I have to say, I agree with the notion that the time dedicated to “news” has produced less news than we have ever had. Newton Minow’s “vast wasteland” speech was the prophesy foretelling American cable “news”.

Who needs real news when we have infotainmentganda!!!!

Fact: Freedom of information in USA will always keep us strong. Only problem with this is liberals know so much that isn’t so and hear so much that isn’t said!

Well, he may be right, but I am certainly not for the idea of oversight of the media. No, the idea leads to government censorship. I wish I could give you an answer but perhaps cases of libel should be stricter. I don’t agree with the government being involved with censorship. I think that if they want to do to the film industry and the game industry that has led to self regulating tactics by having legislation consistently hanging overhead. But the government should not be involved. I think the argument still stems from this idea of the mob being stupid. That kids won’t recognize fantasy violence or that people can’t tell the difference between information and opinion. There are those who can’t, that is for sure, but seriously what does this say. After all, what will happen to the Daily Show, most know it’s not real, but yet it’s where most will get their news. No, government should not form an oversight committee. No matter how much I dislike biased infotainment, it doesn’t mean that it should be illegal.

Conservative screeching has taken over American news. Rush, Hannity, Beck, Drudge..these entertainers run the story, all the while screeching about a “liberal mainstream media” that – if it ever existed – is completely subserviant to their whining, “victimised” right-wing masters now.

I would have thought this particular fellow might have read the U. S. Constitution (if not, at least the Amendments). Apparently not. Censorship now? I pray not.

why would he let a little thing like the consitution get in the way

This man is a cretin. His problem is that there are too many news outlets which prove the inanity (and insanity) of his narrow Obama-worldview. God bless Fox News. And God bless NPR! Let me, the reader, find the truth which lies hidden between these disparate worldviews.

“Palin may also have benefited from some weaker competition (ABC had the Country Music Awards the previous week).”

It’s ironic that for an in depth interview on American news we have to watch the news on BBC.

If only Michael Copps would be in a Beyonce video or go on Dancing With The Stars or cheat on his wife then he could make the news in the U.S.

Harry Truman: I’ve done my damnest each and every day.

I would hope that all mediaite staff, led by Dan, would condemn this concept. I’m actually quite surprised that this article doesn’t do that, but merely repeats something and then through silence, concurs in it.

This is an outrage, and Mark should have screamed a headline on the absurdity of it all. I guess screaming headlines are reserved for the Palins, both Sarah and Bristol, but not when the FCC Commissioner announces he wants the government to control the flow of information to the public, Mark doesn’t have a problem????

Really???

TfT said:
I would hope that all mediaite staff, led by Dan, would condemn this concept. I’m actually quite surprised that this article doesn’t do that, but merely repeats something and then through silence, concurs in it.

This is an outrage, and Mark should have screamed a headline on the absurdity of it all. I guess screaming headlines are reserved for the Palins, both Sarah and Bristol, but not when the FCC Commissioner announces he wants the government to control the flow of information to the public, Mark doesn’t have a problem????

Really???

True. I read the headline and thought it would be some more harmless FOX/MSNBC debate on their quality and then, like finding out Bruce Willis was dead the whole time, completely surprised me. I’m not happy about the Internet stuff they approved and certainly not happy about this. Again, I hope it encourages some self regulation within the industry but the government shouldn’t be a party to censorship.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
It’s ironic that for an in depth interview on American news we have to watch the news on BBC.

That ranks up there with some of your more ridiculous comments. You have to go to BBC to hear a socialist czar of the current administration make a case (a bad one at that) for the government control of the information it’s citizens would be allowed to view or hear.

With all the bitching and kvetching about Fox, Msnbc, Cnn or whomever, do you really really think the government should have the ability to limit what you view?

Once you give the government that power you won’t get it back, and someday there may not be a liberal President, what if an Evangelical dude get’s elected and throughthe powers you want the fcc to have, he decides no more “R” rated type content. No more “blue” language, no more “risque” programming? What do you do then?

Be careful what you wish for because in a couple of years it could be your OX being gored.

Think about it. Seriously. Right now you can always change channels, in the future that might not be the case.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Again, I hope it encourages some self regulation within the industry but the government shouldn’t be a party to censorship.

Make sure you are crystal clear on WHO is doing this.

timzank said:
Make sure you are crystal clear on WHO is doing this.

I don’t give a fuck about ideology on this. I rarely do. I don’t care if it’s a conservative or a liberal view. I care about what’s right, first and foremost. And this is wrong. I am anti-censorship, have always been. If they want to shut down Rush Limbaugh, I’m against it. If they want to shut down Michael Moore, I’m against it. Now, would you be able to rise above party politics to say the same? If this was still the Bush administration, and the FCC decided MSNBC was talking too much smack, and said, We need to regulate. Would you jump on the No Censorship bandwagon or would you say, Yes, Shut them down! Can you point the mirror back and say the same as I just said?

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Can you point the mirror back and say the same as I just said?

On this you and I can agree. I would never abide by the government controlling ANY network. Do I disparage certain networks? Absolutely. Do I laugh when they fail (Air America)? Absolutely, but I would NEVER want them silenced by anything other than their own inability to survive, especially not by government involvement.

As you can probably tell by my posts, I want the government as far away from everything as possible.

timzank said:
With all the bitching and kvetching about Fox, Msnbc, Cnn or whomever, do you really really think the government should have the ability to limit what you view?

Nope. I don’t. And I never said I did.

What I said was American news sucks donkey balls. Not sure how to fix it.

Americans get the news they deserve and if they want to watch terrorist fist bumps and NASA Muslim crescents then that’s what they deserve.

Maybe a rating system like for Movies and TV shows?

FOX News: Rated R (for the retarded)

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
Nope. I don’t. And I never said I did. What I said was American news sucks donkey balls. Not sure how to fix it. Americans get the news they deserve and if they want to watch terrorist fist bumps and NASA Muslim crescents then that’s what they deserve. Maybe a rating system like for Movies and TV shows? FOX News: Rated R (for the retarded)

Good news for you then you can watch the BBC, great. What I find interesting is your view (and obviously Mr. Copps) that simply because you don’t like the manner in which Americans consume their news, it is somehow an inferior product. It’s obvious the populace is more informed now than at any point in our history and I suspect what worries you (and Copps & most dems) is that the populace hears more than just your “enlightened” version of events.

Do yourself a favor and subscribe to Riz Khan’s podcast and watch several episodes. This is what calm, rational news and related discourse used to look like in our country. I’m thankful the BBC News is around.

timzank said:
It’s obvious the populace is more informed now than at any point in our history

Yeah, that’s why a large portion of Americans couldn’t identify a picture of Joe Biden or John Boehner but virtually all of them could pick out Justin Beiber.

{{{When it comes to politics in America, the average citizen displays a breathtaking ignorance of the political system, the philosophies of the major political parties, and the policies of the candidates. As a nation, we can’t be bothered to stay up-to-date on political issues. What we do concern ourselves with are trivial details, like Barack Obama’s skill (or lack thereof) as a bowler, or the age difference between John McCain and his wife.

For anyone who doubts that the American attention span is shrinking, I offer this challenge. Visit a European nation (it doesn’t matter which — just throw a dart at the map if you like), and while you’re there soaking up the culture, make it a point to watch their national news broadcast every evening.

I must warn you though; you are likely to find a European news broadcast extremely boring, because they report…news. Not entertainment, not trivia, but actual news, including the details of proposed government
legislation, economic policy, and all that boring stuff that American news shows tend to ignore in favor of reporting on Lindsey Lohan’s most recent stay in rehab.

European news tends to lack the state-of-the-art 3-D graphics, spray-on tans and big hair we’re used to here in the states. But what it does offer is good information, presented from an objective point of view, and details — lots of details. Where American broadcasts tend to skim the surface, news reports in Scandinavia (for example) tend to be thorough and complete. In other words, if you pay attention you WILL learn what’s going on.”}}}

so its the american people , not the broadcasters, how do you fix that

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
Yeah, that’s why a large portion of Americans couldn’t identify a picture of Joe Biden or John Boehner but virtually all of them could pick out Justin Beiber.

And you think it was different 40 years ago? Or 80 years ago You think the general public was MORE informed then? How naive are you? In 1960 do you think a large portion of Americans knew who the fuck Sam Rayburn was? No, but they’d know a picture of Marilyn Monroe wouldn’t they?

As for Television news broadcasts elsewhere, that is obviously a format you like, great. It’s also obviously NOT the format preferred in the states. What your “opinion” shows is how you look down on the unwashed masses because they don’t like the same format as you. To put it in simple terms, you speak, act and think as though you are much much better than others, it simply shows the rest of us how pretentious and phony you really are.

Yes, the general population was more informed about civics in the past. We’re more informed about crap overall now in the Internet age, but not always in good ways.

cjd ohio 1 said:
so its the american people , not the broadcasters, how do you fix that

I would say we round them up and put them in re-education camps which we won’t tell them. We’ll just have a sign that says “Meet the cast of Jersey Shore.” But then, when they get in there, we catch them and have a nice old lady read the encyclopedia to them. Of course, there will also be cookies.

Actually, I have no idea what to do. I think there must be a way to make education important in this country again. It won’t be easy. Of course, we can’t point the finger at the broadcasters since they wouldn’t have a job if they weren’t delivering what the masses want.

timzank said:
To put it in simple terms, you speak, act and think as though you are much much better than others, it simply shows the rest of us how pretentious and phony you really are.

IM SO PRETENTIOUS, I DONT WANT MY NEWS CHANNELS SCREAMING “KILL CRACKER BABIES!!!” EVERY 20 MINUTES AS A RATINGS PROMO!!!!LOLOL!!11!!

cjd ohio 1 said:
so its the american people , not the broadcasters, how do you fix that

In his opinion, the American people are pretty much all stupid and low life. He looks down on people that don’t have the time or the inclination to have “in depth” discussions about the nations ills while they’re working, raising kids, etc…The average working American doesn’t have the time to do what we are doing, they are all filled up with just trying to get by everyday.

He’s got a European way of looking down his nose at us.

Of course, cultures are different, and after all, a lot of broadcast television in European countries are actually funded by the government. And England is also the birthplace of the reality show as we know it (Survivor, Big Brother, Pop Idol), but yet, the news has yet to fall into what it’s fallen into here. Is it a question of the culture being able to discern the difference or is it the government’s involvement. Or do these cultures where age is revered more than beauty have something to do with a lack of image consciousness that we are so focussed upon? Actually, this could be a fascinating sociological experiment to consider.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
IM SO PRETENTIOUS, I DONT WANT MY NEWS CHANNELS SCREAMING “KILL CRACKER BABIES!!!” EVERY 20 MINUTES AS A RATINGS PROMO!!!!LOLOL!!11!!

Here’s an idea, Change the channel. What a concept. Seriously why do you watch something that irritates you? You have infinite channels and sources for info and news between cable, satellite, international, PBS, local, newspapers, magazines, I mean what the fuck is your problem, you can’t find ANYTHING you like?

timzank said:
He’s got a European way of looking down his nose at us.

Haha…YOU A SUCH A DUMBFUCK SPAWN OF FOX NEWS!!!!

That is exactly what Hannity would say when HE was losing a debate.

…waiting for you to call me a “Frenchie lover” , a “socialist” and ask me “Why do I hate America” lol

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
a lot of broadcast television in European countries are actually funded by the government.

True. To paraphrase King Kong’s captor….

“Twas capitalism that killed the beast.”

