Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:36 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: For those of you who think we aren't on the road toward total government control of our lives Back to Topics
mudtoe

Champion Author
Cincinnati

Posts:12,422
Points:1,623,165
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 12:27:32 PM

FCC wants to make 'guidelines' on what news outlets cover


Even five years ago would anyone have thought in their wildest dreams that government would be considering placing government monitors in news organizations to evaluate what they cover and make "suggestions" on what they should be covering? If you don't think that this President means what he says about fundamentally transforming the country, you are as naive as Neville Chamberlain. The mere fact that government feels confident enough in its power now to publicly acknowledge this desire should send chills down the spine of every single American, regardless of political affiliation (for those of you on the left who are inclined to agree with Obama on everything and desire big government, consider this power over the press in the hands of Richard Nixon), and regardless of whether it eventually comes to fruition "this time around".

mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 2/20/2014 12:29:03 PM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,008
Points:783,245
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 8:38:36 AM

One of the Republicans running in the Maryland primary is advocating a flat tax after gradually reforming the tax code toward it.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:71,441
Points:2,771,070
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 8:29:35 AM

sgm, we were also on the alert since 1993 that democrats in government wanted a "single-payer" health care system that would do away with insurance companies. They went halfway there sixteen years later (2009) although the implementation was put off for three more years, and now another year. But make no mistake, once a concept is hatched it is only a matter of time before the political will to implement it comes around.

We hope that happens with the FairTax. The FairTax would take away a large measure of government control from our everyday lives. That's why statists on both sides of the aisle fear it so much, and why it will be implemented by popular clamoring and activism.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:14,480
Points:2,943,315
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 1:43:33 AM

" On the other hand, if government decides it doesn't like what you are doing with your property, you are at their mercy."

HOAs are a form of government -- at the most local level. Just as one may always vote with one's feet regarding a particular subdivision, one may also move out of a village, county, state or nation if one doesn't cotton to their governments. So, the remedy which applies to disputes with one level should also be available for any other level of government.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:14,195
Points:2,046,505
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 4:22:39 PM

Allergy shot #2:

Michigan Democrat Rep. Gary Peters threatens TV station licenses over Obamacare ad
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:71,441
Points:2,771,070
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 2:22:40 PM

Shut up, they explained.
"The Democrat-Media complex works to in effect silence conservative critics rather than engage their criticisms and debate the issues. They employ a variety of programs and techniques to ensure that substantive points from the other side will either be ignored, distorted, demonized, or delegitimized. Shut up, they explained."

If you dare.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:12,422
Points:1,623,165
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2014 8:50:19 PM

kmd: "I'm all for abolishing this form of tyranny before even thinking about moving on to more distant levels of government. "


Only difference is that you have freedom of choice on whether or not you want to buy property in a neighborhood with covenants and an HOA, and if enough people refused to buy in such neighborhoods, the practice would disappear. On the other hand, if government decides it doesn't like what you are doing with your property, you are at their mercy.

County seeks Colo. couple's land through eminent domain to preserve open space


mudtoe
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:14,480
Points:2,943,315
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2014 1:44:13 AM

"who think we aren't on the road toward total government control of our lives"

That can already be seen in quite a number of HOAs -- complete tyranny at the local level. In these, your own neighbors can tell you what you can or can't do with your own property. I'm all for abolishing this form of tyranny before even thinking about moving on to more distant levels of government.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,577
Points:2,715,390
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2014 7:47:04 PM

But everyone is on the alert, now.
Profile Pic
Service66
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:25,721
Points:2,027,800
Joined:Mar 2004
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2014 11:28:22 AM


>>Wanna bet? Allergy shot #2 will be back in six months or a year with just a little bit of wordsmithing.

