Should the Government Decide what a Newspaper Publishes?

first watch this clip:

(copy and paste this link to your browser)
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Bernie-Sanders-S.mov

then answer the question, as that jerkjob refused to: who should be allowed to decide what can and cannot be published?

...and if the government holds sway over the press, do they not have the ability to filter out any news which puts them in a bad light with the red rubber stamp "national security"? after all...by extention, any news which makes them look bad 'aids and comforts the enemy'....right?

No, they shouldn't decide for them, but people, you gotta be sensible enough to know that the main focus behind the media is financially driven, and not for the sake of your knowledge.

Should they? No, because that's what it's supposed to be, a news paper. The news is supposed to be objective.

-AC

No.

But the gov. should put limits. We have freedom of speech, but you can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

This thread could and perhaps should be Would You Mind Living In Ignorance because, that's what would happen. People look to the news for the truth and an unbiased opinion on what's going on around the world.

Originally posted by LethalFemme
This thread could and perhaps should be Would You Mind Living In Ignorance because, that's what would happen. People look to the news for the truth and an unbiased opinion on what's going on around the world.

Do you think we get that? I don't.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Should they? No, because that's what it's supposed to be, a news paper. The news is supposed to be objective.

-AC

but in fact that is never the case...all forms of media have interests...the Rupert Murdoch empire can pretty much decide the fate of elections in the UK by who it decided to back in the run up...

governments shouldn't be allowed to interfere with what is printed or broadcast although the media do need to be careful what they put into the public domain as the fake pictures printed in the UK's daily mirror are testament to

Exactly. if the government controlled the news, it would become a complete dictatorship. Noone would have any freedom. You won't know what's happeneing so the governemnt can do anything, and therefore, they'd end up worse than those nazi bastards...

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Do you think we get that? I don't.

Well of course we don't get the truth all the time. I don't know anyone who believes that. It's weird we all have our theories and many would probably already say that the government already does have limits for the paper but, to know without a shallow of a doubt that they did would be the ultimate in lies and betrayal and yet ironically would release the truth.

Originally posted by LethalFemme
Well of course we don't get the truth all the time. I don't know anyone who believes that. It's weird we all have our theories and many would probably already say that the government already does have limits for the paper but, to know without a shallow of a doubt that they did would be the ultimate in lies and betrayal and yet ironically would release the truth.

It is a balancing act. 😄

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It is a balancing act. 😄

Kinda shows you the old saying "ignorance is bliss" is an old saying for a reason huh?

I like the fat guy...you can't have a war on a tactic...right on.

Well, nothing determines what is right to publish, but the person that publishes it....it's kind of a pretty basic right of freedom...we call it freedom of the press.

Originally posted by PVS
first watch this clip:

(copy and paste this link to your browser)
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Bernie-Sanders-S.mov

then answer the question, as that jerkjob refused to: who should be allowed to decide what can and cannot be published?

...and if the government holds sway over the press, do they not have the ability to filter out any news which puts them in a bad light with the red rubber stamp "national security"? after all...by extention, any news which makes them look bad 'aids and comforts the enemy'....right?

Governments who control the newspapers are not generally regarded as a democracy. For example, Napoleon and other infamous dictators.

Originally posted by jaden101
but in fact that is never the case...all forms of media have interests...the Rupert Murdoch empire can pretty much decide the fate of elections in the UK by who it decided to back in the run up...

governments shouldn't be allowed to interfere with what is printed or broadcast although the media do need to be careful what they put into the public domain as the fake pictures printed in the UK's daily mirror are testament to

Oh I agree, they do, but they shouldn't.

-AC

and have all dictators not cried out "national security" as a means of witholding information which puts them in a bad light? has "we are at war, so times are different" and "if you make us look bad, weak, and/or stupid you aid the enemy and are thus a traitor" not the preamble for a dictatorship?

what i mean is, when the government is allowed to draw the line, who governs where they draw it? people tout that the media conglomerate are controlled by the allmighty dollar....and they are just to say so. what i find confusing is the denial that our government is equally if not more controlled by money. the current administration is in the pocket of the medical/pharmacutical companies, as their campaign funds proves and their policy reflects.
also, the administration was caught red handed paying off the media to air what was basically a commercial endorsing their medicare bill, but presented in the form of an objective news broadcast. how can they be trusted to draw the line when they would obviously push it well into the realm of propaganda and mass ignorance?

Originally posted by PVS
and have all dictators not cried out "national security" as a means of witholding information which puts them in a bad light? has "we are at war, so times are different" and "if you make us look bad, weak, and/or stupid you aid the enemy and are thus a traitor" not the preamble for a dictatorship?

what i mean is, when the government is allowed to draw the line, who governs where they draw it? people tout that the media conglomerate are controlled by the allmighty dollar....and they are just to say so. what i find confusing is the denial that our government is equally if not more controlled by money. the current administration is in the pocket of the medical/pharmacutical companies, as their campaign funds proves and their policy reflects.
also, the administration was caught red handed paying off the media to air what was basically a commercial endorsing their medicare bill, but presented in the form of an objective news broadcast. how can they be trusted to draw the line when they would obviously push it well into the realm of propaganda and mass ignorance?

I find it just completely insulting and yet admire the fact that they can lie to our faces as though it's second nature. But it's pretty much like I said we know the truth but, to go beyond the shadow of a doubt would hold it's own consequences.

Currently in the US...I think the governemnt already has too much sway just by portraying media companies as "enemies/unpatriotic" and this biasest their coverage. Many still won't do big sotries on WMDs in Iraq etc. They are too afraid.

No direct control necessary.

NO.

Freedom of the press, First Amendment.

That's like asking : "Should the government take away free speech and our decision to worship whatever we want?"

However, it doesnt stop them from doing it....loog at the Flag Burning amendment today in the Senate.

Hmm.

We have separation of state and Church. I would like to see separation of state and media. I would like to see actual objectiveness in the news - not the fingermarks of big business and government influencing the slant and how things get reported (if at all.)

So no, the Government should have no influence over what a newspaper publishes. The paper should publish news based upon facts, and should not be cowed by glares from those in the Government and big business who might not want the light focused on them quite so much.