Govt will need to help shape U.S. media: Waxman

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top Democratic lawmaker predicted on Wednesday that the government will be involved in shaping the future for struggling U.S. media organizations.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, saying quality journalism was essential to U.S. democracy, said eventually government would have to help resolve the problems caused by a failing business model.

Another snipet.

"Eventually government is going to have to be responsible to help and resolve these issues," Waxman told a conference hosted by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission on the future of journalism."

Waxman's "indication that government has a role to play is both bold and soberly sensible," said Free Press Policy Director Ben Scott on the sidelines of the FTC conference.

___________


What a bunch frigin bunk of doublespeak. The hypocrisy of our so-called "democratic free market capitalism" knows no bounds.

I'm sure what the federal government will hand out liscences to future journalist, to make sure they are a credible source. B/c they love us, right.

Federal Shield Bills Offer Rival Takes On Who's A Journalist; Bloggers Could Be Left Unprotected
www.citmedialaw.org...

If I even allow myself to even briefly consider the possibility that the government hasn't already firmly established control over most, if not all major media outlets for the last 10 years, my damn head would explode.

Oh, I have such mixed thoughts here. The first being that the government already controls the media. The second being that that I can think of a few countries whose governments control the media - Cuba, China, Venezuela etc... And we all know how well that's working out!

Leave it to the Dems... er, I guess we can call them Socialists now - at least Howard Dean admits it!

reply to post by Rhetoric


I'd say it's not so much a direct control as it is vested interest: media companies being owned by corporations who, alongside their special interest groups, pull the strings.

Politics may be, in the end, just another brand to market.

If you control the ap, and reuters have you not virtually control most stories.

You control where the news is centralised, and people get it from there.

Actually, I'd have to see the whole context to figure out which side he's on in this. Henry Waxman has a fairly good record of be pro-citizen, anti-corporate, so I'd guess he would try to temper corporate demands.

It's good to remember that not every single politician is evil, or at least not evil on every subject.

Here's something to keep in mind on the subject:

"Your enemy is never a villain in his own eyes. Keep this in mind; it may offer a way to make him your friend. If not, you can kill him without hate--and quickly."

Except for the killing part, of course, unless we're speaking metaphorically. That is quote from Lazarus Long, a character of Robert A. Heinlein.

www.angelfire.com...

No surprise coming from Waxman's mouth. This govt. control is what the fairness doctrine is all about. They will not be satisfied until they have their hands in all forms of media. Hence ATS's involvement in Keep Our Web Free.org. This control is the only way that they can silence any and all opposition.

Oh... but they just want to help struggling organizations. Perhaps they should help struggling Americans first.

The real issue with me is that this will end up influencing what we can say on the internet.

There are many fronts they're trying to get control over the internet, this is just another for us to keep our eye on.

Excellent post Apache Man, thanks for reminding me I need to keep an open mind.

To Andy, yep Rueters is where I got this story.

Jibeho thanks for the site KeepOurWebFree.org

The FTC is doing everything in it's power to assimilate control over the media and the revenue flow it generates.

Considering who virtually 'owns' the FTC (Big Media) you can imagine what that means for all the small and medium sized businesses that thrive on the Internet now..., oblivion.

Before they are done the FTC will have law making authority and enforcement powers ... all brought to you by the political appointees who man the helm.

Hopefully the FCC will object, and the Justice department will reign in this notion that they are somehow mandated let alone empowered to 'shape' anything..... nah!....

This is what the politician's trade in, power for money....

Power over us, and ironically, we are compelled to pay for it.

Tax and Control. Control and Tax.

When one is afraid of chaos, what does one do?

Try to control it.

Government(TPTB, corporations, the elite, etc etc) is/are afraid of people, of chaos, so what do they do.

Tax and Control.

S&F the future is looking bright with everyone distributing information, when that stops, is when we need to worry. This is up their with the most important topics out their now. Good find OP.

Here's another article about the government control of the media, legally.

If media institutions are made tax exempt non-profit orgs., then it will be against the laws of their agreement to criticize the gov'ment just like most churches.


"Among the options being discussed: tax law changes that would allow media companies to earn tax credits or become tax-exempt entities, and copyright law changes that would force search engines and other online aggregrators to compensate media companies for the content they produce.

Also on the table is a proposed change in antitrust rules to allow newspapers to jointly negotiate payments from Web sites that use their content.

The FTC is planning more workshops in the spring to discuss in greater depth the ideas that emerge this week.

Congress has also tried to tackle questions about the future of the media business, particularly print journalism. Last spring, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., held a hearing on the financial troubles facing the newspaper industry. And Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Md., has introduced a bill that would allow newspapers to restructure as non-profits."

www.breitbart.com...