FCC push to regulate news draws fire

[The T]

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) pushed back on Monday against a contention by a Democratic FCC commissioner that the government should create new regulations to promote diversity in news programming.

Barton was reacting to a proposal made last week by FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, who in a speech suggested that broadcasters be subject to a new "public values test" every four years.

"I hope … that you do not mean to suggest that it is the job of the federal government, through the [FCC], to determine the content that is available for Americans to consume,” Barton wrote Monday in a letter to Copps.

Copps had suggested that the test would make a broadcaster's license renewal contingent upon proof that they meet a prospective set of federal criteria.

He said outlets should be mandated to do the following: prove they have made a meaningful commitment to public affairs and news programming, prove they are committed to diversity programming (for instance, by showing that they depict women and minorities), report more to the government about which shows they plan to air, require greater disclosure about who funds political ads and devote 25 percent of their prime-time coverage to local news.

The regulations would apply to all news outlets operating on the public airwaves.

The Hill

In other words, Copps is suggesting that the government force the news organizations to push his political agenda. Kind of like Pravda in the old U.S.S.R.? The people will hear what we want them to hear? It sounds nothing less than a back door approach to reinstate the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

How news organizations conduct their programming is of absolutely no business of the federal government's. In fact, I'm still trying to find the part of the Constitution that grants the FCC the authority to even exist in the first place.

The original intent of the FCC was to regulate technical standards, and allocate the frequency spectrum so that stations operating would not interfere with one another.

This is FAR beyond the intent.

 

[shintao]

Typical socialist attitude. The people need to be told what they need. Idiots.


Now waiting for the pro socialist idiots to respond...waiting...waiting.

Hmm, I see nothing socialist about it, a clear sign you haven't a clue, imbecile. It is just more of the capitalist facist attempts to control media as little Hitler Bush gave us when in office.

I oppose the attempt myself, and would like to see about 800 television stations devoted to education and getting Americans the training and degrees they need to succeed.

 

[shintao]

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) pushed back on Monday against a contention by a Democratic FCC commissioner that the government should create new regulations to promote diversity in news programming.

Barton was reacting to a proposal made last week by FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, who in a speech suggested that broadcasters be subject to a new "public values test" every four years.

"I hope … that you do not mean to suggest that it is the job of the federal government, through the [FCC], to determine the content that is available for Americans to consume,” Barton wrote Monday in a letter to Copps.

Copps had suggested that the test would make a broadcaster's license renewal contingent upon proof that they meet a prospective set of federal criteria.

He said outlets should be mandated to do the following: prove they have made a meaningful commitment to public affairs and news programming, prove they are committed to diversity programming (for instance, by showing that they depict women and minorities), report more to the government about which shows they plan to air, require greater disclosure about who funds political ads and devote 25 percent of their prime-time coverage to local news.

The regulations would apply to all news outlets operating on the public airwaves.

The Hill

In other words, Copps is suggesting that the government force the news organizations to push his political agenda. Kind of like Pravda in the old U.S.S.R.? The people will hear what we want them to hear? It sounds nothing less than a back door approach to reinstate the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

How news organizations conduct their programming is of absolutely no business of the federal government's. In fact, I'm still trying to find the part of the Constitution that grants the FCC the authority to even exist in the first place.

The original intent of the FCC was to regulate technical standards, and allocate the frequency spectrum so that stations operating would not interfere with one another.

This is FAR beyond the intent.

I agree. Media should be free speech and unlimited, with access to all.

 

[kiwiman127]

I think they should be required to be honest with their viewers instead of claiming to be balanced while serving up propaganda.
Free speech is great but only when it's honest free speech.

 

[Revere]

Who owns "truth?" Government?

 

[Father Time]

"In other words, Copps is suggesting that the government force the news organizations to push his political agenda"

It doesn't sound like that but it does sound like a stupid and unnecessary abirdgement of free speech (like a lot of the FCC).

 

[The T]

Who owns "truth?" Government?

Nope.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I think they should be required to be honest with their viewers instead of claiming to be balanced while serving up propaganda.
Free speech is great but only when it's honest free speech.

You didn't need the government to tell you that Fox and MSNBC have biases. You figured it out on your own.

 

[Immanuel]

I for one would like to see honesty by the news organizations.
MSNBC's new slogan is "Lean Forward", "Lean Left" would certainly be more honest.
Fox News' slogan is "Fair & Balanced", it should be "Right Wing & Proud". to be more accurate and honest.

Do you really mean a politician's definition of honesty?

I mean come on! Diversity in this case means more Randi Rhodes and less Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and Sean Hannity. It doesn't mean "truth, justice and the American way."

Immie

 

[The T]

I for one would like to see honesty by the news organizations.
MSNBC's new slogan is "Lean Forward", "Lean Left" would certainly be more honest.
Fox News' slogan is "Fair & Balanced", it should be "Right Wing & Proud". to be more accurate and honest.

Do you really mean a politicians definition of honesty?

I mean come on! Diversity in this case means more Randi Rhodes and less Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and Sean Hannity. It doesn't mean "truth, justice and the American way"

Immie

What it all stems to is forcing other viewpoints on others when anyone can tune any of it out.

What's next? Is the Government going to force everyone to listen/watch things they choose not to...and then test them on it and you had better by God have the correct answer when any official asks you?

 

[Jeremy]

I already started a thread on this today.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/media/145317-fcc-push-to-regulate-news-draws-fire.html

 

[Avatar4321]

The fact that these people think that can propose this openly and be supported is a sad comment on our society.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sharpton Presses FCC to Deny Rush Limbaugh Broadcast License | The Blaze

"Appearing on MSNBC Monday evening, Rev. Al Sharpton told host Ed Schultz that he was meeting with representatives of the FCC to discuss ways to prohibit conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh’s “blatant racist tirades.” Sharpton also brags about his efforts in preventing Limbaugh from taking an ownership stake in the National Football League (NFL) last year:"

Isn't Sharpton the guy that lost a lawsuit after falsely accusing a white DA of raping Twana Bradley? Doesn''t he have a radio show? Wouldn't the FCC be required to take him off the air if he gets what he wants. or does the new law apply only to other people?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Listened to the woman and she is spot on.

You killed ACORN and you continue to fuck its corpse all the time.

You lied about what they did and killed it with lies.

Now you repete the lies to get yourself off.


Go read the racist comments on your little right wing site.

You who? Do the rules about lying only apply to people you don't like, or can we kick Sharpton off the air too?

 

[The T]

Al not so Sharpton sounds off on the FCC... (November 23, 2010)...

Seems 'Ol Al is upset he doesn't get as much play as Limbaugh or others that are more successful than he...

Therefore the power of the Imperial FED must be brought to bear to reign in such speech...of course he uses the race card, Sexist mantra...whatever...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LrtAQ94wrw&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

imho all "news" that is actually commentary or opinion needs to be clearly identified at the time to viewers. ie by a banner on the screen or something.

Why? Do you have trouble differentiating between opinions and facts?

 

[The T]

The fact that these people think that can propose this openly and be supported is a sad comment on our society.

What's even sadder are those that buy into it.

 

[Intense]

Merged Threads.

 

[The T]

Merged Threads.

Thanks

 

[JBeukema]

It's the "Fairness Act" renamed and repackaged, and being enacted by less than ethical means.

This is the liberal agenda being shoved down your throat, because according to them, you're to fucking stupid to know what to listen to. You have to be told.

It's not just libs who want this passed

It's everyone who thinks they can gain control of the machine- on both sides