"Certifying" New Agencies.

[DiveCon]

It Says
Congress shall make no law.

What part of 'no' don't you understand?

fuck the first amendment, FNC has to go

the ends justify the means
then no one can say anything against the liberal media

 

[Dr.House]

Less daddy gumbmint regulation...

kthxbye

 

[Rozman]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

All certified news organizations would either have perference or solo access to press conferences and the like.

One could lose certification by publishing false stories without retraction within 72 hours.

This of course would in no way keep anyone from broadcasting "News". It would just insure accuracy.

Wow,more committees. More agencies,More government.Who makes the determination
as what is news,what is relevant.Who crossed the line this week and who needs to be fined...

Obviously this is anti Fox generated,How bout this? the average citizen watches Fox likes it and keeps watching...The next doesn't and then switches to the hate Fox crowd at all the other stations.

We let the people decide what stays on the air....

This has to be the craziest post I have seen from the left yet....Isn't government big enough?

 

[Baruch Menachem]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

All certified news organizations would either have perference or solo access to press conferences and the like.

One could lose certification by publishing false stories without retraction within 72 hours.

This of course would in no way keep anyone from broadcasting "News". It would just insure accuracy.

Wow,more committees. More agencies,More government.Who makes the determination
as what is news,what is relevant.Who crossed the line this week and who needs to be fined...

Obviously this is anti Fox generated,How bout this? the average citizen watches Fox likes it and keeps watching...The next doesn't and then switches to the hate Fox crowd at all the other stations.

We let the people decide what stays on the air....

This has to be the craziest post I have seen from the left yet....Isn't government big enough?

What part of 'no' don't you understand?

 

[daveman]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

All certified news organizations would either have perference or solo access to press conferences and the like.

One could lose certification by publishing false stories without retraction within 72 hours.

This of course would in no way keep anyone from broadcasting "News". It would just insure accuracy.

Wow,more committees. More agencies,More government.Who makes the determination
as what is news,what is relevant.Who crossed the line this week and who needs to be fined...

Obviously this is anti Fox generated,How bout this? the average citizen watches Fox likes it and keeps watching...The next doesn't and then switches to the hate Fox crowd at all the other stations.

We let the people decide what stays on the air....

This has to be the craziest post I have seen from the left yet....Isn't government big enough?

Are you kidding? People are committing Thoughtcrime! It MUST be stopped!

Right, USMB Leftists?

 

[Sallow]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

All certified news organizations would either have perference or solo access to press conferences and the like.

One could lose certification by publishing false stories without retraction within 72 hours.

This of course would in no way keep anyone from broadcasting "News". It would just insure accuracy.

Wow,more committees. More agencies,More government.Who makes the determination
as what is news,what is relevant.Who crossed the line this week and who needs to be fined...

Obviously this is anti Fox generated,How bout this? the average citizen watches Fox likes it and keeps watching...The next doesn't and then switches to the hate Fox crowd at all the other stations.

We let the people decide what stays on the air....

This has to be the craziest post I have seen from the left yet....Isn't government big enough?

Crazy in what way?

There are licenses to practice medicine, dispense pharmaceuticals, practice law, distribute foodstuffs, insure that sport teams are what they say there are..all sorts of things.

And..we still have Wrestling. It coexists with "real" sports.

It's dangerous for news organizations to out and out lie. Personally..I think it's a real problem. And this isn't taking away their "right" to do so. What it would be doing is adding a standard to news reporting.

 

[Ernie S.]

So we give some committee power to certify news organizations.How long would it be before there was a committee to certify political parties?

 

[DiveCon]

So we give some committee power to certify news organizations.How long would it be before there was a committee to certify political parties?

shhh Ernie, they gotta stop FNC somehow

 

[daveman]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

All certified news organizations would either have perference or solo access to press conferences and the like.

One could lose certification by publishing false stories without retraction within 72 hours.

This of course would in no way keep anyone from broadcasting "News". It would just insure accuracy.

Wow,more committees. More agencies,More government.Who makes the determination
as what is news,what is relevant.Who crossed the line this week and who needs to be fined...

Obviously this is anti Fox generated,How bout this? the average citizen watches Fox likes it and keeps watching...The next doesn't and then switches to the hate Fox crowd at all the other stations.

We let the people decide what stays on the air....

This has to be the craziest post I have seen from the left yet....Isn't government big enough?

Crazy in what way?

There are licenses to practice medicine, dispense pharmaceuticals, practice law, distribute foodstuffs, insure that sport teams are what they say there are..all sorts of things.

And..we still have Wrestling. It coexists with "real" sports.

It's dangerous for news organizations to out and out lie. Personally..I think it's a real problem. And this isn't taking away their "right" to do so. What it would be doing is adding a standard to news reporting.

You lefties are funny. You keep advocating more and bigger government as the answer to every perceived problem, real or imagined.

But you don't consider what would happen when the government is controlled by those who don't support your agenda.

So let's say your Thoughtcrime Commission is enacted, and then conservatives gain control of the government.

Buh-bye MSNBC, CBS, NYT...and you would screech about government censorship and fascism and it's not faaaaaaaair!!

 

[Sallow]

So we give some committee power to certify news organizations.How long would it be before there was a committee to certify political parties?

There sorta is..

Murkowski's name appeared on Alaska's ballot..where?

And not every party gets to participate in debates.

 

[Rozman]

So we give some committee power to certify news organizations.How long would it be before there was a committee to certify political parties?

There sorta is..

Murkowski's name appeared on Alaska's ballot..where?

And not every party gets to participate in debates.

Her name appeared as write in.....she didn't win in a Primary!
And what are you crying about ? She won....

 

[Sallow]

So we give some committee power to certify news organizations.How long would it be before there was a committee to certify political parties?

There sorta is..

Murkowski's name appeared on Alaska's ballot..where?

And not every party gets to participate in debates.

Her name appeared as write in.....she didn't win in a Primary!

Which is kind of like my idea. It's not really "binding" you can watch any news outlet you want. Just like you can vote for anyone you want..even a write in.

All it's doing is saying that a news organization follows a set of standards that give their reporting validity.

 

[Rozman]

There sorta is..

Murkowski's name appeared on Alaska's ballot..where?

And not every party gets to participate in debates.

Her name appeared as write in.....she didn't win in a Primary!

Which is kind of like my idea. It's not really "binding" you can watch any news outlet you want. Just like you can vote for anyone you want..even a write in.

All it's doing is saying that a news organization follows a set of standards that give their reporting validity.

Who sets the standards? Would you be happy if I set the standards?

 

[Sallow]

Her name appeared as write in.....she didn't win in a Primary!

Which is kind of like my idea. It's not really "binding" you can watch any news outlet you want. Just like you can vote for anyone you want..even a write in.

All it's doing is saying that a news organization follows a set of standards that give their reporting validity.

Who sets the standards? Would you be happy if I set the standards?

It would probably be set by a mixture of industry leaders, public officials, and private sector executives.

Not having the Certification wouldn't really mean all that much. You could broadcast..no changes to our current laws in the slightest.

What it would be, more then anything else, is an assurance of accuracy.

 

[JBeukema]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

As Minister of Agitprop, I must say


you're not slick

it's a tad obvious


there are more effectual and less visible means of controlling the media, fuckwit


Also, retard, it's 'ensure', not 'insure'


You're not a very good troll.

 

[Sallow]

This would probably be very controversial..but what the heck.

The Idea is to grant certification to News Organizations. This would probably be done by a panel of politicians/media industry personal and academics. There would be 2 types of certifications.

Accurate and unbiased - Refers to organizations that report news in an unbiased and accurate manner.

Accurate - Refers to organizations that report news in an accurate manner.

As Minister of Agitprop, I must say


you're not slick

it's a tad obvious


there are more effectual and less visible means of controlling the media, fuckwit


Also, retard, it's 'ensure', not 'insure'


You're not a very good troll.

Um..okay..

 

[JBeukema]

Also, what 'new agencies' were you supposed to babbling about and what does it have to do with existing news agencies?

 

[Sallow]

Also, what 'new agencies' were you supposed to babbling about and what does it have to do with existing news agencies?

Typo.

 

[JBeukema]

Also, what 'new agencies' were you supposed to babbling about and what does it have to do with existing news agencies?

Typo.

So a jackass who can't be bothered to proofread or edit his post wants to control the media in the name of accuracy?

Either you're a poor troll and you should kill yourself or you're just plain stupid and should kill yourself.


You are dismissed. You're not up to ATL or Ministry of AgitProp standards.

 

[Sallow]

Also, what 'new agencies' were you supposed to babbling about and what does it have to do with existing news agencies?

Typo.

So a jackass who can't be bothered to proofread or edit his post wants to control the media in the name of accuracy?

Either you're a poor troll and you should kill yourself or you're just plain stupid and should kill yourself.


You are dismissed. You're not up to ATL or Ministry of AgitProp standards.

Well okay then..

Wish I could open these windows and end it all..but they are sealed.

Damn the luck.