Its been announced that the FCC what to study how news stories are selected. They want to make sure the 'undeserved' are getting equal time with CIN program.
Quoting from the FCC article:
That sound good, but what is the result?
Someone, or many someones, would be taking personal notes on what people are saying. What they are doing. Who they are and if they have views in favor of opposed to the state's. That information could potentially be used to pull a station's license. Sounds MacArthur like doesn't it?
The definition of 'undeserved' changes from administration to administration. Each FCC chair and committee has their own parameters for what they think should happen in a newsroom. Its all subjective and changing, dare I say newspeak.
With cable new networks and new media coming age does it really matter? Everyone has access to a radio, internet, and newspapers now. So why concentrate so hard on a shrinking medium: over the air broadcasting? Also it makes me really nervous when I see government official intruding into private affairs.
Many of you maybe saying 'you must be a part of X party! You sound like a kook.' Let flip this, what if the opposite party wanted to do this you? When you stand for or against it then? You need to look beyond thr prism of party lines and look at what its really doing.
I want to keep the government out of my life as much as possible. Beside, the TV newsroom has operated the essentially the same way since the 60's: 'if it bleeds its leads' or 'if positively reflects on my friends and advertiser or negatively reflects on my perceived enemies run the story.' The FCC knows and the government in general knows this. The president ran the most effective media campaign ever. Why is this study really needed?
Quoting from the FCC article:
Today, the Office of Communications Business Opportunities (OCBO) and the Media Bureau (MB) issued a Request for Quotation (RFQ) for a study to examine the critical information needs of the American public so that the Commission can more effectively meet its statutory and judicially mandated obligations.
That sound good, but what is the result?
Someone, or many someones, would be taking personal notes on what people are saying. What they are doing. Who they are and if they have views in favor of opposed to the state's. That information could potentially be used to pull a station's license. Sounds MacArthur like doesn't it?
The definition of 'undeserved' changes from administration to administration. Each FCC chair and committee has their own parameters for what they think should happen in a newsroom. Its all subjective and changing, dare I say newspeak.
With cable new networks and new media coming age does it really matter? Everyone has access to a radio, internet, and newspapers now. So why concentrate so hard on a shrinking medium: over the air broadcasting? Also it makes me really nervous when I see government official intruding into private affairs.
Many of you maybe saying 'you must be a part of X party! You sound like a kook.' Let flip this, what if the opposite party wanted to do this you? When you stand for or against it then? You need to look beyond thr prism of party lines and look at what its really doing.
I want to keep the government out of my life as much as possible. Beside, the TV newsroom has operated the essentially the same way since the 60's: 'if it bleeds its leads' or 'if positively reflects on my friends and advertiser or negatively reflects on my perceived enemies run the story.' The FCC knows and the government in general knows this. The president ran the most effective media campaign ever. Why is this study really needed?
No comments:
Post a Comment