FCC commissioner wants to scrap Constitution

[Quantum Windbag]

I outright dare anyone to justify this one.

The decline of "real journalism" justifies federal involvement, according to Copps. "The news is suffering from a bad case of substance abuse," he said.
The Democratic commissioner pointed to Fox News' Bernie Goldberg and Bill O'Reilly as examples of the problem with today's media landscape, saying the pair has taken his own words out of context.
"What you and I are getting these days is too much opinion based on opinion and too little news based on fact," Copps said.

FCC's Copps calls on agency to address decline of 'real journalism' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

And, in case anyone actually thinks this is a good idea, just remember that the Democrats will not always be in charge, and a Republican might just appoing Glen Beck as the head of the FCC and let him deside what is fair, balanced, and passes that Public Values Test.

 

[Flagwavrusa]

I outright dare anyone to justify this one.

The decline of "real journalism" justifies federal involvement, according to Copps. "The news is suffering from a bad case of substance abuse," he said.
The Democratic commissioner pointed to Fox News' Bernie Goldberg and Bill O'Reilly as examples of the problem with today's media landscape, saying the pair has taken his own words out of context.
"What you and I are getting these days is too much opinion based on opinion and too little news based on fact," Copps said.

FCC's Copps calls on agency to address decline of 'real journalism' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

And, in case anyone actually thinks this is a good idea, just remember that the Democrats will not always be in charge, and a Republican might just appoing Glen Beck as the head of the FCC and let him deside what is fair, balanced, and passes that Public Values Test.

The Obama administration has been trying to figure out a way to get rid of right wing media ever since he was elected. I think this was a trial balloon and Copps is serious about putting the FCC in charge of who can and cannot be allowed on the air. Left Wing hacks like Obermann, Mathews, and Maddow would be sanctioned, but anyone on the right will be deemed un-newsworthy. What's after that? Controlling individual thought? The unorthodox being forced to attend reeducation training?

 

[uscitizen]

I knew from the title that this thread was bull shit.

the only truth in it is that real journalism is pretty much dead in America.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I outright dare anyone to justify this one.

The decline of "real journalism" justifies federal involvement, according to Copps. "The news is suffering from a bad case of substance abuse," he said.
The Democratic commissioner pointed to Fox News' Bernie Goldberg and Bill O'Reilly as examples of the problem with today's media landscape, saying the pair has taken his own words out of context.
"What you and I are getting these days is too much opinion based on opinion and too little news based on fact," Copps said.

FCC's Copps calls on agency to address decline of 'real journalism' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

And, in case anyone actually thinks this is a good idea, just remember that the Democrats will not always be in charge, and a Republican might just appoing Glen Beck as the head of the FCC and let him deside what is fair, balanced, and passes that Public Values Test.

They just extended the patriot act provisions for 3 more months of constitution breaking and now they want to impliment this abomination?

Seriously the constitution is there for a reason....one of those reasons being the government should never have this type of control or power over the media. We are still the USA not the old USSR here people, this would make our media's content controlled by the government.

NO NO NO


Kinda reminded me of an email I got comparing conservatives to liberals that said the following:

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
If a liberal doesn't like a talk show host he demands the show be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.

 

[Avorysuds]

I knew from the title that this thread was bull shit.

the only truth in it is that real journalism is pretty much dead in America.

I hate to agree, QW is usually pretty quality but unless you have a direct quote saying "I want to scrap (or similar) the constitution" it's putting words in someone’s mouth.

I do agree that it's sad times when people in power want to attack media (fox news in this case) but of course never mention CNN/MSNBC, NPR and so on. This country is falling apart and I'm starting to believe it might lead to civil war.

We have 2 sides in essence, one that would be happy with a King as long as that King thinks like them and then people that support the constitution and a freer society. It's really that divided, and it's sad. This is not a liberal/conservative argument either as both sides are hypocrites when it comes to the constitution. Liberals seem to be worse only because I believe they as a whole are far less educated in politics as proven by many studies. However with the birth of the Neocons, Republicans near match Liberals with support for a warfare/welfare state.

The Bush Neocons are almost the same people that would call themselves Progressive liberals. A true liberal and a true conservative are relatively the same thing as they would have to follow the rules of the constitution. This fake Pro light rail/HC/war/spend Liberal and fake conservative BS has managed to blur the lines. Today your average BS liberal VS your average BS conservative only differ on pathetic issues like Gay marriage and abortion.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If a naked breast can be banned by the FCC and fines allocated for using the F word, why shouldn't lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation be regulated by the FCC?

