Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (430525)	10/27/2008 1:15:57 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1574060

>> I've always believed in the free market of ideas. I certainly have, as well. But it comes at a cost. Journalists cannot be prosecuted for certain of their failings. They can say damaging things about certain entities without fear of retribution. Their "speech" receives protections the rest of us don't receive. But these were provided with an understanding that they would serve the essential function of performing as an "unofficial" watchdog on government, which they are now failing to do. When the CPAs failed to self-regulate, it became necessary for government to step in and retrieve some of the regulatory control. Unfortunately, allowing government to regulate the "free press" is not a tenable arrangement. So, I'm not sure where we go from here. The choices, I suppose, are to allow an un-checked media to take control of the election process, or to allow government a process by which they can regulate the "rights" of media speak freely without concern for objectivity or factual content. It is a much more difficult problem with the media than it was with CPAs, as the future of the nation is at stake and the notion of self-regulation isn't one which evolved, rather, it was one that was assigned by the Founders. It is quite a conundrum.