+1
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:17,721
Points:1,589,875
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 6:47:16 PM

Good news...the FCC has backed down...
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:12,422
Points:1,623,165
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 6:43:33 PM

sgm: "Trial balloon fail, I guess. "


Wanna bet? Allergy shot #2 will be back in six months or a year with just a little bit of wordsmithing.


mudtoe

Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,577
Points:2,715,390
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 6:33:24 PM

Not only have I read 1984 (and Animal Farm), but I have read Sinclair Lewis's Babbitt, and I can see the parallels between Babbitt and 1984. It's just easier to go with the flow, apparently.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,577
Points:2,715,390
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 6:32:10 PM

Gosh, those fascists have responded to the manufactured outrage. Whew, that was a close one. Trial balloon fail, I guess.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,008
Points:783,245
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 10:53:16 AM

You're NOT paranoid if they really ARE out to get you.
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,378
Points:802,605
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 10:09:19 AM

mudtoe,

You're good at inventing humorous little stories about totalitarian regimes. The one about the "trial balloon" and "acceptable outrage" was an especially funny parody of paranoid prophets.
Profile Pic
TuNnL
Champion Author Honolulu

Posts:1,877
Points:349,435
Joined:Apr 2005
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 9:39:22 AM

"Slowly," PopcornPirate?
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,872
Points:1,359,125
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 9:35:31 AM

YES SAVMOR
Everyone should read G Orwell's 1984
It will speak volumes as to how the Obama administration is slowly creeping towards control of all aspects of everyones life
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:12,422
Points:1,623,165
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 10:02:24 PM

johnny: "What I want to understand is why the government now wants to send its representatives into the news rooms of America."


One day in the not too distant future in the offices of a news organization that's being a pain the rectum to the current Administration:



Government Monitor: What are you all intending to cover today?


Editor: We are going to lead with the story about the President lying about watchamacallit.


Government Monitor: I don't think that would be in the public interest.


Editor: Well we do, because the public should know that the President isn't being honest.


Government Monitor: Well, there is no real proof that she wasn't being honest, and after all what does it matter anyway? We think you should really cover something else more in the public interest, like how government can help citizens to not fall prey viscous rumours attacking their President.


Editor: You are just here to monitor, not to tell us what to do.

Government Monitor: I'm here to make suggestions and to facilitate harmonious cooperation between government and the media.

Editor: What does that mean?

Government Monitor: Well, harmonious cooperation is necessary between government and the media for the good of the body of the people.

Editor: Huh? I'm not buying any of that B.S. I'm going with the story.

Government Monitor (pulling out long hollow tube from under robe and aiming it at Editor): You will be absorbed. (eerie sounds come from tube)

Editor: No!!!!!!............ (Face goes slack and eyes close for a second as eerie sounds cause reprogramming to occur) Greetings friend. Are you of the government body? I think we will run a story today about how not to fall prey to nasty rumours aimed at our President....





[Edited by: mudtoe at 2/20/2014 10:10:07 PM EST]
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:7,039
Points:979,225
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 6:51:27 PM

What I want to understand is why the government now wants to send its representatives into the news rooms of America.

Just what does the government plan to do once it has gathered the information it wants?
This isn’t just a fishing expedition. There is a plan otherwise there would be no need to place government “watchers” in the news rooms.

We can dislike FOX, The Blaze, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and any other press outlet, and we show out dislike by changing the channel.

I don’t want the government involved in how the press works or what we are told. Jay Carney has proven that the government can’t be trusted.
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,378
Points:802,605
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 5:17:10 PM


Pai apparently hopes to make a serious point about government encroachment on the First Amendment -- a serious topic -- yet he leads and concludes with broadsides at MSNBC.

Thank goodness he wasn't using space in Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal to take shots at Murdoch's Fox "News," though Pai did find room in Murdoch's paper to mock a company competing with Murdoch's Fox "News." My guess is that Murdoch is happy with the cross-promotional plug for Fox's Benghazi coverage (and shots at a Fox competitor).

What a poor way for Pai to try to weigh in on a serious subject.
Profile Pic
SAVMOR
Champion Author Idaho

Posts:6,767
Points:1,535,650
Joined:Jun 2005
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 4:52:33 PM

Go the library and check out 1984 by George Orwell. Orwellian is now a term to describe official deception, secret surveillance, and manipulation of the past by a totalitarian or authoritarian state. Orwell hoped that by writing 1984 he’d help stop such a state ever coming to pass. Read the book and remember some of the quotes from the book like these and decide for yourself.

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.”

“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

“Big Brother is Watching You.”

"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power.”“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,008
Points:783,245
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 2:56:15 PM

Why, yes, I did read the article:

"The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about "the process by which stories are selected" and how often stations cover "critical information needs," along with "perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations."

How does the FCC plan to dig up all that information? First, the agency selected eight categories of "critical information" such as the "environment" and "economic opportunities," that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their "news philosophy" and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information.

The FCC also wants to wade into office politics. One question for reporters is: "Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers that was rejected by management?" Follow-up questions ask for specifics about how editorial discretion is exercised, as well as the reasoning behind the decisions.

Participation in the Critical Information Needs study is voluntary—in theory. Unlike the opinion surveys that Americans see on a daily basis and either answer or not, as they wish, the FCC's queries may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore. They would be out of business without an FCC license, which must be renewed every eight years.

This is not the first time the agency has meddled in news coverage. Before Critical Information Needs, there was the FCC's now-defunct Fairness Doctrine, which began in 1949 and required equal time for contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues. Though the Fairness Doctrine ostensibly aimed to increase the diversity of thought on the airwaves, many stations simply chose to ignore controversial topics altogether, rather than air unwanted content that might cause listeners to change the channel.

The Fairness Doctrine was controversial and led to lawsuits throughout the 1960s and '70s that argued it infringed upon the freedom of the press. The FCC finally stopped enforcing the policy in 1987, acknowledging that it did not serve the public interest. In 2011 the agency officially took it off the books. But the demise of the Fairness Doctrine has not deterred proponents of newsroom policing, and the CIN study is a first step down the same dangerous path."

Keep in mind that this is an FCC COMMISSIONER speaking.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 2/20/2014 2:57:12 PM EST]
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,108
Points:3,318,845
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 2:35:53 PM

another step to dictatorship
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,577
Points:2,715,390
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 2:33:53 PM

"Sorry sgm4law, but this can't realistically be viewed any way but mudtoe's."

Did you even read the article?
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:71,441
Points:2,771,070
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:39:00 PM

Mud, that's why companies like this will pop up like mushrooms after a summer rain. Drive dictators crazy.

We should test the dictators' mettle in N. Korea. We should also air-drop a few hundred thousand mobile devices (batteries fully charged) so that the North Korean people can begin to use free internet to see what the real world is like and read about what is happening in their own country that they don't know about.

It is totally beyond the pale (or beyond the pail, if you're about to kick the bucket) that any branch of the U.S. Government would even breach such a notion as this, to place "monitors" in newsrooms.

"Amendment I

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."

Someone should roll up a big copy of the Bill of Rights and smack the Constitutional Professor across the snout with it. Bad dog. Bad, bad, bad dog.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,008
Points:783,245
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:37:12 PM

Sorry sgm4law, but this can't realistically be viewed any way but mudtoe's.

Just add the FCC to Obama's alphabet soup of agencies being perverted to liberal policy implementation.

FCC, IRS, EPA, ...

Or conversely, would you be just fine with President Christie doing this at CNN, MSNBC and The New York Times?

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 2/20/2014 1:38:42 PM EST]
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:12,422
Points:1,623,165
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:14:02 PM

sgm: " I don't like this "study" but you are overstating it."


You don't get it. The mere fact that government believes that they can and/or should be doing this (i.e. the study), and that they aren't concerned about making it public is what should concern you. This is round 1 of a trial balloon. It was purposefully released to see how much outrage it would cause. In another year or so, a slightly modified version will be released to see if the outrage will be less. This will be rinsed and repeated until an acceptable level of outrage is reached at which point they will try to implement it.

It's like the allergy shots that people get, the idea being to continually expose the body to increasing doses of what they are allergic to in an effort to desensitize them to the allergen. This effort is the first allergy shot in a series whose purpose is to eventually desensitize the public to the idea of government having control over the news.


mudtoe

Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,577
Points:2,715,390
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:00:35 PM

Calm down, hysteria does not become you. I don't like this "study" but you are overstating it. There is a real distinction between "making suggestions" and asking about whether someone else has "made a suggestion."

<<The FCC also wants to wade into office politics. One question for reporters is: "Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers that was rejected by management?" Follow-up questions ask for specifics about how editorial discretion is exercised, as well as the reasoning behind the decisions.>>

I'm disappointed Mr. Pai hasn't posted his opinion on his FCC.gov page, choosing instead to publish his irritation behind a paywall that not all free Americans can access.
Post a reply Back to Topics