No I suggestion the FCC has some interest in regulating "independant
local news " sources following the model of KNSD-VoiceOfSanDiego.org model.
Im not aware of any right wing or centrist Not for prfit news orgs they all seem to be leftwing.
I didnt think the news needed to be more leftwing... there must be a point to it ?
Many of the elements of Copps's proposal suffer from the same defect of subjective values. Copps made it clear that he was discussing "quantifiable" changes in news programming - as opposed to qualitative ones, which would affect the content of coverage, not simply the amount, or the resources devoted to it. But who determines how much local coverage is enough? How "local" does coverage need to be to fall under the definition? Who decides which issues are most important to the community? Copps would say the community would decide, but who reconciles the inevitable disagreements within the community?
Some of those questions have actually been answered in previous examinations of "localism." Under prior formulations of the concept, "community advisory boards" would hold hearings to decide whether broadcast content satisfied the "needs" of the local community. Though it sounds reasonable, those boards would represent direct government control over radio and broadcast television content.
Read more:
Is FCC Commissioner Michael Copps Trying to Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine? | NewsBusters.org
These are totalitarian diktats forcing private companies to fund anti-capitalist entities who wish to see their newly conscripted benefactors ended, imposed by a rogue FCC that lords too much power over private agreements between private parties.
Read more:
Did FCC Pressure Comcast to Incorporate 'Localism' Into NBC Deal? | NewsBusters.org
Kudos to the 'Paul Revere of USMB': Mr. F!
More links folks should know about:
1. “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.
2. 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.
3. McChesney is the founder of the George Soros-funded Free Press, which petitions for more government control of the Internet and news media.
4. 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.
5. In February 2009, McChesney wrote in a column, “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.”
6. 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.
7. In May, Free Press published a study advocating the development of a “world class” government-run media system in the U.S.
8. 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 teamÂ’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 SorosÂ’ Open Society Institute.
Klein: Look who wants to quintuple funding for government media. State adviser, Marxist also want more FCC control of airwaves RBO
