Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Freaking Orwellian


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Freaking Orwellian Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Freaking Orwellian - 2/21/2014 10:49:52 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		The good news, is that The FCC's nifty little project has apparently been pulled right back off the table for a serious rework, and hopefully a quiet death. The bad news is that it is getting partisan treatment. It should be seen as an intolerable trampling of the the founding principles of the United States, by any American.

The WSJ article is at the link. The study document in question is a public record.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579366903828260732



_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/21/2014 11:06:15 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		Sounds like a bit of a whiner.....

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/21/2014 11:13:07 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline 		What a joke. Every time a less-than-important federal department begins to feel neglected they come up with some ridiculous horseshit to try staying relevant and make sure their budget doesn't get cut.

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 12:29:01 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 3:17:12 AM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		Cite the authority of the FCC regarding newspapers, Ken.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:58:50 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest.


That's one oddly stated brush and I question what you mean by "serve the public interest" ... "over those airwaves." The FCC does monitor for certain speech restrictions as applicable by law. Like George Carlin once mentioned, the seven words one cannot say. One could possibly interprete your statement as to public interest as inclusive as to general content. I can assure you that my use of SSB airwaves has zero public interest, but that those allocated airwaves are available is what I see as serving the public interest.

So, DK, I'm not sure just what you mean. I seriously doubt many here think FoxNews serves any public interest, if you catch my drift.




< Message edited by Yachtie -- 2/22/2014 5:04:15 AM >

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:02:28 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Cite the authority of the FCC regarding newspapers, Ken.



That's ridiculous. Newspapers are wholly different from limited spectrum airwaves.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:12:03 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Cite the authority of the FCC regarding newspapers, Ken.

It wasn't about newspapers. It is about TV and radio news. You might want to read the article you cited.

< Message edited by DomKen -- 2/22/2014 5:16:06 AM >

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:15:46 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest.


That's one oddly stated brush and I question what you mean by "serve the public interest" ... "over those airwaves." The FCC does monitor for certain speech restrictions as applicable by law. Like George Carlin once mentioned, the seven words one cannot say. One could possibly interprete your statement as to public interest as inclusive as to general content. I can assure you that my use of SSB airwaves has zero public interest, but that those allocated airwaves are available is what I see as serving the public interest.

So, DK, I'm not sure just what you mean. I seriously doubt many here think FoxNews serves any public interest, if you catch my drift.

Your use of SSB is as a hobbyist which is the public interest it serves. FNC is not broadcast and so does not come under the FCC in the same way.

And that language is straight from the law and the licensing of the stations BTW.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:25:06 AM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

It wasn't about newspapers. It is about TV and radio news. You might want to read the article you cited.



Read it yourself, Ken - the study document is easy public record.


_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:26:19 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest.


That's one oddly stated brush and I question what you mean by "serve the public interest" ... "over those airwaves." The FCC does monitor for certain speech restrictions as applicable by law. Like George Carlin once mentioned, the seven words one cannot say. One could possibly interprete your statement as to public interest as inclusive as to general content. I can assure you that my use of SSB airwaves has zero public interest, but that those allocated airwaves are available is what I see as serving the public interest.

So, DK, I'm not sure just what you mean. I seriously doubt many here think FoxNews serves any public interest, if you catch my drift.

Your use of SSB is as a hobbyist which is the public interest it serves. FNC is not broadcast and so does not come under the FCC in the same way.

And that language is straight from the law and the licensing of the stations BTW.



FNC was but a purposeful example. I'm pretty sure you understand that. Perhaps I should have said CBS, NBC, or PBS that you should then not misunderstand. The problem is here, from the OP link -

But everyone should agree on this: The government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.

Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission, where I am a commissioner, does not agree. Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs," or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.


There it is again, government looking to intrude into the marketplace.

My mentioning of SSB use was not to my hobby, but that such airwaves are allocated. That IS an FCC mandate, whether it be to my hobby use or that of CBS, NBC, or PBS. On what ground might anyone claim the FCC has any mandate to involve itself in content? That is the question which people are looking at. Now, this part of the OP is interesting -

The FCC says the study is merely an objective fact-finding mission. The results will inform a report that the FCC must submit to Congress every three years on eliminating barriers to entry for entrepreneurs and small businesses in the communications industry.


Sure. No problem with that as stated. Barriers are one thing, but I question how looking at how anyone decides on what to report has any bearing as to any barriers. How would CBS not reporting some story create any barrier to some entrepreneur?

< Message edited by Yachtie -- 2/22/2014 5:33:52 AM >

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:38:30 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Government should intrude with both feet in monopolistic marketplaces.   And so this inquiry pressures dipshits in that it makes them feel guilty?  Doubt you can make a nutsacker feel guilty, they possess no morals.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:43:51 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.


Here's the thing, Ken: What gives the FCC authority to decide what the public interest is? Wouldn't Nielsen Ratings do that? If a station has viewership, the public is interested. The greater the viewership, the greater the public interest, no?

The Market can help ferret out those stations not serving the public interest, too. The lower the viewership, the less advertising, the less likely the station will exist. And, if a station is bankrolled by a fat cat with a fat wallet, wouldn't the extra cash that would be needed to keep a station with low viewership not be a Market-based redistribution of that wealth?

Do you support Government controlling content available to the public?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 5:56:47 AM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline 		Regarding newspapers, the free market and the internet have barely left them standing except for the NYT and WSJ.

As for broadcast news, conservatives did better under the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE, but b/c they "feel better" with Fox News, there likely won't be any changes to help improve the quality of national journalism.

< Message edited by cloudboy -- 2/22/2014 6:00:02 AM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:03:06 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Here's the thing, Ken: What gives the FCC authority to decide what the public interest is?


The law.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:04:55 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Cite the authority of the FCC regarding newspapers, Ken.

It wasn't about newspapers. It is about TV and radio news. You might want to read the article you cited.



It's not really about either. It's about content and the government would love to control that.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:06:20 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.


Here's the thing, Ken: What gives the FCC authority to decide what the public interest is?

Federal law.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:21:54 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.

Here's the thing, Ken: What gives the FCC authority to decide what the public interest is?

Federal law.


So, we already have Federal Law dictating that Government can decide what we see?

So much for Freedom of Speech, eh?

< Message edited by DesideriScuri -- 2/22/2014 6:24:57 AM >

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:29:22 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		No, we dont have a federal law dictating what we can see.  And sight is different than speech.

But other than that, I think you are pretty well out of the discourse.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:36:40 AM   
lovmuffin


Posts: 3759
Joined: 9/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

No, we dont have a federal law dictating what we can see.  And sight is different than speech.

But other than that, I think you are pretty well out of the discourse.


So freedom of the press doesn't count ?

_____________________________

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Unknown

"Long hair, short hair—what's the difference once the head's blowed off." - Farmer Yassir

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Freaking Orwellian Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078