Conservative Hideout 2.0 Rotating Header Image

MSM Deathwatch: The Case for Government Control Obliterated

Share

I saw this yesterday, and could not resist.  It is a perfect analysis of the government current plans for the MSM. The full article is available from the Examiner, and I strongly recommend that you read it in full.  Mark Tapscott completely destroys the arguments of Lee Bollinger, President of Columbia University (That alone should give you some indication of the positions presented).  Bollinger wrote what is essentially and ode to tyranny for the Wall Street Journal.

I will be reviewing selections of Tapscott’s article.

So my stomach turned when I read Lee Bollinger’s paean in The Wall Street Journal to government-funded journalism. Behind the Columbia University president’s patchwork of logical distortions and historical half-truths are the grinning visages of Hugo Chavez and Professor Robert McChesney, his chief American apologist.

Bollinger wrote as a booster of Obama administration’s FTC initiative to “save” journalism from its allegedly imminent demise. The demise is being caused by the Internet’s destruction of the advertising model undergirding the now-thinning ranks of print and broadcast news organizations that so prospered during the last half of the previous century.

As always with progressives, Bollinger’s solution – and likely Obama’s, too – is massive government funding of selected media organizations. Those selected will be judged, like “too big to fail” banks and car companies, too important to fail; otherwise, Americans won’t be able to obtain “the essential information they need as citizens.”

“…the essential information they need as citizens.”

In other words, you only need to see and hear what the government wants you to see and hear.

Bollinger thus makes common cause with the intentionally misnamed Free Press coalition led by the neo-Marxist McChesney, an Illinois university professor of communications who, presumably with a straight face, claims “aggressive, unqualified political dissent is alive and well” in the thug state formerly known as Venezuela.

Well, it is…in the prisons.  Or behind closed doors, while hiding from goons and informants.

Several of the Free Press coalition’s flawed assumptions are prominent in Bollinger’s argument, including the notion that America never had a pure free market in news. We can’t do that because “trusting the market alone to provide all the news coverage we need would mean venturing into the unknown – a risky proposition with a vital public institution hanging in the balance.”

In other words, if they let people read, view, or listen to whatever they want, the “progressive” message gets turned off, or lines the bottom of a bird cage.  Surprisingly, people don’t like being insulted and told a long litany of lies.

Never mind that the Internet with no federal subsidies to preferred media outlets today provides more independent news gatherers and analyzers – they’re called “bloggers” – than ever worked in all the newsrooms combined in the old media’s glory days.

That’s why they want to control Internet content.  We are far too inconvenient.  Just ask Van Jones, Kevin Jennings, Cass Sunstein, Anita Dunn, the ClimateGate Scientists, Al Gore, and a host of others.  We have been a very painful thorn in their side.  It would be much more easier for them to push their agenda (and the lies that support them) if we were muzzled.

Or that the Internet is driving news delivery technology in new directions at warp speed, thus promising more independent checks on politicians and bureaucrats than Publius could ever have dreamed.

And that is the “progressive’s” biggest problem.

Not to worry, though, because we have the comforting example of heavily subsidized colleges and universities where, according to Bollinger, “those of us in public and private research universities care every bit as much about academic freedom as journalists care about a free press.”

Somehow I doubt Bollinger would understand that those of us fighting to preserve freedom of the press are anything but comforted by his example, publicly assisted schools being among the least free-thinking institutions in America, owing to their pervasive speech codes and other forms of censorship.

Not to mention the threats of failing grades, harassment, death threats, and so on.

But then maybe we shouldn’t be surprised that Columbia University’s president sees no difference between a government-subsidized university system that perpetuates a suffocating academic orthodoxy and government-subsidized news media like that praised by an apologist for Hugo Chavez’s suppression of the Venezuelan media.

After all, his final argument is a warning that other countries are doing it, countries like still-communist China, with its state-run Xinhua News and Central China Television. Clearly, independent journalism is doomed if it must depend for its defense upon “friends” like Bollinger.

Again, kindly read the entire article.  It is a great read, and Tapscott completely dissects Bollinger’s points.

This is where we are in terms of freedom of speech.  We know that Chavez has shut down unsympathetic news outlets, and has jailed some of their owners. We know that China has a state controlled media, and is still an oppressive state.  We know that the political correctness and speech codes on university campuses make them the closest thing to a Marxist state that can exist in the US. Yet Bollinger thinks that these are favorable comparisons?

