90 percent of Americans ages 12 or older listen to radio each week, “a higher penetration than television, magazines, newspapers, or the Internet.”… Americans listened on average to 19 hours of radio per week in 2006…conservative talk radio undeniably dominates the format…91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.

b. The two most frequently cited reasons are the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and simple consumer demand….Ownership diversity is perhaps the single most important variable contributing to the structural imbalance based on the data."
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf

3. “This slanted paper whines that AM talk radio is dominated by conservative views and suggests that liberal views should be forced upon the talk radio industry. That left-wing idea, of course, is bad enough, but the group that Lloyd was working with to have the paper published shows ties to left-wingers, out right Marxists and other haters of this country and that connection should have disqualified Lloyd for service in the federal government."
A New New Deal under Obama? :: Monthly Review)


They reveal why they fear AM radio.....and the usual attempt to shut down opposing ideas.





4. Free Press is the brainchild of Robert McChesney who wrote a column last year advising President Obama: “In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick-by-brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.”

“The FCC has put on a false front that it is honestly interested in the public’s feedback on its efforts to regulate the Internet,” said Kerpen. “Today’s revelation that it is sharing employees with a group that is dedicated to destroying our free market system is unacceptable.” ‘
FCC Official Spokeswoman Still Working for ?Free Press? « Common American Journal

5. Former head of the FCC, Julius Genachowski…classmate of Obama at Columbia, and at Harvard Law….and a top fundraiser... Genachowski’s press sec’y was Jen Howard, who was Robert McChesney’s press director at the Leftist ‘Free Press.’ Jen Howard Named Genachowski's Press Secretary | Benton Foundation

a. Tom Wheeler is the new boss at the FCC: "... friend of and former fundraiser for President Obama.... didn’t provide details about his agenda, ... enable the expansion of capabilities for Americans with disabilities; and assure diversity, localism ... mix industry sympathy and savvy with liberal tendencies,..." New FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler promises to stress competition over regulation - The Washington Post



How simple is it to see McChesney's Marxism in those words.....' Ownership diversity' as determined by government, and 'that liberal views should be forced upon the talk radio industry.'


What happens to Leftist views when open to the free market?
"Air America" happens.





Take note of the interrelationships....McChesney, Van Jones, Mark Lloyd, Julius Genachowski, Jen Howard, Tom Wheeler, Barack Obama....


The internet is our avenue to get the message of freedom and liberty out. It is our version of the Russian underground's 'Samizdat,'..." This grassroots practice to evade officially imposed censorship was fraught with danger as harsh punishments were meted out to people caught possessing or copying censored materials."

Part 2 will show the direction of Obama's FCC with respect to the internet, and what they have in mind.

 

[g5000]

"PARIS — Leaders of the Group of 8 industrialized countries are set to issue a provocative call for stronger Internet regulation, ... The G-8 leaders will urge the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy,..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/technology/25tech.html?_r=0


Regulate? Exactly what does that mean?

It just told you what it means. "...the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy".

Are you opposed to strengthening privacy rights and protecting children from online predators?

I know you were okay with Bush spying on us, so maybe not.

And copyright protection is a signature of advanced and successful economies. It would bet that particular point was aimed at China.

b. The two most frequently cited reasons are the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and simple consumer demand….Ownership diversity is perhaps the single most important variable contributing to the structural imbalance based on the data."
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf

The Fairness Doctrine was a disaster. I remember that period well.

You won't find much support for its return, even from the Left.


The existence of Fox News, MSNBC, and the universe of hack partisan media outlets can be directly attributed to the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, as can the drastic decline in objectivity and honesty in "journalism" today. You have to take the good with the bad, as so eloquently stated by Alexis de Tocqueville 180 years ago:

Tocqueville: Book 1 Chapter 11

In America there is scarcely a hamlet that has not its newspaper. It may readily be imagined that neither discipline nor unity of action can be established among so many combatants, and each one consequently fights under his own standard. All the political journals of the United States are, indeed, arrayed on the side of the administration or against it; but they attack and defend it in a thousand different ways. They cannot form those great currents of opinion which sweep away the strongest dikes. This division of the influence of the press produces other consequences scarcely less remarkable. The facility with which newspapers can be established produces a multitude of them; but as the competition prevents any considerable profit, persons of much capacity are rarely led to engage in these undertakings. Such is the number of the public prints that even if they were a source of wealth, writers of ability could not be found to direct them all. The journalists of the United States are generally in a very humble position, with a scanty education and a vulgar turn of mind. The will of the majority is the most general of laws, and it establishes certain habits to which everyone must then conform; the aggregate of these common habits is what is called the class spirit (esprit de corps) of each profession; thus there is the class spirit of the bar, of the court, etc. The class spirit of the French journalists consists in a violent but frequently an eloquent and lofty manner of discussing the great interests of the state, and the exceptions to this mode of writing are only occasional. The characteristics of the American journalist consist in an open and coarse appeal to the passions of his readers; he abandons principles to assail the characters of individuals, to track them into private life and disclose all their weaknesses and vices.

He also makes the best case against censorship at the top of that chapter I have ever read. I will post it should the need arise.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"PARIS — Leaders of the Group of 8 industrialized countries are set to issue a provocative call for stronger Internet regulation, ... The G-8 leaders will urge the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy,..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/technology/25tech.html?_r=0


Regulate? Exactly what does that mean?

It just told you what it means. "...the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy".

Are you opposed to strengthening privacy rights and protecting children from online predators?

I know you were okay with Bush spying on us, so maybe not.

And copyright protection is a signature of advanced and successful economies. It would bet that particular point was aimed at China.

b. The two most frequently cited reasons are the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and simple consumer demand….Ownership diversity is perhaps the single most important variable contributing to the structural imbalance based on the data."
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf

The Fairness Doctrine was a disaster. I remember that period well.

You won't find much support for its return, even from the Left.


The existence of Fox News, MSNBC, and the universe of hack partisan media outlets can be directly attributed to the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, as can the drastic decline in objectivity and honesty in "journalism" today. You have to take the good with the bad, as so eloquently stated by Alexis de Tocqueville 180 years ago:

Tocqueville: Book 1 Chapter 11

In America there is scarcely a hamlet that has not its newspaper. It may readily be imagined that neither discipline nor unity of action can be established among so many combatants, and each one consequently fights under his own standard. All the political journals of the United States are, indeed, arrayed on the side of the administration or against it; but they attack and defend it in a thousand different ways. They cannot form those great currents of opinion which sweep away the strongest dikes. This division of the influence of the press produces other consequences scarcely less remarkable. The facility with which newspapers can be established produces a multitude of them; but as the competition prevents any considerable profit, persons of much capacity are rarely led to engage in these undertakings. Such is the number of the public prints that even if they were a source of wealth, writers of ability could not be found to direct them all. The journalists of the United States are generally in a very humble position, with a scanty education and a vulgar turn of mind. The will of the majority is the most general of laws, and it establishes certain habits to which everyone must then conform; the aggregate of these common habits is what is called the class spirit (esprit de corps) of each profession; thus there is the class spirit of the bar, of the court, etc. The class spirit of the French journalists consists in a violent but frequently an eloquent and lofty manner of discussing the great interests of the state, and the exceptions to this mode of writing are only occasional. The characteristics of the American journalist consist in an open and coarse appeal to the passions of his readers; he abandons principles to assail the characters of individuals, to track them into private life and disclose all their weaknesses and vices.

He also makes the best case against censorship at the top of that chapter I have ever read. I will post it should the need arise.

1. " You have to take the good with the bad,..."

On the contrary.....we should be fighting the tyranny of Leftism in the schools, and the media.

And....rise up against any attempt to muzzle the free passage of information.


Be very careful when you agree to censorship under what seems like 'good intentions.'
Saint Bernard of Clairvaux explained where that leads.


2. "You won't find much support for its return [Fairness Doctrine], even from the Left.

You don't read carefully, do you.
Go back and see what the McChesney folks say about AM radio....and their wishes.





3. "It just told you what it means. "...the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy"
The Left has a history of mass murder and oppression.
Why would you ever give them the benefit of the doubt?

Read their words with an eye on their history.


Freedom, free market, free people.

I have only begun to make the case.
Stay tuned.

 

[Edgetho]

"He who tells the people what to think does not need to be King"

 

[Edgetho]

"PARIS — Leaders of the Group of 8 industrialized countries are set to issue a provocative call for stronger Internet regulation, ... The G-8 leaders will urge the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy,..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/technology/25tech.html?_r=0


Regulate? Exactly what does that mean?

It just told you what it means. "...the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy".

Are you opposed to strengthening privacy rights and protecting children from online predators?

I know you were okay with Bush spying on us, so maybe not.

And copyright protection is a signature of advanced and successful economies. It would bet that particular point was aimed at China.







The Fairness Doctrine was a disaster. I remember that period well.

You won't find much support for its return, even from the Left.


The existence of Fox News, MSNBC, and the universe of hack partisan media outlets can be directly attributed to the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, as can the drastic decline in objectivity and honesty in "journalism" today. You have to take the good with the bad, as so eloquently stated by Alexis de Tocqueville 180 years ago:

Tocqueville: Book 1 Chapter 11

In America there is scarcely a hamlet that has not its newspaper. It may readily be imagined that neither discipline nor unity of action can be established among so many combatants, and each one consequently fights under his own standard. All the political journals of the United States are, indeed, arrayed on the side of the administration or against it; but they attack and defend it in a thousand different ways. They cannot form those great currents of opinion which sweep away the strongest dikes. This division of the influence of the press produces other consequences scarcely less remarkable. The facility with which newspapers can be established produces a multitude of them; but as the competition prevents any considerable profit, persons of much capacity are rarely led to engage in these undertakings. Such is the number of the public prints that even if they were a source of wealth, writers of ability could not be found to direct them all. The journalists of the United States are generally in a very humble position, with a scanty education and a vulgar turn of mind. The will of the majority is the most general of laws, and it establishes certain habits to which everyone must then conform; the aggregate of these common habits is what is called the class spirit (esprit de corps) of each profession; thus there is the class spirit of the bar, of the court, etc. The class spirit of the French journalists consists in a violent but frequently an eloquent and lofty manner of discussing the great interests of the state, and the exceptions to this mode of writing are only occasional. The characteristics of the American journalist consist in an open and coarse appeal to the passions of his readers; he abandons principles to assail the characters of individuals, to track them into private life and disclose all their weaknesses and vices.

He also makes the best case against censorship at the top of that chapter I have ever read. I will post it should the need arise.

1. " You have to take the good with the bad,..."

On the contrary.....we should be fighting the tyranny of Leftism in the schools, and the media.

And....rise up against any attempt to muzzle the free passage of information.


Be very careful when you agree to censorship under what seems like 'good intentions.'
Saint Bernard of Clairvaux explained where that leads.


2. "You won't find much support for its return [Fairness Doctrine], even from the Left.

You don't read carefully, do you.
Go back and see what the McChesney folks say about AM radio....and their wishes.





3. "It just told you what it means. "...the adoption of measures to protect children from online predators, to strengthen privacy rights and to crack down on digital copyright piracy"
The Left has a history of mass murder and oppression.
Why would you ever give them the benefit of the doubt?

Read their words with an eye on their history.


Freedom, free market, free people.

I have only begun to make the case.
Stay tuned.

Conservatives, aka; Patriotic Americans, hate tyranny of all kinds.

dimocraps, aka; dirtbags extraordinaire, hate only Conservative tyranny but are quite accepting of leftwing tyranny.

Just a fact. An observational fact

 

[PoliticalChic]

Earlier in the thread, one poster made a weak apology....or explanation for the regulation of the internet.

If there are any others who believe that the excuses/explanations for 'regulating' the internet, consider this: the claims that they would be used to ensure privacy, or protection of the citizenry are far outweighed by the massive potential for abuse.




Should that be a concept that any need mull over....look closely as the thug tactic employed by the current Leftist administration in using the Internal Revenue Service to stultify the activity of those organizations they felt might be antithetical to their machinations.

"IRS employees were “acutely” aware in 2010 that President Obama wanted to crack down on conservative organizations and were egged into targeting tea party groups by press reports mocking the emerging movement, according to an interim report being circulated Tuesday by House investigators."
: IRS officials thought Obama wanted crackdown on tea party groups, worried about negative press - Washington Times





This is no hypothetical.....this is a proven corrupt group in control of the nation.
This President will show no restraint, no ethics, and, as shown by the IRS scandal....censorship and control of the internet would simply be a lateral movement in his behavior.



If this mob could gain control of the internet.....

....imagine MSNBC being the only cable channel.....