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
Haha…YOU A SUCH A DUMBFUCK SPAWN OF FOX NEWS!!!! That is exactly what Hannity would say when HE was losing a debate. …waiting for you to call me a “Frenchie lover” , a “socialist” and ask me “Why do I hate America” lol

I’m not losing a debate. Anybody (liberal or conservative) can tell when they are talking to a snob. You come off that way. You deride people for opinions, likes and dislikes that are different than yours. Pretty simple.

The government would do nothing but make matters worse, like always. They need to keep doing what they do best: perpetual wars and wasting money.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
True. To paraphrase King Kong’s captor….

“Twas capitalism that killed the beast.”

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting we should do the same thing here. I’m not sure we’d have a Simpsons or Edward R. Murrow going after Joe McCarthy. I just found it interesting. I mean government sponsored television did give us Monty Python, but I think that’s a bit different. I was looking more as a cultural thing. It’s interesting that the government sponsored stuff in Britain gave us a lot of the reality programs that we have here today. But at the same time, they have news that is smart and non-biased, and also, according to American tastes, boring.

And in the original version of King Kong, he was supposed to be knocked off the Empire State Building by the Monopoly guy in a bi-plane throwing a giant money bag with a huge dollar sign on the side at Kong. Hence, that was the original line.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
But at the same time, they have news that is smart and non-biased,

How can you say that? Because you heard it from BFD, or just assume? How on Earth would you know if it was biased unless you lived there and voted there? Even visiting may give you a “flavor” for the delivery, but you’d have no idea if they actually favored one side or the other would you?

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
Well, he may be right, but I am certainly not for the idea of oversight of the media.

I’d be interested in hearing more about the rules they have in the UK. Their political discussions are pretty dam lively but there are guidelines that make too much dishonest bullshit actionable.

I think an accurate complaint about US cable news would be a lack of substance abuse.

cjd ohio 1 said:
so its the american people , not the broadcasters, how do you fix that

The American public can actually be involved but probably won’t make the effort.

What if viewers actually started writing to shows and networks complaining about shallow superficial content and asking for more informing reports on relevant issues, based on more fact than just opinions.

I Imagine that there is a market solution to the information problem… Would love to see a new dedication to education in the USA… attention to logic and argument would build our capacity to correct the current imbalance.

For a change this is a fairly interesting discussion about a very critical subject. No one wants censorship of any kind, but American TV is definitely out of control and the majority of Americans are amongst the most ill-informed people of any advanced industrialized country. I lived in England for many years and the BBC was always highly respected by the majority of Brits no matter whether the Tories or Labor were in power. The BBC is financed by a fairly hefty fee that everyone who has a TV must pay and there are no commercials and it is supervised by an independent board set up by the government. Michael Copps was on the FCC for a number of years and was one of the few, especially during the Bush years, who consistently voted against the consolidation of media companies which has done a lot to produce the dreck we have. Few own more which means we get less. Whether it’s network or cable, it’s impossible to get a clear idea of political or social reality via American television. The best we have is PBS news which is boring, C-Span which can occasionally be great and, of course, there’s Stewart/Colbert which is funny and sometimes on the money. There’s nothing wrong with the ‘free’ market that a little bit of regulation wouldn’t improve. Maybe media companies should be required to do more hard news and less crime and glitz and maybe fewer commercials. Sad to say,the dumbing down process we’re witnessing is the main reason Murdoch, Limbaugh and Palin have been so successful.

Probably the most frightening thing to come from the Obama admin. Who the fuck does this guy think he is? He alone can define what news americans need to hear? Of course he wants to go back in time when we only had 3 choices of television information. Liberal, more liberal, most liberal. These facists now believe they should control the flow of information so we only know the good obama admin.

If the american people don’t stand up and remove these socialists in 2012, I worry about the future of this country.

I concur!

