Under a handful of owners is a separate, but related problem.

Though not sure how much good that would do in the age of 24/7 social media news.

public airways and the FCC has zero content authority over those genres and there's no FCC license to revoke as there is no license required to operate, as it should be.
And, like you said, it wouldn't do any good anyway, not in todays 24/7 social media.

what is true/false, what is newsworthy, or what constitutes truthfulness.

An option of "regulations only in effect/enforceable under Democratic administrations".

I don't know if that is even possible.

It always amazes me that people would empower Trump or a future Republican president to shut down news outlets he doesn’t like. Pure madness.

there are those that fail to see that.

Foreseeable consequences.

or in stronger terms, FUCK NO, the govt. has no business regulating news, that would be a MAGAt dream come true.

Last edited Thu Jun 20, 2024, 01:38 AM - Edit history (1)

The Amendments to the Constitution were put there for a reason. Our kin that have come before us fought and many of them died for the freedoms that those Amendments give us.

Who is in charge? It’s great to pass laws like this until however many years later the other party gets into control and uses them against you.

who is the government? It needs to be non partisan fairness for both sides and why I voted for the only regulation should be to tell the truth. Just the facts like when I was a kid watching the news.

Those ideas could go very bad.

Hard pass.