Re: Ending separation of powers to bail out Newspapers?


Date: 2009-04-21 04:24:28

It would be the change from Freedom of Speech to liberty of speeking what has been sanctyfied in advance. See Jordan Maxwell on the difference – liberty is what the slave has when his master allows. Would Andrew be awarded a licence to publish this newsletter? Would I be publisher right now, too? At 04:33 21.04.2009, you wrote: >How independent was the BBC with their tax payer money of Tony Blair >during the Iraq war. > >In a message dated 4/20/2009 6:51:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > writes: > > > >Do they want to end separation of powers (silly!) for the sake of a >bailout of commercial newspapers or do they want more (that would be: all)? > > > >Obama Appointee Suggests Radical Plan for Newspaper Bailout > >Rosa Brooks, who has moved from the L.A. Times to the Pentagon, >called for more “direct government support for public media” and >government licensing of the news, which critics say would destroy the >independent media. > > > >Thursday, April 16, 2009 > >Influential Los Angeles Times columnist Rosa Brooks has hung up her >journalistic hat and joined the Obama administration, but not before >penning a public proposal calling for some radical ideas to help bail >out the failing news industry. > >Brooks, who has taken up a post as an adviser at the Pentagon, >advocated upping “direct government support for public media” and >creating licenses to govern news operations. > >”Years of foolish policies have left us with a choice: We can bail >out journalism, using tax dollars and granting licenses in ways that >encourage robust and independent reporting and commentary, or we can >watch, wringing our hands, as more and more top journalists are laid >off,” she wrote in her parting column on April 9. > >Brooks said this would help rescue the industry from a “death spiral” >and left the government unaccountable to the journalists who must >keep it honest. “[I] can’t imagine anything more dangerous than a >society in which the news industry has more or less collapsed,” she wrote. > >But critics say her proposal would spell an end to the independent >media and make journalists reliant lapdogs. > >”The day that the government gets involved in the news media you see >the end of the democratic process, because an independent news media >is absolutely essential to the success of a democracy,” said L. Brent >Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, a conservative watchdog group. > >Bozell said licensing journalists would violate American traditions >and was a form of “intellectual prostitution.” > >”Since when did our Founding Fathers envision that … you could >exercise your right to freedom of speech provided you had a license >from the federal government? This is the kind of stuff you have >revolutions about,” he told > >Attempts to reach Brooks by phone and e-mail were unsuccessful. A >columnist for four years at the Times, Brooks this week joined the >office of the undersecretary of Defense for policy, the principal >adviser to the Pentagon’s top brass. She retains her post as a >professor at the Georgetown University Law Center and during the >Clinton administration served as a senior adviser to the State Department. > >Media experts said it was unlikely her calls for a bailout would be >heeded by the government. > >”I’m doubtful that one person taking a secondary job in the Pentagon >is going to guide the policy on [bailouts],” said John Nichols, a >longtime journalist whose own plans to help save newspapers were >cited approvingly by Brooks, but who called licensing a “very dangerous move.” > >”I would be very surprised if the Obama administration actually >proposed something like that,” added Joel Brinkley, a visiting >professor of journalism at Stanford University, who said that no one >would trust the news industry if it accepted heaps of government >money. “It’s the first time I’ve heard this publicly discussed.” > >It is unclear whether the Obama administration is considering such >assistance. A spokesman for Obama did not respond to questions about >Brooks’ statements, which were published after her appointment to >the Pentagon. > >Some in the government are already looking to assist the industry. >Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Md., proposed legislation in March that would >allow newspapers to operate as tax-exempt nonprofits as long as they >don’t endorse political candidates. The move was heralded as a >positive step toward finding a fix but condemned by critics for >potentially making newspapers beholden to the government. > >Some scribes are already closely bound to Washington. As jobs are >axed and papers felled across the country, many journalists have >sought work elsewhere. A number have gone to work for the Obama >administration, including Chicago Tribune correspondent Jill Zuckman; >Time magazine’s Washington bureau chief, Jay Carney; former L.A. >Times reporter Peter Gosselin; and Warren Bass, once the Washington >Post’s deputy editor. > >Brooks is not the first journalist to support a broadsheet bailout, >but she is the first member of the administration to publicly declare >her support for the move, which appears to be gaining momentum. > >Nichols and Robert McChesney suggested in an April 6 cover piece in >The Nation that the government eliminate postal fees for smaller >papers and periodicals and offer tax credits for newspaper >subscriptions to help save the media. Looking for more direct >assistance, the company that owns two Philadelphia papers approached >Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell in January seeking a $10 million bailout >to help cover its massive debts — and it’s not the only conglomerate >that’s hurting. > >The Tribune Company, which owns many of the nation’s leading papers, >including the Los Angeles Times, filed for bankruptcy protection in >December. Many more newspapers have closed their doors, like the >Rocky Mountain News, or have ended their print editions, like the >Seattle Post-Intelligencer. > >Brooks worried in her column that the death of such newspapers would >spell an end to investigative journalism and leave the country with >only “yapping heads” on television and “nothing in our newspapers but >ads, entertainment features and crossword puzzles.” > >But many media critics say the troubles facing newspapers are of >their own making, and that throwing around money won’t fix the problem. > >”Licensing is a simplistic solution for historic trends battering the >traditional newspaper industry,” said Ken McIntyre, a media and >public policy fellow at the Heritage Foundation, who argued that a >bailout would “preserve businesses that free enterprise and >competition marked for failure — or a transition into something else.” > > >———- >Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. >Get >the Radio Toolbar! > > >

Related articles...

Comments are closed.