The First Amendment guarantee of a free press should be taken more seriously. No
matter how far newspaper sales decline, the newspapers must resist the temptation to accept
"help" from the government.
Hands off the First Amendment!
"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...," but the progressives on
the Federal Communications Commission think their job is to do just that — regulate the speech of
individuals, and of the press. Speaking to the Columbia School of Journalism, FCC Commissioner Michael
Copps, spelled out his idea for a "community values test" to be applied to media outlets with every
license-renewal application.
Silencing the Opposition.
The Obama administration has been itching for a way to control the flow of information for almost a year, and
multiple approaches have been tried. But all of these approaches have run into the same snag: the
First Amendment. President Obama began by creating his own Ministry of Truth, headed up by Cass
Sunstein...
FTC to "reinvent" journalism.
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.
FTC draft study
proposes massive bailout of newspapers. The Obama FTC is attempting to commit the liberal press
to permanent, government-run life support, with the federal monolith and the state-funded press each supporting
the other in perpetuity. Let's see, raise taxes, reduce competition, expand government, drain the profit,
control the news... Music to Obama's ears.
Government Takes On Journalism's
Next Chapter. Looking for the federal government to come to the rescue of newspapers?
Don't hold your breath. The Federal Trade Commission has set out on the somewhat quixotic journey of
trying to identify ways to save journalism as we know it from possible extinction.
The federal government
can forget about funding America's newspapers. Talk about a poison pill. The last thing
the American newspaper business needs is a financial bailout by the federal government. That scenario
only spells the end of this nation's precious First Amendment freedom of the press. But today
[6/15/2010] in Washington, D.C., the Federal Trade Commission is holding a final public forum about
ways to provide financial "help" to the newspaper industry which is in the midst of seeing an end to
its traditional business model.
Please, Don't
Save Us. You know what journalism could really use more of? Government participation.
Who better, after all, than a gaggle of technocrats and political appointees to guide the industry in matters of
entrepreneurship, fairness and coverage? Thankfully, the good folks at the Federal Trade Commission are
all over it, cobbling together a report aimed at saving newspapers, called "Potential Policy Recommendation To
Support the Reinvention of Journalism." It's only the first step in a long-term plan to rescue the Fourth
Estate from itself.
Obama
vs. Freedom of the Press. [Scroll down] By now, the Obama M.O. should be clear to all.
As he has done with the banks, AIG and the car companies, he extends his left hand offering subsidies and then
proffers his right laden with regulations. Should the government follow through on [Jon] Leibowitz' ideas
and enact special subsidies and tax breaks for news organizations, it will induce a degree of journalistic
dependence on the whims of government not seen since the days when the early presidents bestowed government
advertising on favored periodicals.
Obama vs. press
freedom: Jon Leibowitz, the chairman of Obama's Federal Trade Commission, is at the epicenter
of a quiet movement to subsidize news organizations, a first step toward government control of the media. ... While
Leibowitz distanced himself from the proposals for the taxes, calling them "a terrible idea," his comments appear
to be related only to the levies proposed in the working paper. Nobody is commenting on the other part of his
proposal — a subsidy for news organizations.
'First, Do No Harm': A Plea to
the FTC. The proposal is directed at sustaining historically useful but decreasingly viable means
of one-way communication of news and other stuff to the public. Newspapers are dying. A comparison
to the industry earlier devoted to horse drawn carriages is apt. To have attempted to keep the "carriage
trade" alive by requiring automobile manufacturers and the public in general to subsidize it, directly or
indirectly, would have been foolish; now, a "Drudge Tax" is envisioned, sort of like an automobile tax to
support buggy whip manufacturers, I guess.
An obvious assault on the First Amendment: Michigan Considers Law
to License Journalists. A Michigan lawmaker wants to license reporters to ensure they're credible and
vet them for "good moral character." Senator Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate
reporters much like the state does with hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers.
Why not License Politicians Seeking Public
Office? State Senator Bruce Patterson of Michigan recently rocked the journalism trade with
a proposal that would establish a state licensing board for journalists. ... Although Patterson's legislative
proposal is not likely to become law any where soon, his reasoning and logic could give rise to another
terrific idea: Why not license politicians seeking public office?
Will journalists wake up in time to save journalism from Obama's
FTC? Journalists must understand that there is no way the First Amendment's guarantee of
freedom of the press will survive if the federal government regulates the news industry as envisioned
by the FTC. Those who accept at face value protests to the contrary or the professions of pure
intentions by advocates of government takeover of the news business are, at best, incredibly naive.
