PDA

View Full Version : New Law Will Require a License to be a Journalist.



Ponce
2nd June 2010, 10:00 AM
And this way only "their" peole will qualify to be journalist and not those who wants the truth to be seen by the world.
=============================================


New Law Will Require a License to be a Journalist.

What good is a government if they can’t regulate every aspect of your life? From the same lawmakers that brought us the Detroit economic calamity comes a new bill, aimed at controlling the flow of information to the unsuspecting public even more than the mainstream does now.

A Michigan lawmaker wants to register reporters to ensure they’re credible and have “good moral character.”

State Sen. Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate reporters much as the state regulates hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers. Patterson, who also practices constitutional law, says the general public is being overwhelmed by an increasing number of media outlets — traditional, online and citizen generated — and an even greater amount of misinformation.

“Legitimate media sources are critically important to our government,” he said.

He told FoxNews.com that some reporters covering state politics don’t know what they’re talking about and they’re working for publications he’s never heard of, so he wants to install a process that’ll help him and the general public figure out which reporters to trust.

“We have to be able to get good information,” he said. “We have to be able to rely on the source and to understand the credentials of the source.”

…

According to the bill, reporters who register will have to pay an application and registration fee and provide a “Board of Michigan Registered Reporters” with proof of:

– “Good moral character” and demonstrate they have industry “ethics standards acceptable to the board.”

– Possession of a degree in journalism or other degree substantially equivalent.

– Not less than 3 years experience as a reporter or any other relevant background information.

– Awards or recognition related to being a reporter.

– Three or more writing samples.

[source: Fox News]

Government registration and licensing requirements of journalists and reporters will be determined by a board of higher-educated bureaucratic intellectuals who’ll have the power to determine if a wanna-be reporter has the necessary writing skills, ethics and good moral character to be allowed to disseminate their views to the public.

Had a law like this been passed by King George in the late 1700’s, would reporters and commentators like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine been approved by the journalist licensing board? Or, would a board instituted by the king have found that Franklin’s and Payne’s morals and ethics ran counter to those of the Empire? Since both of these men published their views under anonymous pen names, the information and claims made could not possibly have been - what did Mr. Patterson call it - oh yes, “legitimate.”

At the very least, however, Mr. Paine would have certainly subscribed to the fairness doctrine, publishing the monarchy’s opposing views right next to his patriotic diatribes in Common Sense.

President Obama, who recently suggested that news and information on blogs, talk radio, and cable, is difficult to sift through and figure out who’s telling the truth, would likely support Mr. Patterson’s bill on a federal level. Once a reporter is licensed, the public would have the comfort of knowing that the writings, opinions, and insights being presented have been thoroughly sifted, filtered and edited to ensure the information is truthful and easy to understand.

The same population of gullible idiots that require government intervention when it comes to smoking cigarettes, drinking sodas, and salt intake, also need to be told what news they can consume.

We couldn’t possibly let the consumer gather as much information from various news sources and make their own interpretations based on opinions, video, and audio excerpts - that would be way too easy and cost-effective.

While Senator Patterson believes that it is important for the government to have legitimate media sources because they are critical to our government, radio talk show hosts like Neal Boortz disagree:

The media isn’t supposed to be important to the government, you ignoramus Democrat; it’s supposed to be important to THE PEOPLE.

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/michigan-to-consider-law-requiring-licensing-of-journalists_06022010

kregener
2nd June 2010, 10:23 AM
There will be fees, taxes and licenses on faith and gravity before the Utopian bliss-ninnies are done running us into the gutter of history.

I am me, I am free
2nd June 2010, 10:36 AM
They hate us for our freedoms. lol

Amerika has become what 'merikans were taught to despise - the Soviets. It's gone full circle.

zusn
2nd June 2010, 10:41 AM
According to the bill, reporters who register will have to pay an application and registration fee and provide a “Board of Michigan Registered Reporters” with proof of:

– “Good moral character” and demonstrate they have industry “ethics standards acceptable to the board.”
Too bad this "Good moral character" disclaimer doesn't apply to the people making the laws.

Libertarian_Guard
2nd June 2010, 10:49 AM
I can guess at some of the more likely test questions........

Who shot JFK?

Why did TWA flight 800 crash?

How would you defend the Supreme Court decision of the 2000 Presidential Election?

State in as few words as possible, why America will always stand alongside Israel.

Why is the second amedment of The Constitution flawed, and not written for today's America?

Uncle Salty
2nd June 2010, 01:42 PM
How about a license to be a politician?

What a stupid fvck. Sorry for the french but that tard is stoopid.

Ifyouseekay
2nd June 2010, 01:46 PM
What's that right we as Americans have.... hmmmmmmm

oh yea... FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Ponce
2nd June 2010, 01:48 PM
LOL Uncle.........love that one.........they should be asked questions about the history of the US, the Constitution and the meaning of it......and specially questions about the state that they will represent.

TheNocturnalEgyptian
2nd June 2010, 01:50 PM
There should be a license to be a politician. You should have to pass United States History, and write a 10 page essay on why newer versions of Black's Law Dictionary were necessary....At the very LEAST!

I am me, I am free
2nd June 2010, 01:55 PM
There should be a license to be a politician. You should have to pass United States History, and write a 10 page essay on why newer versions of Black's Law Dictionary were necessary....At the very LEAST!


There should at least be a vetting process for ALL politicians, including where their allegiance lies (e.g. are they a bona fide natural born citizen).

Twisted Titan
2nd June 2010, 02:08 PM
Why didnt this guy get the memo????




There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.

There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.


John Swinton on the "independence" of the press 1880

keehah
2nd June 2010, 02:25 PM
They want to more easily know who to 'trust', and who they have to deceive.

Plus it will mean less interviews with those they have to lie to, that is average joes asking real questions rather than a fellow 'professional'.

And it will reduce competition for sociopath and/or corporate media.

Neuro
2nd June 2010, 02:57 PM
“Legitimate media sources are critically important to our government,” he said.

Thats it in a nutshell! Fuck them!

keehah
2nd June 2010, 03:00 PM
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legitimate

Etymology: Middle English legitimat, from Medieval Latin legitimatus, past participle of legitimare to legitimate, from Latin legitimus legitimate, from leg-, lex law
Date: 15th century

1 a : lawfully begotten; specifically : born in wedlock b : having full filial rights and obligations by birth <a legitimate child>

3 a : accordant with law or with established legal forms and requirements <a legitimate government> b : ruling by or based on the strict principle of hereditary right <a legitimate king>

5 : relating to plays acted by professional actors but not including revues, burlesque, or some forms of musical comedy <the legitimate theater>

SQUEXX
2nd June 2010, 06:20 PM
.............And we all know what evil tribe controls the media!

dysgenic
2nd June 2010, 06:45 PM
A couple of years ago, 'war on the internet' stories turned up once every few months. Now they are turning up weekly and sometimes even daily.

Quantum
2nd June 2010, 07:15 PM
I volunteer to be among the first to "practice without a license."

Neuro
2nd June 2010, 11:28 PM
How about a license to be a politician?

Or just an original birth certificate for the president...

Nah too much to ask for! It is far better to have a license to prevent people to ask the question, serious licenced journalists wouldn't of course, and the rest will not have the opportunity to ask the question, problem solved!

Apparition
3rd June 2010, 12:04 AM
Intentionally stifling free speech through governmental legislation intended protect us?

Say it ain't so! :sarc:

Neuro
3rd June 2010, 12:11 AM
Intentionally stifling free speech through governmental legislation intended protect us?

Say it ain't so! :sarc:

The road to hell is paved with evil intentions, the majority is lead to believe they are good though...

ximmy
3rd June 2010, 12:12 AM
This law will fit nicely with non-videotaping of police... every photo, every video, every record, of any incident involving the police must be handed over to the proper authorities by the licensed journalist.