In so many respects, the masks have come off.  More and more people on the left are openly exposing their ideas, and that these people are in positions of power or influence  should concern us.

From their perspective, they have to try and control the flow of information.  As I pointed out earlier, we have been a massive pain their collective posteriors.  We have dug up videos, excerpted books and academic articles, posted quotes, and otherwise expose their ideas and their policies/legislation.  And since, in a state of freedom, the American people reject “progressive” ideas, they have to silence dissent.  As I have posited many times, Marxism (or fascism and “progressivism”) eventually collapses when information is free. When people can compare individual freedom to any statist system, they embrace freedom.  The free flow of information exposes the failures and tyranny of any statist system.  Since Marxism, Fascism, and “progressivism” are all based on lies to install them, and more lies to maintain them, control of information is absolutely essential to perpetuate them.

Our “progressive” friends won’t refer to it as that.  They’ll make references to “fairness” and “democracy.”  Those words are meaningless to them, as they are only selling points, similar to the words that a used car salesman would spew to sell a lemon.  The real goal is to control information, and in the end, you-body, mind, and spirit, from cradle to grave.

Share
  • Pingback: Tweets that mention MSM Deathwatch: The Case for Government Control Obliterated | Conservative Hideout 2.0 -- Topsy.com()

  • http://americaswatchtower.com Steve Dennis

    Funny how unfair “fairness” is when the leftists try to impose it. People reject their ideas and that isn’t fair, fo they want to force their ideas on us in the name of “fairness.”
    And don’t forget that Barack Obama claimed that Americans get too much information, when yoiu stop to think about that statement it is very scary. He wants to control what information we receive. (Remember also that he stated people watch the wrong television stations because they are confused?)

    • http://www.trestinmeacham.info/ Trestin Meacham

      This is because left leaners think like children. They base their arguments on emotion and self interest.

      • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

        Well said, Trestin. I agree,

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      I don’t believe that I’m confused at all. Of course, with a government controlled media, we wouldn’t even know that we should be concerned.

  • http://www.ldjackson.net LD Jackson

    Bottom line, they think they know what is best for us to eat, drink, watch, and read. Therefore, we should listen to them, as they know best. God help us all if it comes to that.

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      You said it LD. Control is the goal.

  • http://kingshamus.wordpress.com/ KingShamus

    Matt-Great work here.

    When it comes to Bollinger, it’s amazing how dumb a guy with all that edumakation can be.

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      Sadly, he was edumakated in teh Marxism.

  • http://www.womanhonorthyself.com/ Angel

    hey Matt..yea let the first so called Lady tell u how many calories a day u can eat! pfftt! Hang in there…its almost Friday hun!:)

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      You know Angel, given all the foods that you discuss at your place. Mobama would likely ban you first. That cheeseburger post is still making me hungry! :lol:

  • http://www.amusingbunni.blogspot.com Bunni

    Wonderfully said, Matt! I’m very happy to be a big thorn in the sides of these commies. The Bloggers are the only outlet, besides a few like Fox, etc. telling the TRUTH! That poster says it all. If the gov’t gets it’s wish and takes over the media, we will really be screwed. I sure am praying that doesn’t happen. This is why obummer loves Chavez, et al, he want’s to copy them, esp. on this issue.

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      Thanks Bunni. I’m proud to be part of the thorn with you!

  • http://thecurrent9171787.blogspot.com/ John Carey

    Great post Matt. We need to keep exposing these Marxists for what and who they are. As you said when you place statism and individual freedoms side by side people chose individual freedoms again and again. The great work you do here at Conservative Hideout and the great work all the other conservative bloggers have done on their own sites are exposing the lies everyday making it indeed difficult for them to gain solid footing on the issue. I thank you for that.

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      Thanks for that very good comment John.

  • http://www.manhattaninfidel.com Infidel de Manahatta

    Le’ts see. A government bailout of newspapers so they can continue to give us the information we need? What can possibly go wrong with that.

    • http://conservativehideout.com Matt

      Let me help you imagine this liberal future: You turn on the TV, and all you see is Keith Olbermann. You go on your favorite news site, and it’s Olbermann. You turn on the radio, and all you hear is Olbermann. You buy any paper, and all you can read is Olbermann.

      That is the future government media.

      Now turn your head before you vomit all over your screen.

  • Pingback: Saturday Morning Links: The Classic Motorcycle Edition | motorcitytimes.com()