Five ways Obama may tax you to pay for the government's 'reinvention
of journalism'. Translated, "reinvention of journalism" is codespeak for "Repeal the First Amendment's
prohibition on Congress doing anything to abridge the freedom of the independent press to find and report all of the
facts about what politicians, bureaucrats and their allies in the private sector are doing, are planning on doing,
did in the past, or are thinking about doing to the rest of us and with our tax dollars.
How
not to save the news business. [Scroll down slowly] Most dangerous of all, the FTC considers
a doctrine of "proprietary facts," as if anyone should gain the right to restrict the flow of information just
as the information is opening it up. Copyright law protects the presentation of news but no one owns
facts — and if anyone did, you could be forbidden from sharing them. How does that
serve free speech?
74%
Oppose Taxing Internet News Sites To Help Newspapers. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is
considering several ways to help the struggling newspaper industry, but Americans strongly reject several
proposed taxes to keep privately-owned newspapers going. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone
survey finds that 84% oppose a three percent (3%) tax on monthly cell phone bills to help newspapers and
traditional journalism.
Freedom of the press is more important than saving struggling
newspapers. More devastating news today from Rasmussen Reports for the FTC's "Reinventing
Journalism" project, as fully 85 percent of the respondents to a national telephone survey say
protecting freedom of the press is more important than saving existing newspapers. Perhaps even more
worrisome for the FTC is the fact that only 19 percent of the respondents think it's appropriate for the
government to be involved in efforts to prop up existing newspapers, according to Rasmussen.
FTC floats Drudge tax.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking ways to "reinvent" journalism, and that's a cause for concern.
According to a May 24 draft proposal, the agency thinks government should be at the center of a media
overhaul. The bureaucracy sees it as a problem that the Internet has introduced a wealth of information
options to consumers, forcing media companies to adapt and experiment to meet changing market needs.
FTC's policy staff fears this new reality.
The Editor says...
The marketplace will force newspapers (or any other business) "to meet changing market needs."
Government intervention is unnecessary and illegal. Read the First Amendment for yourself.
FTC dodges Drudge
Tax questions. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) leaders are attempting to distance themselves from
controversial proposals published in a May 24 working paper on "reinventing" the media. The report
presents a suite of options through which government could step in and supposedly rescue journalism, most notably
by imposing taxes. A fee could be levied on websites such as the Drudge Report that link to the best news of
the day, or a tax could be imposed on consumer electronics such as iPads, laptops and Kindles.
Future of the News.
It's a frightening thought: government takeover of the media. But having tightened their grip on
health care, financial services, and energy, it's only logical that the Democrats should turn their attention
to the media. Discussions underway at the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications
Commission point toward a dangerous new effort to regulate what Americans read and hear. The takeover
under discussion would apply across the board to print media, radio and television, and the internet.
The result of proposed regulations would be nothing less than an end to free speech in America.
Will journalists wake up in time to save journalism from Obama's
FTC? Journalists must understand that there is no way the First Amendment's guarantee of
freedom of the press will survive if the federal government regulates the news industry as envisioned
by the FTC. Those who accept at face value protests to the contrary or the professions of pure
intentions by advocates of government takeover of the news business are, at best, incredibly naive.
How
not to save the news business. [Scroll down slowly] Most dangerous of all, the FTC considers
a doctrine of "proprietary facts," as if anyone should gain the right to restrict the flow of information just
as the information is opening it up. Copyright law protects the presentation of news but no one owns
facts — and if anyone did, you could be forbidden from sharing them. How does that
serve free speech?
FTC draft study
proposes massive bailout of newspapers. The Obama FTC is attempting to commit the liberal press
to permanent, government-run life support, with the federal monolith and the state-funded press each supporting
the other in perpetuity. Let's see, raise taxes, reduce competition, expand government, drain the profit,
control the news... Music to Obama's ears.
FTC to "reinvent" journalism.
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.
Abridging
Too Far. Philadelphia is charging bloggers $300 for a "privilege" license. In the city
where the Declaration of Independence was adopted and the Constitution signed, a right has become a privilege.
The scheme went virtually unreported until the Philadelphia City Paper ran a story last week noting that the
city requires privilege licenses for any business engaged in what local tax attorney Michael Mandale terms
"activity for profit."
Michigan Considers Law
to License Journalists. A Michigan lawmaker wants to license reporters to ensure they're credible and
vet them for "good moral character." Senator Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate
reporters much like the state does with hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers.
Why not License Politicians Seeking Public
Office?. State Senator Bruce Patterson of Michigan recently rocked the journalism trade with
a proposal that would establish a state licensing board for journalists. ... Although Patterson's legislative
proposal is not likely to become law any where soon, his reasoning and logic could give rise to another
terrific idea: Why not license politicians seeking public office?
