3rdnlng Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/02/20/watch-judge-napolitano-takes-radical-fcc-plan-monitor-media-fox-and-friends In a move that is raising First Amendment concerns, the Obama administrationis looking to send the FCC into news organizations to investigate how the media chooses stories. Judge Andrew Napolitano was fired up this morning on Fox and Friends, explaining to Elisabeth, Brian and Steve why the American people need to be aware of this plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Obama using a federal agency to intimidate opposition to his useless administration? I just don't believe it. This would be an unprecedented abuse of executive authority that we all know Mr. Obama is simply not capable of! Edited February 20, 2014 by Koko78 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Sounds more and more like Atlas Shrugged every day. Incredible leftist aggression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 For those who don't like the "Fox" source, here is an article written by an FCC commisioner Ajit Pai in the Wall Streeet Journal: News organizations often disagree about what Americans need to know. MSNBC, for example, apparently believes that traffic in Fort Lee, N.J., is the crisis of our time. Fox News, on the other hand, chooses to cover the September 2012 attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi more heavily than other networks. The American people, for their part, disagree about what they want to watch. But everyone should agree on this: The government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories. Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission, where I am a commissioner, does not agree. Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring. 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. The proper answer to questions from the federal government, to the media, such as “how are you serving underserved populations?” and “tell us the editorial process by which you decide to cover important issues like the environment and economic opportunities” is the same answer employers should give when asked to sign illegal certifications on their tax forms. It rhymes with “muck you” and begins with an “f.” If you’re still in the dark, ask mommy. But once you give the government power of inquiry over media editorial decisions, and power to coerce statements or behavior from employers regarding their hiring numbers, you’ve given up the game. Liberty is a joke. Which is why it’s increasingly frustrating to write a blog. The administration does crazier and crazier things, and nobody seems to care except a small handful of people. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Gestapo? Secret police? Thought police? State approved media Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Wow. Just wow Democrats? Chime in. Liberals?. Chime in. The Patriot Act was bad. But NSA and such is OK. Is this OK or bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 How is anyone surprised by this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 At least Obama was honest when he said he wanted to fundamentally transform America..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 A free press has always been considered like the 4th branch of government. Obama has already usurped Congress' role and has become the lawmaker. He ignores Supreme Court decisions. Could taking over the last of the media that doesn't already suck on him be the precursor to his third term? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Democrats? Chime in. Liberals?. Chime in. - insert the sound of crickets chirping - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Hugo Chavez would be so proud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Hugo Chavez would be so proud. And look what has happened/happening to his country. Edited February 20, 2014 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Hugo Chavez would be so proud. The only sources I've seen for this on google is from right leaning websites. Any non-biased sources? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 The only sources I've seen for this on google is from right leaning websites. Any non-biased sources? You won't find it on NBC, ABC, CBS or any of the others not because it's made up bs, but that's the media that is already covering up for Obama. Sorta like their Benghazi coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 You won't find it on NBC, ABC, CBS or any of the others not because it's made up bs, but that's the media that is already covering up for Obama. Sorta like their Benghazi coverage. That's not true. Any time the media is attacked, I saw plenty of articles/commentary from both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-13-1214A1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 That's not true. Any time the media is attacked, I saw plenty of articles/commentary from both sides. How about an FCC Commissioner in the WSJ in post #4 above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 How about an FCC Commissioner in the WSJ in post #4 above? and while Commisioner Pai does give his own opinion throughout the article, the whole FCC "monitoring program" and the questions being asked are not really debatable. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 (edited) How about an FCC Commissioner in the WSJ in post #4 above? He is one of the Republican commissioners. Sounds like he wants to be another GOP hero. The FCC is going to study how the new is made and a partisan comes out screaming bloody murder? Color me surprised He was also born in Buffalo Edited February 21, 2014 by gatorman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Let's just hope POTUS doesn't unleash some of his famous "consequences." If this issue rises to critical mass, he may hold his breath, shut his eyes then go play golf followed by a fundraiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts