Posted on 06/07/2010 11:38:02 AM PDT by John Semmens
Michigan State Senator Bruce Patterson (R-Lansing) has introduced legislation that would empower the state government to license and regulate journalists.
Patterson claims the legislation is necessary because “an increasing fragmentation of the sources of information is confusing the average person. The legitimate media are being drowned out by an army of amateurs. The Internet has made it affordable for anyone with access to a computer to promulgate his voice. Readers don’t know who they can trust, who to believe.”
Patterson’s bill aims to reduce the difficulty of knowing who to trust by having the state license those authorized to report on the news. “I’m not necessarily saying that those without a license would be shut down,” Patterson said. “But readers have a right to know which sources have been vetted by the state. Think of it as a sort of ‘Good Housekeeping seal of approval.’”
Under the bill, unlicensed amateurs would be subject to penalties if state regulatory officials determine that they have published articles that contain significant “inaccuracies.” “Freedom of speech and the press don’t entail the right to spread lies and untruths,” Patterson contended. “The people have a right to be protected from being misled. As their elected representative I am merely trying to codify this right in the state law.”
(Excerpt) Read more at azconserv1.wordpress.com ...
Patterson and the other RINOs in the legislature are taking heat for their support of forced unionization of home care workers and they don’t like it.
Eleven....Twelve...I’m losing count.....
;-)
Unfortunately its still true.
First there was “commonsense gun control”. Now “common sense speech control”.
Because the (R) is more important than conservative principles. To MIGOP, anyway.
Well you should. Bruce Patterson does want to license journalists.
If ‘Journalists’ are licensed, then the next thing you know...prostitutes will want to be legitimized, too!!
(A little sarcasm here)
If ‘Journalists’ are licensed, then the next thing you know...prostitutes will want to be legitimized, too!!
(A little sarcasm here)
They might as well change the name of every paper to “Pravda.”
Post #23 before the < sarc > is exposed!
Not just NO but HELL NO!
The first amendment is clear on this. We are all journalists, and the government cannot have any say in who may report news freely in a free country.
This man needs to be run out of office as quickly as possible. I don’t care what party he’s in.
Oops, apparently, this is satire. Why it doesn’t say so in the title, I’ll never know. This is the kind of crap that our esteemed “leaders” desire, and as such, I took it at face value.
that’s the scary part... how close to reality it seems. i bet, given the chance, dems would jump on such and idea... if they could get it to pass
Trust me you Goose Stepping little Brown Shirt when I tell you that we are perfectly capable of figuring out who to trust and who not to trust when it comes to the Internet and the news. We most certainly don't need a bunch of scummy, Marxist politicians determining who can speak out and report on events. We already know how that scenario plays out. Now go somewhere and mind your own damned business and leave us alone!
This may be from a satire site but this has already been floated in several forms by the pols in Washington and elsewhere. It's only satire if it's not essentially true and in the works.
Your notion that something is satire only if it’d not true is in error. The purpose of satire is to ridicule bad ideas, behavior, etc.
In effect, satire exposes an unacknowledged truth.
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.