* Idea : New Legislation to Govern Media Accuracy *

[rpgamerd00d]

(Note: I realize the difficulty of passing anything like this under RepubliCON control, so don't bother with those replies to this post as they add nothing to the discussion. Thanks.)

My idea:
- New legislation making it a felony for any national news media organization personnell to willfully lie, in any media type (print, electronic, radio, TV).

Basically, make it the same as lying under oath.

I realize the difficulties of this.

1) How do you tell a lie vs. an "error" (note "error" in quotes)?
2) Who investigates?
3) How do you prosecute?
4) Constitutional Issues (Free Speech vs Propaganda)
5) Loopholes galore (Get a "guest" to lie, have a Republican politican lie on tape and show the tape, etc.)

This is a work in progress.

PLEASE, ENOUGH WITH THE FRIGGING NAYSAYING ON THIS BOARD. Help make this idea into one that can work rather than just be negative and shoot it down. Yes, making this work would take a crapload of effort. What, are you some kind of pansy?

:D

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Gee that is a terrible idea.

See your problem #4.

A better idea is to reinstate the ownership regulations that prevented broadcast media conglomerates from monopoly control of entire regions of the country and to re-introduce fairness regulations back into broadcast license requirements.

[rpgamerd00d]

2. Ok, whats all that mean? Can you explain?

[Warren Stupidity]

6. ugh replied in the wrong place. See reply #5

[Warren Stupidity]

5. which one?

There are rules that have been watered down that used to severely limit the nnumber of stations any 'entity' could own, and prevented horizontal media monopolies in metropolitan regions.

Here is a good link on that: http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/mediatimeline.html

It also covers the abolition of the fairness doctrine.

Basically the deregulation of broadcast media parallels the rise of the rightwing propaganda machine culminating in the current Faux/Pravda situation.

[rpgamerd00d]

8. OK, I like the Fairness Doctrine

With that, plus the idea of "News Labelling", making it illegal to call something news unless certain, strict criteria are met.

What else folks?

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Plus the re-regulation to abolish media monopolies.

Really, it is very simple, everything that was done since 1981 has to be undone. It was all a huge mistake. Our fearless Democratic leadership got snookered by the vast right wing conspiracy.

[rucky]

3. Think more like food labeling...

You couldn't dump a cup of sugar in a Diet Coke and still call it "Diet".

News is news, and to call yourself "news" you must follow a set of long-established journalistic standards.

If you don't abide by those standards, you can still be on the air and maybe reel in just as many viewers - you just can't call yourself "news".

[rpgamerd00d]

4. Thats also good, maybe several ideas in the bill, all at once

[Mythsaje]

7. Too difficult to prove

willful lying, for one.

I happen to agree with the idea of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine and repealing the Telecommunications Act that Thom Hartmann addresses.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. Exactly. Dereg was/is a disaster. eom.

[BattyDem]

13. I disagree

Very often, we see the same story in American newspapers and foreign newspapers, yet the facts are very different. If you or I can read foreign sources or Google a certain topic to get the full range of facts, so can a professional journalist. That's the litmus test. If the information is so readily available that the average person or a blogger or a DUer can uncover some, if not all, of the facts, then the so-called journalist is either incompetent or lying. Either way, they have no business "reporting" the news. Also, if a particular story (that has serious implications in America), is being covered by all the major media throughout the Western world, but is completely ignored by the American press, then "willful lying and/or suppression of the facts" would be very easy to prove. JMHO :-)

[Mythsaje]

14. I think that the laws as they did exist

would solve the problem. We don't need a whole new set of laws to do it.

[BattyDem]

15. I agree - those laws did work and I'd love to see them reinstated.

I was just making the point that "willful lying" wouldn't be all that difficult to prove with the bunch of losers who currently call themselves journalists. :-)

[Mythsaje]

16. It would quickly turn into a (pardon the expression) circle jerk

where everyone blamed everyone else...the reporters would blame the editors, the editors the reporters, and the publishers (who are probably behind it all in the first place) would play innocent.

And the lawyers would get fat and sassy.

[BattyDem]

17. LOL! You're probably right.

Liars love to create chaos in order to deflect attention from their lies. :eyes:

[hang a left]

11. Wasn't FOX sued for that very reason

and the judge ruled they didn't have to tell the truth or something like that?

[BattyDem]

12. The media would certainly object due to "Constitutional issues" ...

but I'm not sure it's a valid argument.

When something is labeled "news" and distributed to the public, it is reasonable to believe that it is as accurate and truthful as possible. That's the whole point of news - to inform. What the media is currently doing is disseminating propaganda and labeling it "news" in order to get the masses to behave a certain way. I believe that's already a crime under current law ... but there's no way it's going to be enforced at the moment. The news media should be held accountable because they are intentionally distributing inaccurate information in order to manipulate public opinion concerning elections, war, political positions, etc. and mind control is not their "Constitutional right".

We need to break up the media monopolies. We need to bring back the Fairness Doctrine so that the public gets BALANCED information concerning all topics, especially those of a political, social or cultural nature. If something is labeled as news, it should be legally required to be factual and error free. I'm not talking about prosecuting people for making honest mistakes, I'm talking about intentional misrepresentation of the facts (spin) in order to advance a certain agenda. If a story or a broadcast is nothing but opinion, it should be clearly labeled as such. No more talking heads taking up air-time on the cable news stations 24/7, acting as if their personal OPINIONS are FACTS.

I'm not a lawyer, but I honestly don't understand why that would be a violation of Free Speech. After all, all news media would be held to the same standard and no one would be preventing them from saying whatever it is they wanted to say - but the content would have to be clearly identified as opinion (spin) or news (fact). All television broadcasts currently label their content so the viewers know what they're getting (TV-Y, TV-14, TV-MA, etc.). All motion pictures and video games have ratings as well. So why shouldn't something as important as news be required to identify its contents? After all, an informed populace is the only way a democracy can survive ... and thrive.

[rpgamerd00d]

18. Good point