Comment 56745

By patcon (registered) | Posted January 17, 2011 at 21:38:16


They're not legislating truth. They're allowing the networks to decide what might constitute "misleading", which is great, because they are the best judges of. It encourages them to self-police, which is something we should push for. But hey, if they started defining what "misleading" meant, then I'd be worried. Let the courts decide should charges ever be pressed. That's the time to get upset -- if the legislation is being perverted. Can anyone give one instance of a story being killed because of this? You SHOULD be confident of a story's truth before publishing -- that's what responsible journalists do -- or else you're just an amateur blogger! (And that's NOT meant to imply anything about this blogger.)

I am overall very happy with how our networks conduct themselves, and I for one can't see any good coming out of this removal. Have you ever even heard of this legislation preventing a real story from being told? Or being abused to shut down a story? Why are we striking it down then? Our media climate compared to that of the USA is amazing.

PS, this blog could really use a Disqus comment module :)

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools