Who here subscribes to Pravda?

[rudder]

Specifically referring to its birth as the official mouthpiece of the communist government. Pravda is Russian for truth. From its birth in 1917 to its demise when the Soviet Union fell apart it was used by a lot of Soviet leaders to help maintain power by manipulating its content.

When the government starts giving handouts to newspapers... how biased do you think their reporting will become? We don't here about any Sestak developments as it is. I cannot imagine what kind of news we will have towards the end of obama's administration in 2012.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/06/federal-trade-commission-free-press.html

http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/news/jun15/docs/new-staff-discussion.pdf

Thank goodness we have the internet... for now.

 

[Danube]

""Potential Policy Recommendations to Support the Reinvention of Journalism."

lol Obama is such a creep

 

[palehorse]

"Potential Policy Recommendations to Support the Reinvention of Journalism."

That's just so fucked up, and on so many levels, I don't even know where to start...

 

[UberNeuman]

and again we go with outrage...

from a blog/op....

/quit being chumps.....

 

[CallMeJoe]

If you actually read the FTC paper, you might note that the first section deals with implications of Intellectual Property Rights, Fair Use Doctrine and the Hot News exception to existing copyright laws, and the bulk of the remainder addresses issues of existing tax laws to various news media.

I read Pravda, and this is no Pravda charter.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

My wife does. She is Russian and only reads it for it's comedic value.

 

[shangshang]

OP you bunch of pussies. go on remove those pussy hairs in between your teeth and read some commie ideologies instead of being all pussy about it. fuckin puss dude.

 

[palehorse]

OP you bunch of pussies. go on remove those pussy hairs in between your teeth and read some commie ideologies instead of being all pussy about it. fuckin puss dude.

Winner!

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

Yeah! We don't need a free press. Why would we be guaranteed that?

 

[rudder]

OP you bunch of pussies. go on remove those pussy hairs in between your teeth and read some commie ideologies instead of being all pussy about it. fuckin puss dude.

lolwut?

Anyway, better than having penis hairs in between your teeth... right shittyshitty shangshang? At least show a slight modicum of intelligence when you post here... hell, your comments would be considered idiotic and senseless over in the off-topic forum.

 

[Thump553]

Specifically referring to its birth as the official mouthpiece of the communist government. Pravda is Russian for truth. From its birth in 1917 to its demise when the Soviet Union fell apart it was used by a lot of Soviet leaders to help maintain power by manipulating its content.

When the government starts giving handouts to newspapers... how biased do you think their reporting will become? We don't here about any Sestak developments as it is. I cannot imagine what kind of news we will have towards the end of obama's administration in 2012.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/06/federal-trade-commission-free-press.html

http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/news/jun15/docs/new-staff-discussion.pdf

Thank goodness we have the internet... for now.

1) Learn to write in English- "We don't here about any Sestak developments as it is." A fifth grader should be expected to construct a sentence more clearly than that.

2) I take it you weren't disturbed at all by the GWB administration spoon-feeding it's talking points to Fox News, or parading around government paid stooges as so-called independent experts?

But you get outraged over Bill Clinton floating a trial balloon for an unpaid advisory committee position to Sestak. Your "moral" outrage is a total failure.

 

[Bateluer]

http://kotaku.com/5555080/ftc-proposes-5-tax-on-consumer-electronics"

To save the newspaper industry, of course. Hmm, or the newspaper industry could join us consumers in the 21st century and go digital. You know, publish digital versions for the Kindles, Nooks, iPads, etc and save themselves a bunch of money in the process. No printing costs, no delivery costs, minimal bandwidth costs. I think my largest .epub files for my nook are under 1MB and thats with no compression at all, for a 1000 page novel. I can't imagine the average newspaper being anywhere near that size.

http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/news/jun15/docs/new-staff-discussion.pdf

As part of a draft plan to "save journalism" (as in, "save newspapers"), the Federal Trade Commission is making a number of proposals to Washington. Among them is a 5% tax on consumer electronics. Hey, game consoles are consumer electronics!

It's already been dubbed the "iPad Tax" by some hipsters, but really, that's a little stupid. Consumer electronics isn't just iPads, or iPhones, or iMacs. It's a Zune, a DS, an Xbox 360, a PS3, a Tivo, a tablet, a laptop and a digital camera as well.

The thinking behind the tax is that it would generate $4 billion annually for the US government, which it could then use to subsidise the continued operation of failing media outlets like newspapers, who have seen their ad revenues drop by over 40% in the past decade.

Putting aside concerns of how this would generate a conflict of interest between the media and the federal government, it's astonishing to think that consumers could be slugged an extra 5% at the register when buying a PlayStation to help save a newspaper.

While 5% doesn't sound like much, on a $500 purchase, that's an extra $25.

Before you grab torches and pitchforks, though, note this isn't law. It's not even the final word from the FTC. It is, as the FTC puts it, "solely for the purposes of discussion". Well, mission accomplished!

 

[boomerang]

1) Learn to write in English- "We don't here about any Sestak developments as it is." A fifth grader should be expected to construct a sentence more clearly than that.

2) I take it you weren't disturbed at all by the GWB administration spoon-feeding it's talking points to Fox News, or parading around government paid stooges as so-called independent experts?

But you get outraged over Bill Clinton floating a trial balloon for an unpaid advisory committee position to Sestak. Your "moral" outrage is a total failure.

Attacking the messenger huh?

