It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth
Freedom does not offer a licence to break the law.
Unpopular speech, even lying isn't illegal.
Nowhere in the world can you say whatever you want without consequences you may not like.
The 1st Amendment guarantees that the government won't imprison you or fine you for free speech. It doesn't guarantee there won't be civil consequences.
There can also be legal ramifications for what you say.
Truly free speech does not exist anywhere on earth.
And until that does return, yeah, I'm starting to think there should be some kind of penalty for operating in a journalistic field without a shred of journalistic integrity.
a reply to: Idreamofme
Freedom of mass manipulation through lies.
More people have been prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act during the Obama-era than previous presidents combined.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: FyreByrd
I don't see the Fairness Doctorine coming back and honestly, given the volume of media and the size of the FCC and the availability of foreign news outlets thanks to the Internet, I don't think it would be practical.
That's really secondary though. The Fairness Doctorine is simply a bad idea and I say this knowing that its end facilitated the rise of right-wing broadcast media. FCC regulators shouldn't be judging how fair the news is. That's basically turning them into government censors.
What I would suggest is stronger antitrust laws focused on media organizations to reverse market consolidation coupled with some sort of incentivization to encourage growth of independent media organizations to bring about greater (healthier) diversification of media ownership.