 

[Avorysuds]

I outright dare anyone to justify this one.

The decline of "real journalism" justifies federal involvement, according to Copps. "The news is suffering from a bad case of substance abuse," he said.
The Democratic commissioner pointed to Fox News' Bernie Goldberg and Bill O'Reilly as examples of the problem with today's media landscape, saying the pair has taken his own words out of context.
"What you and I are getting these days is too much opinion based on opinion and too little news based on fact," Copps said.

FCC's Copps calls on agency to address decline of 'real journalism' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

And, in case anyone actually thinks this is a good idea, just remember that the Democrats will not always be in charge, and a Republican might just appoing Glen Beck as the head of the FCC and let him deside what is fair, balanced, and passes that Public Values Test.

They just extended the patriot act provisions for 3 more months of constitution breaking and now they want to impliment this abomination?

Seriously the constitution is there for a reason....one of those reasons being the government should never have this type of control or power over the media. We are still the USA not the old USSR here people, this would make our media's content controlled by the government.

NO NO NO


Kinda reminded me of an email I got comparing conservatives to liberals that said the following:

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
If a liberal doesn't like a talk show host he demands the show be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.

For the most part, on the issues you used I agree... However on the bolded I believe the constitution is here to protect our equal rights as citizens and this does not mean a man and a woman can get married but a woman and a woman can't. It's that simple and there is literally not debate unless a person is a bigot /hater of the constitution. There is not "if we let a man/man get married what’s next, a man getting married to a hoarse?" The constitution does not recognize a hoarse, nor can a hoarse consent or say no to marriage thus no debate.

Just pointing that out.

I'm conservative, very strong conservative yet I'm not religious so I don't struggle with false interpolations of the constitution to benefit my own religious beliefs.

 

[BlindBoo]

"Wolf", "wolf" the boy cried......

 

[PoliticalChic]

If a naked breast can be banned by the FCC and fines allocated for using the F word, why shouldn't lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation be regulated by the FCC?

Great...

now, would you agree that little ol' me would be the very best arbiter of " lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation."

Just sign right here, on the dotted line..........

 

[uscitizen]

Outstanding projection jobs in this thread.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

 

[Finnguy]

The FCC is just a bunch of conservatives anyway. Heaven forbid you say something inappropriate on air. They've been trying to get Howard Stern for years. You go to Europe and there is topless women on TV at noon and you don't even want to know whats on at night. Here you can't even see forearm at noon and at midnight your allowed to wear a t-shirt.

 

[Avorysuds]

If a naked breast can be banned by the FCC and fines allocated for using the F word, why shouldn't lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation be regulated by the FCC?

Yikes, the end really is near... We are travelling back in time, I wonder who the new King will be.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I outright dare anyone to justify this one.

The decline of "real journalism" justifies federal involvement, according to Copps. "The news is suffering from a bad case of substance abuse," he said.
The Democratic commissioner pointed to Fox News' Bernie Goldberg and Bill O'Reilly as examples of the problem with today's media landscape, saying the pair has taken his own words out of context.
"What you and I are getting these days is too much opinion based on opinion and too little news based on fact," Copps said.

FCC's Copps calls on agency to address decline of 'real journalism' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

And, in case anyone actually thinks this is a good idea, just remember that the Democrats will not always be in charge, and a Republican might just appoing Glen Beck as the head of the FCC and let him deside what is fair, balanced, and passes that Public Values Test.

QW, hope you don't mind if I widen your target, here....

There are too many folks who can's see the forest for the trees.

"“Net neutrality” rules must be implemented while the government should quintuple federal funding for public and community broadcasting, argued Ben Scott, the State Department’s recently appointed policy adviser for innovation.

Scott was writing last year in a radical magazine in an article co-authored by Robert W. McChesney (left), an avowed Marxist activist who has called for the dismantlement, “brick-by-brick,” of the U.S. capitalist system, with America being rebuilt as a socialist society. McChesney is the founder of the George Soros-funded Free Press, which petitions for more government control of the Internet and news media.

Scott and McChesney also recommended the U.S. impose ownership limits on local radio, TV, and cable channels while pushing for more control of the media by the FCC.The duo were writing in the January/February 2009 edition of Tikkun Magazine, run by avowed Marxist Michael Lerner. Lerner has been accused of using the magazine to justify Palestinian terror and has written articles in which he suggested the 9/11 attacks were a response to U.S. policies.

“Whatever issue tops your list of priorities, real progress will be impossible unless we first change our media system,” wrote Scott and McChesney. “Currently, access to communications and control over media content are vested in the hands of corporate titans.”

The two recommended the following policy implementations:
* At a minimum, quintuple the federal funding for public and community broadcasting, to at least $3 billion annually...


* Establish “Network Neutrality” rules that guarantee free speech and a free market on the Internet by prohibiting discrimination, manipulation, and interference by network owners like Comcast or AT&T.

* Authorize the license of more noncommercial, low-power FM radio stations in communities nationwide.

* Open antitrust investigations into vertically integrated media companies that control production and distribution through anti-competitive practices.

Just last week, FCC Commissioners voted 3-2 to approve controversial “net neutrality” rules, with the content of those rules, about 100 pages, still being rolled out.

This past May, Scott was named a policy adviser for innovation at the State Department. He previously served as director of McChesney’s Free Press.

In February 2009, McChesney wrote in a column, “In the end, there is no real answer but

The board of Free Press has included a slew of radicals, such as Obama’s former “green jobs” czar Van Jones, who resigned after it was exposed he founded a communist organization.

Now the group is pushing a new organization, StopBigMedia.com, that advocates the downfall of “big media” and the creation of new media to “promote local ownership, amplify minority voices, support quality journalism, and bring local artists, voices and viewpoints to the airwaves.”

Free Press has ties to other members of the Obama administration.
Obama’s “Internet czar,” Susan P. Crawford, spoke at a Free Press’s May 14, 2009, “Changing Media” summit in Washington, D.C.

Crawford’s pet project, OneWebNow, lists as “participating organizations” Free Press and the controversial Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. Crawford and Kevin Werbach, who co-directed the Obama transition team’s Federal Communications Commission Review team, are advisory board members at Public Knowledge, a George Soros-funded public interest group.

A Public Knowledge advisory board member is Timothy Wu, who is also chairman of the board for Free Press.

Like Public Knowledge, Free Press also has received funds from Soros’ Open Society Institute. "

Klein: Look who wants to quintuple funding for government media. State adviser, Marxist also want more FCC control of airwaves « RBO

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

To hear an appointed Goverment Official say this is scary:

"The commission can act now. It should have acted on the media before now. I am disappointed that it has not," he said.

The decline of "real journalism" justifies federal involvement, according to Copps. "The news is suffering from a bad case of substance abuse," he said.

VERY scary.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

100% agreed.

I would NEVER want the government to shut down speech just because I might disagree with the opinions in said speech.

 

[BlindBoo]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

But is it okay for media groups who own several stations in several markets to broadcast the same political perspective 24/7? Is that really free speech in a free market place. Isn't that excluding any other political perspective? I don't want the governement outlawing anyone's speech. If they decide to regulate broadcast political content I'd like to be able to hear more than two sides(Rep/Dem) as well. The world is not black and white. There are more than two ideas, ideals and solutions to our problems.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

But is it okay for media groups who own several stations in several markets to broadcast the same political perspective 24/7? Is that really free speech in a free market place. Isn't that excluding any other political perspective? I don't want the governement outlawing anyone's speech. If they decide to regulate broadcast political content I'd like to be able to hear more than two sides(Rep/Dem) as well. The world is not black and white. There are more than two ideas, ideals and solutions to our problems.

Yes. I have the freedom to change the channel if I get sick of MSNBC's liberal bias or FOX's conservative bias.

I know many americans aren't knowledgable enough about the media and politics to know that if they only watch MSNBC they are getting a very liberal viewpoint or vise versa on other station but still that doesn't justify throwing away the first ammendment.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

But is it okay for media groups who own several stations in several markets to broadcast the same political perspective 24/7? Is that really free speech in a free market place. Isn't that excluding any other political perspective? I don't want the governement outlawing anyone's speech. If they decide to regulate broadcast political content I'd like to be able to hear more than two sides(Rep/Dem) as well. The world is not black and white. There are more than two ideas, ideals and solutions to our problems.

Yes, yes it is. There is nothing barring entrance to the markets, save lack of demand.