Point two is the living in the past syndrome. This president promised us transparency and the end to business as usual in Washington. In this regard he is an utter failure and I personally have no qualms with being outraged over it.

Point three is covered by my paragraph above.

 

[halik]

Specifically referring to its birth as the official mouthpiece of the communist government. Pravda is Russian for truth. From its birth in 1917 to its demise when the Soviet Union fell apart it was used by a lot of Soviet leaders to help maintain power by manipulating its content.

When the government starts giving handouts to newspapers... how biased do you think their reporting will become? We don't here about any Sestak developments as it is. I cannot imagine what kind of news we will have towards the end of obama's administration in 2012.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/06/federal-trade-commission-free-press.html

http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/news/jun15/docs/new-staff-discussion.pdf

Thank goodness we have the internet... for now.

If it's NPR in print I would be interested. If it's government printing news, no thanks.

I grew up in a country that had a publication called The Red Right ("Rude Pravo"), subsequently renamed to Right ("Pravo") after '89

 

[Bowfinger]

Is this doomed to be another formula thread, where the nutters get a great rage going before someone points out the OP is factually inaccurate? Let me be the first. Your title is false. Congress doesn't want anything at this point. It is an FTC proposal for discussion.

Carry on.


(Edit: Please note that this post was in a different thread carrying the title, "Why Does Congress Want to Tax Personal Electronics". It appears that thread was merged into this one.)

 

[Red Dawn]

Who here subscribes to Pravda?

Well I subscribe to Fox News which is basically the same thing, a mouthpiece for a political party.

 

[Bateluer]

Is this doomed to be another formula post, where the nutters get a great rage going before someone points out the OP is factually inaccurate? Let me be the first. Your title is false. Congress doesn't "what" [sic] anything at this point. It is an FTC proposal for discussion.

Carry on.

Title corrected for you. While this is technically just a discussion at the FTC, the fact that they'd even consider it is a noodle scratcher. It doesn't pass the idiot test.

 

[Exterous]

WTH??!! I replied to the Newspapers Tax thread

Edit: Ahh - thread merger

Anyway: Why do we need to save the newspapers? More to the point why do we need the government to do it?

 

[Bowfinger]

Title corrected for you. While this is technically just a discussion at the FTC, the fact that they'd even consider it is a noodle scratcher. It doesn't pass the idiot test.

No argument from me. I do think it's a legitimate problem and agree it's in the public interest to maintain a robust free press. This seems like a dumb and inappropriate approach to the problem, however. The press needs to find a business model that works in today's market.

(On a personal note, I'd suggest they start by improving customer service. We finally dropped our subscription to the local daily after over 20 years as a customer. We did this not because we were dissatisfied with their content (which had certainly gone way down hill) nor because we didn't want the print format (we find paper convenient at times, digital at other times). No, we dropped it because their delivery had become so unreliable. Even worse, when we would call them about missing papers or missing sections, the service was atrocious. Sometimes there was nobody there to answer the phone. When they did answer, they'd usually promise to bring out a replacement, but didn't follow through about half the time. We finally got so fed up with the constant hassles we canceled.)

 

[IndyColtsFan]

OP you bunch of pussies. go on remove those pussy hairs in between your teeth and read some commie ideologies instead of being all pussy about it. fuckin puss dude.

AzN, is that you?

 

[Bateluer]

WTH??!! I replied to the Newspapers Tax thread

Edit: Ahh - thread merger

Anyway: Why do we need to save the newspapers? More to the point why do we need the government to do it?

Confused me. My title was more clear.

 

[rudder]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...mportant-than-saving-newspapers-96085674.html

85% of Americans polled by rasmussen agree that Freedom of the Press is more important than saving some struggling newspapers. Not that this thing would die because of public opinion... but there is hope this will never get out of department level talks.

 

[Craig234]

Fox news, and the corporate corruption of our media, are far larger problems, that most who scream about this say little about.

At first glance, I did not like the idea at all - the government should not subsidize its own watchdog.

But there's a big difference in the reason for the program. Pravda was designed to serve the government,not the people, with propaganda to keep them in line.

If PBS and NPR did not exist and were suggested today instead of when they were created in the late 60's, we'd hear the same objections - horrible program, they'll just be Pravda and threaten our independant media. And yet, that was wrong. Few would accuse them of being 'government progpaganda' - even a poitical show like Frontline is considered by many to be one of, if not the, best documentary series on TV - beating the 'private' media in that activity.

But when I saw a Bill Moyers' segment with two experts suggesting the government funding investigative journalism, because it's critical for democracy and at a time of ig problems over the business situation, and the protections available (recall the BBC is pretty good too), I'm much mope open to considering it as the government ensuring an essential thing for democracy - one it protected in the first amendment - isn't lost to Fox and big corporations.

I can't find a link to the Moyers segment if someone can, post it.

 

[Linflas]

Well I subscribe to Fox News which is basically the same thing, a mouthpiece for a political party.

Fascinating theory, so which political party would that be, Republican (Hannity), Libertarian (Beck, Napolitano), Democrat (Rivera, Smith), or Independents (Van Susteren, O'Reilly)? Fox News leans right editorially but they have plenty of people on there on a daily basis slamming Republicans and Democrats in the opinion segments. It just really seems to get lefties panties in a bunch that we are no longer restricted to 1/2 hour a day of left slanted news delivered by 3 sources.

 

[heyheybooboo]

I prefer The Daily Worker, comrade.

I also prefer newsprint and am sorry to see its upcoming demise.




--