The Federal Communications Commission on Friday quietly canned its controversial study of American newsrooms, a week after putting the project on hold.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Nightwatch Program
Collapse
X
-
What's going on with our country? These stories, while deeply, deeply disturbing, are not a shock. Warning signals were present in the adminstration's first term.
America, THIS is what you elected.
America, THIS is what you deserve.
In both cases, you are either actively involved or by neglect.
The Justice Department did more than seize a Fox News reporter's emails while suggesting he was a criminal "co-conspirator" in a leak case -- it did so under one of the most serious wartime laws in America, the Espionage Act.
Leave a comment:
-
I think Saudi Arabia has these guys that do pretty much the same thing, except that they insure that the women are dressed properly, instead of talking properly.
Well, Churchill DID say that the next generation of fascists would call themselves anti-fascists...
Leave a comment:
-
The scariest thing for me about this is that the univerity officials actually went ahead and proudly announced this "project". It is one thing to do this quietly, behind peoples backs, but to go out in the open and actually suggest this is the right thing to do ... *shakes head*
Leave a comment:
-
It's very cold up north...
It would be hilarious if it were not so chilling: Queen's University will hire six "facilitators" who will listen in on student conversations, vigilant against incorrect speech. Officially, says the University's website, these incognito "intergroup facilitators," will "respond to, stimulate and invite engagement across difference and tensions that arise among and between groups" in residences. They'll pay special attention to "incidents of bias, prejudice ... harassment and discrimination" and they'll be good at all this, because they will "receive intensive and specialized training in the areas of social-justice theory."
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazett...3-04fb0130daa4
After this program was reported by the National Post and others, it proved somewhat more controversial than anticipated, and Patrick Deane, the school's academic vice-president, was forced to e-mail out a hasty letter of explanation to alumni. Mr. Deane tells the old boys (and girls) of Queen's that he literally cannot imagine why plainclothes university-paid snoops skulking around campus, listening in on student conversations would remind anybody (as it reminded the editorial board of one Toronto newspaper) of the KGB.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...t-queen-s.aspx
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Radhil View PostIt's a stupid idea because it's a publicity ploy, not a real action.
On the flip side, I like the logic of it. A stupid arguement on a stupid ban when codified into law turns into state harassment for the masses, not just the minorities. I like the illumination. Pity no one will see it that way.
EDIT - P.S. - Are we even in the right thread here?
Leave a comment:
-
It's a stupid idea because it's a publicity ploy, not a real action.
On the flip side, I like the logic of it. A stupid arguement on a stupid ban when codified into law turns into state harassment for the masses, not just the minorities. I like the illumination. Pity no one will see it that way.
EDIT - P.S. - Are we even in the right thread here?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LessonInMachismo View Post
Leave a comment:
-
Wash. initiative would require married couples to have kids
10:26 AM PST on Tuesday, February 6, 2007
KING5.com Staff and Associated Press
OLYMPIA, Wash. - An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.
Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LessonInMachismo View PostCute how this has been happening for YEARS in nice little publications such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, etc., but only now is it a problem.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Jan View PostYou're right, columnists and the like should NOT be registered as lobbyists. It'd be easy to say that a determination of who's paying them could/should be used but that would be wrong, too.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LessonInMachismo View PostYep. Cute how this has been happening for YEARS in nice little publications such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, etc., but only now is it a problem. They aren't lobbyists. They're writers who get paid, and that isn't any of our business. Now, if it were a case where a senator or congressman was found to be directly funneling money to a columnist or blogger, then yeah, you'd have a case against the senator or congressman. But not the writer.
Jan
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SLerman View PostSo let me see if I understand you correctly. You think it's immoral for the government to force people that get paid by large corporations and lobbying firms to write "opinion pieces" and influence Congress (a.k.a. lobbyists) to openly state that they are indeed lobbyists?
I mean, we've had state secrets revealed in newspapers and there wasn't a penalty.
That's quite interesting. I'm not a big fan of government interference in people's personal lives, but I'm sorry, anything that promotes honesty and transparency in politics (insert "honest politician" joke here) trumps whatever ultra-libertarian views someone may have.
You want transparency in politics? Let's start tracking things such as farm subsidies and find out WHY certain politicians from both parties are for them. But don't mess with someone's free speech.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: