quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

"So now you are equating Fox News to Goebbel? Fox is far from the only game in town, there are definitely alternatives to their broadcasts, and the government isn't determining who and what each of us is forced to watch, HUGE DIFFERENCE."

Actually, another major difference is Goebbels described what he did as propaganda, whereas Fox masquerades as news.

If you're a believer in "free market" i.e. unregulated capitalism (careful on the definition of free market- may not mean what you think it does.)- you get Walmart. If you're a believer in a "free press" i.e. unregulated corporate entities- you get Fox news.

I'm not an advocate of gov't censorship and telling us what we can and can't watch. I am an advocate of making certain that there is a working free market for the press, rather than an oligopoly with an 800 lb gorilla having control of the right. A desire for a level playing field is not tantamount to a call for censorship, much as you seem to believe.


Sam

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

"Sure there are those that believe whatever they hear or read, but does that make it the job of government to police the free speech (press) of whatever outlet so that suckers aren't fooled? I think not. "

So if you buy milk that's contaminated with strontium-90- that's not the government's job to protect you? How about toys manufactured in China that claim that they have no lead in their paint but do? Why not just let people sell snake oil to cure cancer?

Capitalism breaks down if there is not a certain amount of truth in the description and pricing of goods that are bought and sold. Unregulated capitalism winds up as a South American democracy or as a medieval fiefdom with serfs in thrall to their owners. Why should Fox be allowed to use deceptive sales and marketing practices claiming that their propaganda or opinion is masquerading as fact? Shouldn't they have to play by the same rules as other companies doing business in the US?


Sam