Wow FUCK the FTC. Wants to tax news aggregators and redistribute funds to newspapers

Affiliati

Affiliati

New member
Jul 19, 2009
533
16
0
Orlando
EDITORIAL: FTC floats Drudge tax - Washington Times

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking ways to "reinvent" journalism, and that's a cause for concern. According to a May 28 draft proposal, the agency thinks government should be at the center of a media overhaul. The bureaucracy sees it as a problem that the Internet has introduced a wealth of information options to consumers, forcing media companies to adapt and experiment to meet changing market needs. FTC's policy staff fears this new reality.
"There are reasons for concern that experimentation may not produce a robust and sustainable business model for commercial journalism," the report states. With no faith that the market will work things out for the better, government thinks it must come to the rescue.
The ideas being batted around to save the industry share a common theme: They are designed to empower bureaucrats, not consumers. For instance, one proposal would, "Allow news organizations to agree jointly on a mechanism to require news aggregators and others to pay for the use of online content, perhaps through the use of copyright licenses."
In other words, government policy would encourage a tax on websites like the Drudge Report, a must-read source for the news links of the day, so that the agency can redistribute the funds collected to various newspapers. Such a tax would hit other news aggregators, such as Digg, Fark and Reddit, which not only gather links, but provide a forum for a lively and entertaining discussion of the issues raised by the stories. Fostering a robust public-policy debate, not saving a particular business model, should be the goal of journalism in the first place.
The report also discusses the possibility of offering tax exemptions to news organizations, establishing an AmeriCorps for reporters and creating a national fund for local news organizations. The money for those benefits would come from a suite of new taxes. A 5 percent tax on consumer electronic devices such as iPads, Kindles and laptops that let consumers read the news could be used to encourage people to keep reading the dead-tree version of the news. Other taxes might be levied on the radio and television spectrum, advertising and cell phones.
The conflict of interest in having the government pay or contribute to a newsman's salary could not be more obvious. Reporters and columnists would have little incentive to offer critical analyses of tax increases that might mean a boost in the pocketbook. Once Congress has the power to fund the news, it can at any time attach "strings" designed to promote certain viewpoints - in the name of fairness, of course. Each year at budget time, the Fourth Estate would scramble to be worthy in the eyes of Capitol Hill for increased support. It is hardly a surprise that the heavily subsidized National Public Radio frequently presents issues in a way favorable to Washington's tax-and-spend agenda.
Self-respecting journalists must reject this tempting government bribe as the FTC brings its proposals to a round-table discussion scheduled for June 15. When it comes to the media, consumers lose most when government suppresses innovation in the name of "saving" old business models.
Click to expand...
 


This is just sickening. What happened to the freedom of information that the FTC was pushing for the Internet earlier this year?

People need to adapt, not cling to pre-electronic business models. There are plenty of ways that Newspapers and Magazines could make money if they just got off their asses and thought about it instead of living in the past.
 
Fucking Terrible Cunts.

Fuck the FTC. Next thing we know they want to tax emails and facebook. :action-smiley-052::action-smiley-052::action-smiley-052::action-smiley-052:

adapt or die motherfuckers, adapt or die
 
It's not the FTC spearheading this, it's Obama. He wants to get even more control over the media and this is one of his first chilling steps. It reminds me of the state-owned BBC which is one of the most Communist outlets I've ever watched.
 
  • Like
Reactions: .Hack
Demon said:
Calling the BBC a communist outlet is one of the most absurd things I have ever heard. There is no brainwashing here, I get my news from all over the place, and I can say the BBC is as good as it gets when it comes to impartial reporting.
Click to expand...

And none of what you say is particularly surprising considering you grew up with it. You take the most far-left, financially fragile, loony cable network here and it doesn't even come close to what the BBC offers. There's a reason these types of "news" outlets need state financial support. But I don't expect one truthful comment to undo years of brainwashing since birth. Carry on.
 
hellblazer said:
And none of what you say is particularly surprising considering you grew up with it. You take the most far-left, financially fragile, loony cable network here and it doesn't even come close to what the BBC offers. There's a reason these types of "news" outlets need state financial support. But I don't expect one truthful comment to undo years of brainwashing since birth. Carry on.
Click to expand...
The BBC gets its money from the license fee which the taxpayer pays every year. Since there are no ads, it's the only way it gets its money. What's your point? And a BBC with ads would be shit anyway, it wouldn't happen and for good reason too. Carry on watching Fox news ;)
 
Demon said:
The BBC gets its money from the license fee which the taxpayer pays every year. Since there are no ads, it's the only way it gets its money. What's your point?
Click to expand...

The point's obvious, the BBC wouldn't survive if it didn't have the government forcing taxpayers to subsidize it. And since it doesn't have to worry about satisfying its customers or audience(its revenue/profit is guaranteed), it's free to go as left as possible, which it incidentally does. Liberals love to force the public to listen to their drivel.

But like I said, you and most Brits grew up thinking this is perfectly normal, so I highly doubt me explaining it to you would change anything. It's pretty bad here too, except the free market exposes their ideas for the intellectually bankrupt and morally vacuous things they are by totally shunning them, which is why MSNBC plays to about 43 people and CNN isn't far behind.

But now Obama's planning on changing that and will start with the newspaper industry. The New York Times has always been a Marxist propaganda rag; how nice that it might now be subsidized by the taxpayer. And once newspapers are under government control, what's to stop him from "rescuing" the radio or television industry? After all, we all know MSNBC is on the verge of bankruptcy daily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjdaz and DKPMO
Demon said:
The BBC gets its money from the license fee which the taxpayer pays every year. Since there are no ads, it's the only way it gets its money. What's your point? And a BBC with ads would be shit anyway, it wouldn't happen and for good reason too. Carry on watching Fox news ;)
Click to expand...

It is laughable that you would think a taxpayer-funded media outlet would be "balanced" instead of doing anything to support Big Government whose tit it is sucking on.

UK (that used to be known as Great Britain) is truly a sad case of what happens when socialists and entitlement ninnies take over. Even with David Cameron as PM there is little hope of reversing decades of ruinous socialist degradation. C'mon guys, British Steel is now owned by Indians! Your former colony controls your industrial backbone!

Britain is a cautionary tale of what we must avoid turning America into at all costs.
 
OK, let's not turn this thread in to a BBC thread, hellblazer. Let's stick with the actual angering issue.

The BBC is hardly a terrible news source. It should have a pro-establishment pro-government bias, but its actually pretty well mitigated. HuffingtonPost is communist nutbaggery.
 
Refrozen said:
OK, let's not turn this thread in to a BBC thread, hellblazer. Let's stick with the actual angering issue.

The BBC is hardly a terrible news source. It should have a pro-establishment pro-government bias, but its actually pretty well mitigated. HuffingtonPost is communist nutbaggery.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but BBC is extremely relevant. That is what Obamunists want to create in America to serve their political interests forever.

I would prefer free-market based nutbaggery representing all viewpoints (including HuffPost) to a sanitized government sanctioned Ministry of Truth.
 
This is the first step to prop up the sources that are willing to suck off the socialist/Obama/Democratic agenda. The next move will be to put something in place to shut down the conservative talk shows.

It is very simple. If your business relies on the government to stay afloat...you will be less likely to piss off said government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom