US Office of Censorship?

[Andy9o8 3]

Should the US govt establish an Office of Censorship to screen news reports to determine whether they "hurt the country" (endanger national security) or are of "news value"? Is there a place for this in a democracy?

A recent debate on the issue was reported in this article:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606290009

[quade 4]

Quote

Should the US govt establish an Office of Censorship to screen news reports to determine whether they "hurt the country" (endanger national security) or are of "news value"? Is there a place for this in a democracy?

A recent debate on the issue was reported in this article:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606290009

Debate?

Are you freekin' kidding me?

The answer is no freekin' way.

We're supposed to be fighting for freedom and democracy not suppressing it in our own country.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Funny how some one on Fox would advocate something like that. I guess it would ensure they would get all the scoops.

[billvon 3,132]

>Should the US govt establish an Office of Censorship to screen
>news reports to determine whether they "hurt the country" (endanger
>national security) or are of "news value"?

Of course we need it! How else do we stop stories about atrocities in Iraq, indictments in the White House and growing worldwide opposition to our wars? Such stories make the president's approval rating go down, and then the terrorists win.

[mr2mk1g 10]

Using those criteria would cause a spontaneous implosion of the entire Universe.

I jest not:

Things would start off simple enough: an office in the Office of Censorship would conclude that an item of news was harmful to the Nation and thus attempt to censor it.

Things would soon escalate however.

Someone in another office of the Office of Censorship would rightly conclude that State sponsored censorship of the press is hugely harmful to the Nation and would therefore censor the edict emanating from the first office in the Office of Censorship.

This blatant attempt at State sponsored Censorship, being hugely harmful to the Nation, would be instantaneously censored by the Office of Censorship internal control systems leading to the inevitable paradox that the first office's attempt to censor the news would go ahead, instantly generating another office within the Office of Censorship to produce a memoranda censoring the first office within the Office of Censorship, which would instantly be overturned by their own control systems allowing the initial office of the Office of Censorship to go ahead with their censorship which would then be censored.

The news item would go ahead as the Office of Censorship was busy with a self perpetuating paradox causing an unavoidable critical mass of red-tape. With further internal memoranda and censorships being generated at such a blinding speed the Office of Censorship would collapse into itself and form a self-generated black-hole causing a tear in the very fabric of space time and the end to reality as we know it.

So personally I think it's probably a bad idea.

[bodypilot90 0]

If in WW2, would you want the news to publish the date and plan for d day? I know i wouldn't.



_______________________________________________

[Channman 2]

OOPs, I'm sorry, did'nt realize this was a liberal blog. I'll just excuse myself and let yall rant.

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

OOPs, I'm sorry, did'nt realize this was a liberal blog.

It's not. It's whatever you choose to make out of it, if you choose to participate.

Quote

I'll just excuse myself and let yall rant.

Or, you could participate.

[WeakMindedFool 0]

Yes we should! But it should be called "The Ministry of Information"....See you at 2 minute madness

Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for lost faith in ourselves.
-Eric Hoffer -
Check out these Videos

[bch7773 0]

I don't think news corporations should be allowed to print all that they find. They've proven they can't be trusted to protect national security over big sales.

but I don't think the government should be able to censor all that they want.

MB 3528, RB 1182

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I don't think news corporations should be allowed to print all that they find. They've proven they can't be trusted to protect national security over big sales.

but I don't think the government should be able to censor all that they want.

Ok. So, where is the balance point? And, who decides it?

We are all engines of karma

[unformed 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't think news corporations should be allowed to print all that they find. They've proven they can't be trusted to protect national security over big sales.

but I don't think the government should be able to censor all that they want.

Ok. So, where is the balance point? And, who decides it?

the president.

since he knows what's best for the country.

This ad space for sale.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Should the US govt establish an Office of Censorship to screen news reports to determine whether they "hurt the country" (endanger national security) or are of "news value"? Is there a place for this in a democracy?

A recent debate on the issue was reported in this article:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606290009

Debate?

Are you freekin' kidding me?

The answer is no freekin' way.

We're supposed to be fighting for freedom and democracy not suppressing it in our own country.

Dam, I agree with you here. The laws we have on the books can deal with illeagal discloser.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Should the US govt establish an Office of Censorship to screen news reports to determine whether they "hurt the country" (endanger national security) or are of "news value"? Is there a place for this in a democracy?

You mean other than the abuse it would suffer at the hands of either party when in power?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Amazon 7]

Quote

the president.

since he knows what's best for the country.

Long Live King George......


I bet the founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I bet the founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.

zombies are scary

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Gawain 0]

During WWII there was such an office. However, that was also during a period of "declared" war by Congress.

Should there be such an office now? In my opinion, no. However those that would tout "1st Amendment" rights in the face of everything should seriously look at their role in a larger scheme of things.

Just because one has the right to say something, doesn't mean they should say it. 1st Amendment rights do not extend to the point that they might infringe on someone else's right to "...life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."

If the terrorist networks learned of a new way to disguise their funding networks through SWIFT and other clearinghouses as a result of the NYT's disclosure of the monitoring, and that results in a new attack, then they have (the NYT), in my opinion, committed a crime.

There is no protection under the Constitution from those circumstances.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Zipp0 1]

If this were to come to pass, the insurgency in Iraq would no longer be the primary problem.

The primary problem would be the insurgency in the USA.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.