posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 01:04 PM
Originally posted by Seekerof
You are in control Jez, but that being in your own control does not come without government oversights (rules, regulations and
guidelines), as applied to the topic of Howey.
The buck (money; dollars) may stem from "us" (you, me, it, they, etc.), but the buck stops where? Certainly not the bank? The buck stops with the
government, again, as applied to the topic of Howey.
The buck should stop with us! Why should we give the government power to regulate something that we should be regulating ourselves? Why should we
call the FCC instead of the broadcasting company? It's like telling your boss about something a coworker said, so that you don't have to confront
the problem yourself.
If enough people object to something a company broadcasts, then the company (if they want to stay in business) will change it. Why do we need the FCC
to do that for us?
I watched part of the hearing before the Congressional committee yesterday morning. There was a Congresswoman (whose named, coincidently, was
McCarthy) who raised the issue of censorship of the t.v. news. She was concerned about the news that comes on in the evening, around 5 and 6 pm. She
actually stated that she thought the content of newscasts ought to be regulated so that kids wouldn't have to be witnesses to the pain and suffering
that is portrayed.
Now I agree that the news isn't always appropriate for young children, but it is up to parents to decide how much reality they want to expose them
to. It should not be censored by the government for any reason, and certainly not to "protect" us from the bad things that go on in the world
That is the most fundamental reason behind the freedom of speech even existing. The news is already manipulated to reflect the wishes of the elite.
If they soften the rough edges of truth and reality any further, it's going to be just another episode of "Friends". First they ban what some
consider profane, then they edge into controlling what is shown on the news, then what?
I don't want to seem like an alarmist, but when McCarthy brought up regulating the news, it freaked me out. I would rather error on the side of
allowing too much freedom of speech than not protecting it enough!