You know I think we have an amendment that prevents this kind of thing. In fact I think it is the first amendment.

For this to even being to have grounding they would have to prove that each news agency gathers its own stories and they don't get stories from things like the AP, Reuters, LA times, etc.

Imagine that another Nazi judge.

Freedom of speech anyone?

Freedom of speech shall not be abridged?

Hello?

Doesn't anyone care about the constitution anymore?

The only way for them to pull this off is to shut down the internet completely...

You think raising taxes and gas prices could start a "civil war".... turn off the lifeblood of this new world (the net) and watch how fast TSHTF.

The answer is obviously it could support it's information gathering network. In fact it is News Papers Web Sites that are keeping them viable in the Internet Age and one of their biggest sources of Add Revenue as well. In addition the people who can read today's New York Times online far exceeds what the paper itself could print and distribute rapidly to far flung corners of the world where it's online version is being read by people who wouldn't be able to obtain the actual print version.

I think the real fear here is that News Papers themselves who have gone Online, I know for instance my town Miami, and the Herald does this, is that most of the stories allow you to post comments too.

Imagine here you are a hot shot reporter, years of college, lots of pats on the back for putting just the right sell news papers twist on things, spread the propoganda whose posted what you feel is a brilliant piece that will earn your editiors appreciation and right below for the whole world to see is a comment from some guy like me that just poked holes in half the story big enough to drive a truck through.

In essence a lot of the propoganda is being exposed as propoganda as fast as it's published and put on line.

CNN and FOX do the same thing on many stories allowing viewers of their websites to post comments.

Then other sites with members who are poltically interested and active like here on ATS usually pick up the story within minutes after it's hit an online News Source where it gets totally disected.

They are realizing they can't control perception anymore. That in the very same forum they are putting it out into, it is often being discredited or exposed as flawed or poorly researched on the very same forum at the very same time.

This has got to be a mounting problem for the Powers that Be and the Media Outlets that they quietly bought up in the early 1900's to control public perception.

I suspect Obama's real poll numbers are far lower than the mainstream media is purporting them to be.

Where has they put him in the 60's based by online and street support they really are probably in the 30's.

He was meant to be the Powers that Be ace in the hole who could continue to drive forward the agenda quickly without resistence and less than 6 months into it, I think they are finding out he is loosing all his capital fast, and they have a mounting problem on their hands when it comes to public awareness.

I really think right now, despite the legislation they keep passing, that 'we' our winning and not them, because each new piece in reality is being recieved in large part as one more nail in the government's coffins not the citizens.

I think we have the powers that be genuinely worried, I think we have them way behind schedule at this point, and I think they are trying to figure out what the heck if anything they can do to keep public awareness from continueing to rise on them.

I think rulings like this display that.

The "old" print media is dying and throwing a hissy fit over it. When not on ATS, my other internet hobby is running a blog dedicated to the Jacksonville Jaguars. I tried to get a press credential to cover the draft in April, just so I could get some quotes and soak up the experience. It was approved and then, for no reason, reneged. Someone I know well in the organization tells me it was because the Good Ole Boys who run the media relations at the last minute decided that it would be "bad" for bloggers to be posting live updates while their buddies in the print media wouldn't be posting their stories for hours.

Newspapers are going to tank sooner or later. The smart one's will (or already have) embraced the internet while some may still survive in print form.

A great opportunity for government to censor web news content.

Not only do they want you to read their garbage, they want you to pay for it.

ATS had better get it's own news site going soon.



[edit on 2-7-2009 by Walkswithfish]

Remember over a decade ago when the USPS was trying to charge for emails because they were losing revenue due to advance from their "snail mail".

It failed...their business model was being rendered obsolete, so they panicked just like the press is now.

I assume this will end the same way.

Another possible reason 'they' don't want us to be able to link to their content could be to de-legitimize or in effect, neuter Conspiracy Theorists. If we aren't able to provide what people regard as more 'reliable' sources, then we are basicly all talk. I don't know the numbers but I'd be willing to bet after 9-11, Conspiracy Theorists have become an explosive growth demographic and I'm sure we are a major thorn in the side to the PTB. Truth cannot be hidden, only supressed really, but anybody that's ever played "whack a mole' will begin to understand the difficulty of this burden in this new information age.

ProtoplasmicTraveler
They are realizing they can't control perception anymore.

I think that about sums it up.
The solution in their view is to regain ownership of that perception by clamping down the content, reinstalling the Main Stream Media, and pushing through regulatory measures of control in our legislature, flimsily disguised as 'anti-hate speech' bills and 'communication' acts. Arguably, it's too late for that though, we've tasted the freedom.

Ok, so now they will just post content without citing the original source, this makes perfect sense....what a joke. Don't linkbacks drive traffic to the news paper...it sounds more like to me that newspapers simply don't know how to operate.

[edit on 3-7-2009 by yellowcard]

This is -* V E R Y *- good news!!!

Let's get behind this proposal and support the DAYLIGHTS out of it!

Why? Well the mainstream would stop getting the clicks, viewers and spotlight to only fall off the cliff and into obscurity! Finally, peer to peer journalism can prevail under FREE LICENSE clauses etc.

Let's face it... The fire hose is full of 2nd hand aggregated bunk from another aggregation site, drudgereport, half the time. I'm guilty of doing it too.

GOODBYE MSM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[edit on 3-7-2009 by Atlantican]

The printing media has been hopelessly caught offguard. They're outtated format and the sooner we can rid the world of them the better. The problem however is that they're big players with lots of money and employers etc. but they have to go anyway.

If there are no more newspapers, what am I going to wrap my ornaments in, next time I move? I will miss having to wash off the black ink, the odd smell and the ability to hide from fellow passengers on public transport.

My grandchildren will be amazed and amused that I once bought and read actual real newspapers when I was younger.

I can see how the internet business model has forced a lot of traditional companies to close down or down-scale.

But when newspapers first came into existence, the local Town Crier lost his job ... such is progress. Adapt or die.