Obama’s Ministry of Truth.
From Breitbart.
The Federal Communication Commission announced it will no longer ask editors and reporters about their newsroom practices in a controversial questionnaire that critics ripped as invasive and having troublesome implications.
Questions in the document for editors and reporters will be “removed entirely” from the questionnaire, FCC spokeswoman Shannon Gilson said in a statement released Friday.
Gilson added that, “Any suggestion that the FCC intends to regulate the speech of news media or plans to put monitors in America’s newsrooms is false.”
The questionnaire, which is being promoted by Mignon Clyburn, the daughter of noted Fairness Doctrine proponent Rep. Jim Clyburn, spooked freedom of speech advocates.
Mignon is the same race-baiter who declared that “nappy headed children” deserve free internet access.
Clyburn, whose father is a vocal proponent of the fairness doctrine, will be running the CIN study. Interestingly, a field test of the CIN will be happening in Jim Clyburn’s own home state of South Carolina within the city limits of Columbia.
Jim Clyburn called for the fairness doctrine in the wake of the 2011 Tuscon, Arizona shooting, which resulted in six dead and 14 seriously injured, including former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).
“The shooting is cause for the country to rethink parameters on free speech, Clyburn said from his office, just blocks from the South Carolina Statehouse. He wants standards put in place to guarantee balanced media coverage with a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, in addition to calling on elected officials and media pundits to use “better judgment,” reported The Post and Courier in January of 2011.
“Free speech is as free speech does,” he said. “You cannot yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater and call it free speech and some of what I hear, and is being called free speech, is worse than that,” Clyburn reportedly said, referencing a remark made by 2010 U.S. senatorial candidate Sharron Angle of Nevada, who commented on political disputes and “Second Amendment remedies.” Clyburn blamed such political discourse for Tuscon shooter Jared Loughner’s 2011 rampage.
“He saw a Second Amendment remedy and that’s what occurred here and there is no way not to make that connection,” Clyburn said.
Ah, yes. I remember the screeching liberal moonbats spewing hate and inflammatory rhetoric at Tea Party patriots and Second Amendment supporters just minutes after the shooting, which is their standard M.O.
I don’t recall Clyburn having any concerns over that.
These were the questions the FCC wanted to pose:
• What is the news philosophy of the station?
• Who is your target audience?
• How do you define critical information that the community needs?
• How do you ensure the community gets this critical information?
• How much does community input influence news coverage decisions?
• What are the demographics of the news management staff (HR)?
• What are the demographics of the on air staff (HR)?
• What are the demographics of the news production staff (HR)?
• What is the news philosophy of the station?
• How much news does your station air every day?
• Who decides which stories are covered?
• How much influence do you have in deciding which stories to cover?
• Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?
o If so, can you give an example?
o What was the reason given for the decision?
o Why do you disagree?
Even a cursory glance at CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, PBS, NPR, the New York Times, Newsweek, or Time Magazine, answers all of those questions. The main stream media leans left and their philosophy dictates the way stories are covered and presented for public digestion. The lone TV network counterpoint is Fox News, which leans right and defies the Democrat media tool conglomerate.
Their questions are moot.
The government doesn’t get to decide what is fair or not, but certain politicians, Dems in particular, would love to see the media regulated to their liking.
The underlying purpose to the FCC’s inquiry has nothing to do with fairness.
Related post:
Related article:
This isn’t over. FCC has backed off on those questions – for now – but the program has not been eliminated; it’s being “retooled.” You can bet your next installment of Retired Pay that CIN will be even more insidious when it comes back for round two. Eternal vigilance, folks. Eternal Vigilance . . .