Journalism in this country is in parlous state, I think. It is just about impossible to find unbiased journalism anyplace. Now, in the internet age, maybe this doesn't matter; there are literally thousands of outlets spewing "news" with any slant you want to find. But maybe that is part of the problem; you are able to find a news outlet that spews the spew that suits you and you don't have to ever listen to any other viewpoint.

Nonetheless, when the government decides to step in, you'd better watch out.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...l-critics-say/

This happens a lot over here too - an official drafts up a paper to be discussed, someone leaks it to the media, media assumes that this is an inch away from being signed off. It's a way for the media to remain largely untouchable. I would recommend Flat Earth News to anyone with an interest in the media and the way it manipulates and is manipulated - it has a UK centric focus, but applies everywhere. Same as I would also recommend Bad Science by Ben Goldacre and Trick or Treatment by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst.

It's important to ask questions like "who benefits" from this failing and "who is delivering the message"? Not that government intervention into journalism is a good thing, but the media have to take a big share of the blame - if people like Glenn Beck were better regulated then we would be able to trust news outlets to provide unbiased news. Or even just news.

Very important point of order.

Glenn Beck is not a journalist; none of this SHOULD apply to him and those like him. Beck is a commentator. He explicitly does not provide the news; he interprets the news. You may like his interpretation or not. You may agree or not. But it isn't journalism and doesn't pretend to be.

The Becks of the world aren't the problem. You know who they are and what they represent. No, the problem is the Dan Rathers of the world - who claim to be impartial journalists but stealthily advance their agenda because they are nothing like impartial.

And the FTC plan apparently is focused on propping up newspapers. Which, in this era, just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Also, it is explicitly unconstitutional for the government to "regulate" journalism, and that is probably our most important single freedom in the US. The REAL danger I see in any such FTC program is that it would let the government camel get its nose into the journalistic freedom tent, and we can't have that.

It is not surprising to see this article on fox. Considering they are about the worst place for you to get any sort of REAL news these days. People should never forget how they quietly fired the hard copy journalists for actually reporting news that was truthful.

The real issue here is we need to investigate how much government organizations or party's are either owning or providing funds for to spin there view on things. Too much news is so outta context that its laffable.

You're all about to get the shock of a lifetime when all of a sudden you have no say in anything at all.

I guess most of you would probably be happier having jobs assigned to you by bureaucrats, especially if they give you some BS line like "Oh yeah, we test your DNA for position compatability!", but really you're just being directed because your masters have run out of ways to expand their institutions, and thus they must move to stage 5, The Age of the Universal Empire in which we will live, briefly, as the most repugnant, vile, and disgusting filth ever to grace this earth, and then we will be conquered by foreign invaders.

These are the times when people start building pyramids and shit.. Not because it is a good idea, but because if you didn't you'd get the whip.

UNLESS, of course, a miracle happens.

Journalism should be objective. Commentaries serve as a midrash for the beliefs of who writes/speaks them. Censorship never leaves the journalistic arena whether due to politics of the journalist or policies of governments; however, censorship and intervention should be curtailed as much as possible.
Whoever screams the loudest will cry the most. The human animal blindly yet selectively follows the self appointed alpha member.

If I am in my tower, surrounded by fences and dogs, and on an island, then I can make any statement about someone else. Once I leave that protected area, then I have to be wary of what I say. Take this into consideration. How many of them have to watch their backs?

Free speech does not give a person the right to slander another and free press does not give the right to print or speak falsehoods and half-truths.

I would say that the honest journalist should strive mightily to be objective. True objectivity is hard to achieve, but an honest journalist can get close. Witness Walter Cronkite. From listening to him report the news, you NEVER knew what he himself believed. The sole exception to this that I am aware of is when he made a public statement against the Vietnam war, and when he did that he told you it was his opinion and why he held that opinion. Walter, we miss you.

Yup. Protected by the first amendment. Go for it, but make sure you call yourself a commentator.

see my comment above

Which is why this FTC idea...not yet a plan...must never see the light of day. Yet, the fact that they're even floating it internally should raise all kinds of alarms.

Journalists in the US are well protected; they don't have to watch their backs. That leads many of them to abuse their position.

Yup.

Glenn Beck is a means to an end. The end is acquiring total control over all distributed media without having to kill anybody.

They get around the killing part by presenting logical examples of why having rights is bad.

In this particular case, you don't get the full picture.. The reason why freedom of speech is bad is apparently because the global government can send "civilians" in to positions of opposition and have him go "too far".

In this "reactionary" society, in which a problem is created, the public is given two choices as to how to handle it, and of those two choices the real choice is always selected as a "reaction".

Really, all that was done was to obtain more power over the people, but for the ones who still drink the koolaid it would seem that something good happened, though he/she is not at all sure WHAT exactly happened.

You lose your rights, and that is ALL that happens.

Real journalism is dead, maybe it died long ago, I don't know. I can't approximate the time it died.