I agree – ABC, NBC, CBS are NOT doing the job. They’ve been usurped by cable news, most specifically FOX, although MSNBC and occasionally CNN actually provide some news. Mostly, these news stations diss the tea party, Republicans, FOX and anyone else that doesn’t stand with their leftist views. FOX has become the leading source of cable news because those who actually care about the systematic destruction of this country by the far left controlled administration are listening with attention to the altlernative, the return to a Republic. This country is going bankrupt, it’s freedom of press is being threatened, it’s off shore energy shut down, it’s freedoms removed. Net neutrality will aid in the dissolution of this country. I hope that enough Americans become aware of this plan to “change” America into a socialist state, one of State Capitalism, which means gov’t controlled capitalism, total control, before it’s too late.

Let the media continue to emphasize cute talking head who want to be admired for being on the air. I’ll continue to change channels to find someone who offers information, and who identifies problems and issues I might not be aware of. Most of the ‘panels’ I see consist of people over-yelling each other… Most of the cuties seem to be lawyers, who always have an opinion about everything that must be emoted for their glorification and our edification. Give me the internet forums. I get more information, and intelligent discussions, there than from any tv or radio news sources. At least I can require online postings to provide access to their sources; to source means being ignored.

So, the media WON’T be able to collectively blow President Obama during the next election in 2012? I don’t understand what more from the media Mr. Copps wants? For the media to go ass to mouth next time?

I see..so, when Dan Rather and CNN pillory George Bush with half truths and untruths, that’s freedom of speech; when liberals get brutalized by the truth, it’s ‘substance abuse’?
Commish, you’re an idiot. That, BTW is what we call ‘free speech’. I just exercised it. Get used to it.

The public votes with their channel changers, which is why certain outlets are really, really popular, while others are cobweb outposts. And every two years, we’ll be voting for people that will put federal parasites, like you sir, out to pasture.
Hope you’re trainable for something saleable, Mr Copps. How are you at serving breakfast? I hear Denny’s is hiring.

Dan Rather was and still is, a terribly biased idiot. I voted with my remote control. My grandfather was a friend of Larry King. Grandpa was an alcoholic and Larry King is a loud-mouthed ideologue with a hatred for anyone to the right of Karl Marx. I don’t watch Larry King. Nor do I watch Olbermann, Maddow, Hannity, O’Reilly, etc. The reason the Leftists are soiling themselves is not because there is too much information (or “news”). The problem for the Leftists is that they are no longer able to control and manipulate the information which becomes available to the general public. In the opinion of Leftists, the general public is too stupid to process information and must be spoon-fed by their Masters, lest “The Masses” reach a conclusion opposed to what the Leftists desire.

Joseph Goebbels is soooo proud of you and your methods!

We are inundated 24/7 with news, and this guy thinks we’re getting less news? Or is it just not the news this guy thinks we should be getting? The one-sided, Obama butt-kissing news is probably what he wants us to hear more of.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
I don’t give a fuck about ideology on this. I rarely do. I don’t care if it’s a conservative or a liberal view. I care about what’s right, first and foremost. And this is wrong. I am anti-censorship, have always been. If they want to shut down Rush Limbaugh, I’m against it. If they want to shut down Michael Moore, I’m against it. Now, would you be able to rise above party politics to say the same? If this was still the Bush administration, and the FCC decided MSNBC was talking too much smack, and said, We need to regulate. Would you jump on the No Censorship bandwagon or would you say, Yes, Shut them down! Can you point the mirror back and say the same as I just said?

Sans expletives, I agree. We have lost our freedoms under the 2nd Amendment, and that was necessary groundwork for the usurpation of our freedoms under the 1st Amendment. Watch folks, you will soon see I’m right on this.

I agree with Nahu and would also like to point out that the FCC does not have oversight over cable and broadband services, at least not yet anyway. OTAB and radio are what it can regulate. Commissioner Copps is pining for a time when there was only a limited amount of media outlets to disseminate news, thus it was easier to control. Interesting that he did not do this interview in America and to be fair the interviewer did point out some of the glaring heavy handedness of his position. I prefer to have an ‘open architecture’ of choice decided by free markets, even if I don’t agree with them rather than the ‘choice architecture’ served up by a group of bureaucrats.