Posted on 06/02/2010 12:28:36 PM PDT by faq
The nation needs a strong, independent press, the FTC argues, and so they want to find ways for government to "reinvent" journalism. If that sounds vaguely Orwellian to you, the actual language in the Federal Trade Commission’s discussion-points memo should have hairs standing on the backs of necks across the nation. It shows a wildly laughable rationale for government intervention that would prop up the failing newspaper model in a manner that would put the entire industry at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy it’s supposed to keep in check.
The paper notes "experimentation" of media outlets on the Internet, a rather strange term considering that most media outlets have used the Internet for years. Major newspapers have been on line for well over a decade. After framing that as "experimentation," the FTC then argues that it won’t work. Not only that, it then offers a very strange definition of "subsidy" in order to provide cover for a government intervention:
There are reasons for concern that experimentation may not produce a robust and sustainable business model for commercial journalism. History in the United States shows that readers of the news have never paid anywhere close to the full cost of providing the news. Rather, journalism always has been subsidized to a large extent by, for example, the federal government, political parties, or advertising.Huh? Advertising isn't a subsidy for newspapers, any more than it is a subsidy for television or radio stations, magazines of all kinds, and so on. It's an exchange of services for mutual benefit.
...
This is not a document meant to salvage an independent press. It's a road map for government control over the news.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
They’ll first have to wrench the First Amendment out of my cold, dead hands.
Hey, FTC! Just what part of “Congress shall make NO LAW...” don’t you freakin’ understand?...................
When they pull my mouse from my cold, dead hand!
It is something new every damned day with this pack of duplicitous, scheming wankers.
Why don’t they look for collusion between with DNC and MSM on a number of “news items” in election years?
Foleygate, Abu Ghraib, Bush’s forged “National Guard memos”, Plamegate...
When they came for the healthcare industry......
-- The "free" press didnt say a single honest /critical word...
When they came for the oil & gas industry...
-- The "free" press didnt say a single honest /critical word...
When they went after the teaparty folks and conservative media voices...
-- The "free" press dint say a single honest /critical word...
When they came for the "free" press...
--THERE WAS NO ONE LEFT TO SPEAK UP!
You can comment here
http://public.commentworks.com/ftc/newsmediaworkshop/
The easy, unvetted election of this mysterious incompetent to the highest office in the land is proof that the Left already has a jackboot on the throat of the media. But of course that's not enough. They want more control.
"'Freedom Of The Press' belongs to those who own one."
-- A. J. Liebling, of The New Yorker
I know a great way to “reinvent” journalism.
Antitrust the big 10 MSM corporations. That’s right, break them up.
The same lefty Democrats that own the movie studios, own the newspapers and wire services, own television, own book publishing, own magazine publishing, own most entertainment ticket sales, etc. And unless they are broken up, there is no future in journalism. Heck, I’d throw less left wing Clear Channel into the mix, so that the radio monopoly would be broken up as well.
The point is that there’s no such thing as “journalism”, when there aren’t any dissenting voices. Not just politically, but working for different bosses, living in different parts of the country, belonging to different religions and ethnic groups, and with only one thing in common.
They work for a living. Which is why both PBS and NPR need to be broken up as well.
This is just the MSM print-media goin for another try at a Federal bailout...
If indeed the GOP takes back Congress this fall (a big "if" at this point), they had better be dedicated to 1) stopping Obama's agenda dead in its tracks, and 2) reversing that agenda forevermore. I know, a guy can dream...
Sigh................so what else is new? We just have to hold on for a little more time and then end this madness in the vote booth.
bookmark
True, the media did cover up the news of John Edwards’ affair to keep him politically viable in the 2008 primary and to keep Hillary in a 3 way race for votes.
To the best of my knowledge “Journalism” is the only profession that will publish a paper/article for review, but does not include footnotes - and will even go so far as to say that you should NOT know their source of information.
Until you cite - you’re just rumor-mongering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.