The Supreme Court Ruling Behind the Media's Right to Lie
Posted April 11th, 2008 by billyjack1958
output
FTA: In a six-page written decision released February 14, the court essentially ruled the journalist never stated a valid whistle- blower claim because, they ruled, it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.
www.organicconsumers.org/...
Video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=t...
Bookmark/Search this post with:
hm
Fortune Favors the Bold
interesting. I think, in theory, the media should have the right to lie. The airwaves issue is a complex one. The airwaves pretty much have to be public.
Corporate personhood working against YOU!
From the first link in the post...
"In essence, the news organization owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to even lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves."
How many of you still don't see how important giving the rights of a 'person' to a corporation are in their game plan?
I started another post on the subject of corporate personhood here http://www.dailypaul.com/... Please think about it.
what
so we ask the Supreme Court which is part of the corrupt administration to rule on the very system that keeps them in power; the media, and anyone is surprised how they ruled? Come' on. That's like asking them to admit when they have ruled against the US Constitution. Every last one of them would say never. I can think of one ruling that has us in this mess,
-No recount of the votes, GWB is president.
Lying about the news, in my
Lying about the news, in my opinion, should be considered some type of fraud. There is also slander or libel as well. It cannot be completely legal to simply report false news.
But in the case of wrongful death? Read: 9/11
"Walls are stronger than the men that defend them."
Khan
reddit it too!
reddit it too!
Actually
this is one case that the court got right. Even though it is crazy, there is no law. It is the job of Congress to make the law. It pisses me off, but I would rather the courts rule within their constitutional powers than to legislate from the bench. Because when they do that we have real problems.
I agree but by making this
I agree but by making this post, I hoped to get it Dugg and Reddited so that John and Mary Q Public become aware of the fact that lying is rampant in our corporate media. A huge part of our battle has been the lies and blackout of the media....and it's a huge battle for us boots on the ground. Every time I have gone canvassing recently, I've heard the words "he's not running"....
I thank you for making the
post. It needs to be mentioned how insane this all is. But here is a fundamental problem, I have read the book "how to make yourself invisible" and the author states that in order to be considered a liar (in the legal sense) the information actually has to be used to incur damages. Therefore, there has to be a victim that incurred a loss or damages from the information. It should be clear that RP has incurred losses from the outright lying, but it leads to other questions about false information that doesn't. I am on your side and want the MSM to rot in the jails they deserve, I just want to make sure we get something with real teeth. Cheers.
I would say that the victim,
I would say that the victim, if looking at this case alone, is the general American public who are being poisoned by drinking milk from cows injected with the bovine growth hormone. We are the only country who approved these injections....everybody else looked at the links to cancer and said "No Way". Read up on Monsanto....there are victims alllll over the world from their GMO propagations. A good place to start would be with Big Sky Free Press, it's meetup 84 under current events.
http://currentevents.meet...
I am very aware of Monsanto.
But what does that have to do with the media lying. Or are you referencing the Fox reporters that got fired because they wouldn't change their story regarding Monsanto. Are you sure that we are the only country that uses bGH? Codex from the WTO is requiring bGH for all animals in the world. I have a hard time believing the U.S. would be able to push this through by themselves. I know that Canada has vetoed several measures. Monsanto is a huge enemy of any person around the world.
Digg It
Digg It Here:
http://digg.com/politics/...
they won't bite the hand that
feeds them.
Speechless
..........
I am bringing this back
I am bringing this back because I want to make sure that everyone sees it. I was trying to bring some awareness to an independent voter I know and when I mentioned how blatantly and repeatedly the corporate media lies to us, she responded with "They can't lie to us, it's illegal, isn't it?" I emailed her these links as well as a lot of other info and now she is supporting Ron Paul.