So the FCC chair is threatening networks that broadcast unfavorable news

He called news that said 5 US air tankers were struck during a Iranian drone attack "fake news" and threatened the various station's broadcast licenses.

This in spite of the fact the mod edit "tRump" violates the clean start policy Trump himself had already acknowledged this as factual even though he took pains to minimize the damage.

Any of you Trumplings gonna defend their first amendment rights?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Yes., news distortation will get your licence revoked.
 
Nobody is "making up news". Trump has always hated the media for telling the American people the truth about him.

It is the Constitutional duty of reporters to report the facts to the American people, not the bullshit and propaganda being put out by the dishonest lying felon you clowns elected.

The world is watching Weather, whether YOU like it or not, and it's not the MSM that's lying to them.
If the broadcast networks aren't distorting the news then they have nothing to worry about here.
 
I didn't say it was....the first amendment has nothing to do with this. THe first amendment doesn't give anyone the right to a broadcast license.

Actually, since removal of the license would be punishment for not propagating the message of the administration, such a punative action would be barred by First Amendment free speech and freedom of the press provisions.

If the administration tried to pull the FCC license of over air broadcasters, that action would be blocked - rightly so - by the courts in a hot minute.

WW
 
Last edited:
Yes, it does, as the inevitable lawsuits would reflect.
No the first amendment doesn't give anyone the right to a broadcast license.

Please provide us, with some sort of case law that supports your claim that it does....https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/367/

(a) The First Amendment is relevant to public broadcasting, but it is the right of the viewing and listening public, and not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount. Pp. 395 U. S. 386-390.


(b) The First Amendment does not protect private censorship by broadcasters who are licensed by the Government to use a scarce resource which is denied to others. Pp. 395 U. S. 390-392.


(c) The danger that licensees will eliminate coverage of controversial issues as a result of the personal attack and political editorial rules is, at best, speculative, and, in any event, the FCC has authority to guard against this danger. Pp. 395 U. S. 392-395.
 
No the first amendment doesn't give anyone the right to a broadcast license.

Please provide us, with some sort of case law that supports your claim that it does....https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/367/

(a) The First Amendment is relevant to public broadcasting, but it is the right of the viewing and listening public, and not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount. Pp. 395 U. S. 386-390.


(b) The First Amendment does not protect private censorship by broadcasters who are licensed by the Government to use a scarce resource which is denied to others. Pp. 395 U. S. 390-392.


(c) The danger that licensees will eliminate coverage of controversial issues as a result of the personal attack and political editorial rules is, at best, speculative, and, in any event, the FCC has authority to guard against this danger. Pp. 395 U. S. 392-395.
#147 said it better than I.
 
Actually, since removal of the license would be punishment for not propagating the message of the administration, it such punative action would be barred by First Amendment free speech and freedom of the press provisions.

If the administration tried to pull the FCC license of over air broadcasters, that action would be blocked - rightly so - by the courts in a hot minute.

WW
Removal would be punishment, you don't have a right to a broadcast licence, and if you distort the news you violate the law, and thus get punished.

So you of course are wrong.
 
Influencing opinions is exactly what the first amendment intended. That’s the purpose of speech in a free society.

When the influence is unbalanced it becomes propaganda. Just a few years media was censoring speech and demonizing views regarding COVID.
 
When the influence is unbalanced it becomes propaganda. Just a few years media was censoring speech and demonizing views regarding COVID.
So what you’re saying is that you want the government to enforce diversity, equity and inclusion in the media?
 
15th post
So the FCC is now the ministry of truth?
No, they are the Federal Communications Commission and been charged with enforcing the law since 1934 when they were created

 
No, they are the Federal Communications Commission and been charged with enforcing the law since 1934 when they were created

And you want them to decide what the truth is.

Who do they work for?
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom