Congressional Investigation of Fox News needs to be done

[itsrobert]

Will Pelosi and Reid have the guts to take on the GOP propaganda network masquerading as a News channel?

[AlCzervik]

1. it's cable so i think they aren't under the jurisdiction of the fcc

i'm pretty sure we've all thought about it though. I'm not for shutting them down, i'm for shaming them in to actually having to tell the truth.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. No FCC jurisdiction, but I wonder if any campaign finance laws have been violated?

In other words -- has Faux been giving the 'Pubbies free advertising in violation of some law?

[AlCzervik]

4. Sean Hannity gave money to Jeanne Pirro during this cycle, maybe there is

law that requires that to be disclosed on screen the way the money ho's have to disclose on the air if they own the stick they're trying to pimp out to you.

[rwenos]

3. How Could it be Constitutional?

They are, after all, a news organization. As much as I hate their guts, it's never a good idea to start on that road.

Also, I think the prior poster is correct -- FAUX News is not FCC-regulated, since they're "cable only."

What's that old quote, "I deplore what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it?"

[AlCzervik]

5. well said.

[conscious evolution]

15. You are right

Due to our Constitution that is a slippery slope.
Let an international war crimes tribunal deal with them.Since our law precludes us from doing anything that gives jurisdiction to International tribunals.
There is precedent for war crime charges against the media.
http://foi.missouri.edu/newsmgmtabroad/crtconvicts.html
There are others from WW2.

[Montauk6]

6. Because I support freedom of the press, I get a little antsy about this.

I'd rather see an investigation of the whole "faith-based initiatives" racket.

[rwenos]

7. Subpoenas Soon to Fly

That guy who wrote a book about the "faith-based initiative" being a big con -- seems like he'd be a GREAT witness to lead off Congressional hearings on THAT boondoggle.

[Generic Brad]

8. Maybe it's time to expand the fairness doctrine to cable

Just because it hasn't been done before does not mean we have to keep the existing rules in place. It's not like changing the Constitution. It's just cable television.

[rwenos]

10. Sounds Like Time for . . . .

the COMMERCE CLAUSE!

Great idea! Congress could re-institute the Fairness Doctrine with a majority vote. I don't know if Brownshirt would have the cojones to veto THAT.

[Generic Brad]

20. Not unless he officially wants to be known as the unfair and unbalanced President

Although he currently could lay legitimate claim that title, he is only known that way "unofficially".

[KSU Wildcat]

9. This is a freedom of speech issue.

What we need to do is get our own television channel. We have AAR to counter Rush Limbaugh and Hannity. Now we need a news channel to counter O'Reilly and Hannity's constant stream of bs.

[Clark2008]

19. But AAR isn't as popular.

Look - AAR isn't on every freaking talk station in the South and mid-West like Limpballs and InSannity are.

And - even if they tried - advertisers and big money wouldn't advertise on them to keep them from being a hit with the populace.

The same would be true of an all liberal news station.

Let's face it, liberals, by definition, don't have the money and corporation-funding that conservatives do.

[KSU Wildcat]

22. It is not about money..

Advertisers want programs that have a lot of people listening to. They do not care red, yellow, black, white, left or right, they want the most exposure for their buck. There are more liberals than conservatives so if AAR is failing it is because their content is not appealing to the masses out there, not even the liberals out there in radio land. The same would be for a television news network.

Nobody, right or left, is not going to spend hard earned money sponsoring programs that very few people listen to.

[onenote]

11. and then what? repeal the first amendment?

Fox News is not a broadcast station. Its not licensed by the government. It should no more be subject to an investigation of its content than any other non-broadcast form of communication, including newspapers, magazines, and internet websites like this one that we're communicating on.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

12. I wish we can get them on slander,

FOX should be held accountable for every out and out slanderous lie they told and tell.

[rwenos]

14. NY Times v. Sullivan

Forget it. Libel and slander were constitutionalized in the Pentagon Papers case in 1974. When the shoe was on the other foot, we were cheering the Supremes. (Hard to imagine now, ain't it?)

[boolean]

13. What is it with this first ammendment, free speech NONSENSE??

Freedom of speech, my ass. Do advertisers have the right to lie about their products? No. It's called false advertising.

Faux News has consistently LIED. They advertise themselves as a legitimate news channel, but they are not.

[rocktivity]

18. DING DING DING! Boolean, you're our grand prize winner!

...Faux News has consistently LIED. They advertise themselves as a legitimate news channel, but they are not.

The public has a right to know--the whole truth, no matter who it hurts. And if hearings were to reveal that the news channels conspired with the Bush White House to peddle their policies and quash dissent, we'd be perfectly justified in regulating them if they want to continue to refer to themselves and be treated as news channels.

:headbang:
rocknation

[DocSavage]

21. Good idea

You be sure to start telling everyone in America that watches Fox or listens on sat radio that Fox lies. 2 minutes after you do that, someone will trace you to DU, once they post a couple of threads that are really out there, you will be discredited faster than Juanita Brodrick.

I am sure that there is no one that wants to get into a he said/she said argument over what a news channel or paper put out.

I am still very suprised by the fear that 1 tv network instills in people.

[Robbien]

16. How about investigation of an RNC office inside the White House?

Rove's office is totally for promoting the RNC and his office is sitting in the west wing. Clinton was sanctioned for using WH phones for campaigning, while Bush has almost the entire West Wing doing RNC campaign duties.

This should get on the "to be investigated" list.

[mmonk]

17. It will never happen