PDA

View Full Version : And Michigan is the first to step up to the plate for Obama



Rocktar
06-01-2010, 01:48 PM
Yep, we need to license journalists so the politicians know who they can "trust". Right, how about we license politicians so WE can know who to trust? So much for Freedom of Speech when you speak out against a Liberal Socialist. With laws like this in the works, you can bet your ass that Obama and others have plans on just WHO will and won't get a license and how they will use this to control media. Much like Nixon tried to use the "Fairness Doctrine" this will be used to silence the very people and organizations that are suposed to be watching the government for us.

Original Article (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/28/michigan-considers-law-license-journalists/?test=latestnews)

Michigan Considers Law to License Journalists

By Jana Winter
Published May 28, 2010

A Michigan lawmaker wants to license reporters to ensure they’re credible and vet them for “good moral character.”

Senator Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate reporters much like the state does with hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers. Patterson, who also practices constitutional law, says that the general public is being overwhelmed by an increasing number of media outlets--traditional, online and citizen generated--and an even greater amount 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.”


Critics say the proposed law will stem press freedoms and is bound to be politicized with disgruntles politicians going after reporters who don’t paint them in a positive light. They say that adding members of the so-called fourth estate to the list of government regulated occupations would likely be found unconstitutional.

“It’s misguided and it’s never going to fly,” said Kelly McBride, media ethics expert, the Poynter Institute. She is currently involved in a project examining the transformation of the journalism profession.

The bill was introduced on May 11 and has been referred to the state legislature’s Committee on Economic Development and Regulatory Reform.

“It’s a single sponsor bill. I think that says it all” said Mike MacLaren, executive director of the Michigan Press Association.

“I’ve not talked to the senator about this but whenever you see a single sponsor it’s usually indicative of what others think of it, which is not much.”

According to the bill, reporters must provide the licensing board 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.

Reporters will also have to pay an application and registration fee.

The bill does not prevent reporters who are not licensed by the state from covering Michigan politics, and registering with the state would be voluntary.

Patterson conceded that he didn’t actually think his bill would be enacted into law. He says he’s winding down his two decade political career and wants to provoke public discussion before he leaves office.

“I would argue the first amendment feels otherwise,” said MacLaren. “He’s entitled to his thoughts. The first amendment protects those as well.”

“What’s the definition of a reporter? I haven’t been able to find out? What’s a reporter? What’s a journalist?” Patterson said. “I thought you had to have a degree in journalism but apparently not. I could retire and be a journalist.”

Patterson said he wants a central place where members of the public can go to find out about reporters’ credentials, background and experience.

“I’m talking about a central depository for information so someone can go find all that out,” Patterson said, comparing his idea to the vetting process for expert witnesses who testify in court.

The senator said that he feels that there’s no way to tell who’s a legitimate journalist and who’s just rewriting other reporters’ reporting and twisting facts.

“He is right, the problem is “How do I know where I’m getting my news from?”” said McBride, who is working on a Ford Foundation project for the Poynter Institute that address the issue of the growing fifth estate--non professional bloggers, community reporters, and citizen journalists--and the shrinking of the fourth estate, the traditional press.

But even though McBride agreed with Patterson’s concerns that people don’t know which news outlets to trust she said the bill introducing government-licensed reporters is just a bad idea.

Plus, she said that governments often try to control journalists through a credentialing process--and that these attempts are usually deemed unconstitutional.

“I think that his concern is a legitimate one,” McBride said, “But you’re not going to solve the problem by creating some kind of licensing system.�
Quote
Now let's go back to the statement this Michigan Moonbat made about the media. Here you go .. now ponder this for a moment:

"Legitimate media sources are critically important to our government."

Celephais
06-01-2010, 01:58 PM
Why two threads for this? Stop Ioraking us.

Suppa Hobbit Mage
06-01-2010, 02:06 PM
If we need to ensure our journalists have "good moral character", I propose we do the same for lawyers, doctors, politicians and CEOs.

Atlanteax
06-01-2010, 03:17 PM
Incredible Irony for Politicians to be demanding "Good Moral Character" of the Media that is functionally the Public Voter's means of Oversight.

ie reporters blowing the whistle on politicians/events to the PUBLIC

Parkbandit
06-01-2010, 04:24 PM
If we need to ensure our journalists have "good moral character", I propose we do the same for lawyers, doctors, politicians and CEOs.

There would be like 3 lawyers in the country.. and no politicians.

Edited to add: Holy shit, sounds like paradise!!

Keller
06-01-2010, 05:33 PM
If we need to ensure our journalists have "good moral character", I propose we do the same for lawyers, doctors, politicians and CEOs.

I had to fill out a moral character application that included 3 personal references and a full background check as part of my application to the California state bar.

Not sure if doctors need to do the same thing.

Latrinsorm
06-01-2010, 06:13 PM
Bruce Patterson is a Republican (and a lawyer), not a liberal socialist. Sorry.

Atlanteax
06-01-2010, 11:00 PM
I had to fill out a moral character application that included 3 personal references and a full background check as part of my application to the California state bar.

And you passed?!?! O_o

Or was it because it was in California? :)

TheEschaton
06-01-2010, 11:07 PM
Bruce Patterson is a Republican (and a lawyer), not a liberal socialist. Sorry.

LOL? Like the article said, it's a single sponsor bill, from a Republican...that suggests to me that the "good moral values" piece is coming from the Christian right, rather than from the progressive lockstep socialist left.

Rocktar
06-02-2010, 12:51 AM
Bruce Patterson is a Republican (and a lawyer), not a liberal socialist. Sorry.

Being a member of the Republican Party does not make you Conservative, any more than theE saying he is moderate makes him less than flaming Liberal Socialist, or you, for that matter.

Latrinsorm
06-02-2010, 01:37 AM
Nobody claimed that Patterson was a conservative, or that Eschaton or I were moderates. I recommend you admit to yourself at least that you jumped the gun on this one and move on, it's better for the digestion.

TheEschaton
06-02-2010, 08:58 AM
When have I ever said I was a moderate? The point is, you pointed this out as a Liberal Socialist plot to censor the media, when in fact the guy is a Republican.

Rocktar
06-02-2010, 01:21 PM
And you fail to understand that regardless of who the messenger is, the message is the same. And both of you have claimed moderation from time to time on these forums.

TheEschaton
06-02-2010, 01:27 PM
A) Your point was somehow that a specific party ("liberal socialists") were doing a specific act ("subverting the media"). While the latter may be true, the whole statement is false because the former is false. It's simple logic, P ^ Q = T iff P = T, Q= T. You cannot say the message being the same is somehow relevant, because it isn't.

B) I've never claimed moderation on these boards. Not once.

Rocktar
06-02-2010, 01:56 PM
And you are trying to pick nits in order to detract from the reality of the situation simply to try and find fault with a true statement that you support.

TheEschaton
06-02-2010, 02:03 PM
Are you alleging now that I support curbing the media? Because I do not, and I'd love for you to point out a place where me, or any "liberal socialist" did so.

Rocktar
06-02-2010, 02:19 PM
I am flat stating that you condone the expansion of government control in all areas as befits your Liberal Socialist mentality.

AnticorRifling
06-02-2010, 02:42 PM
Yup, you're retarded.

CrystalTears
06-02-2010, 03:28 PM
Yup, you're retarded.
QFT

TheEschaton
06-02-2010, 04:43 PM
Rocktard, you're totally off the reservation, man.

Elsymir
06-03-2010, 09:38 AM
Yeah, he's one of those Liberal Socialist Republicans.
He sits next to the Unicorn-Centuar Representitive, in the "Things that don't exist" section of the Michigan legislature.