Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: FoxNews has to be dismantled [View all]
Last edited Sat May 17, 2025, 02:10 PM - Edit history (3)
Protected from what? Popular government needs to be protected from the media moguls.
I didn't suggest any remedies. I am merely saying we have a problem.
Here is a really funny thing. Searching for anything related to this topic brings up extreme right wing propaganda almost exclusively.
The purpose of the First Amendment was to protect the public. The threat was from the government through the suppression of the press. Today the threat comes from the press. A relative handful of wealthy people use the press to mislead the public and to control the politicians and the government. What is the difference between King George deciding what can and can't be published and Rupert Murdoch et al deciding that, in terms of the suppressive effect on the public;s access to information?
We have a president making public policy based on what he sees on Fox news, and staffing the government with people from Fox News. At the same time he is threatening news organizations and individuals who disagree with him, that is to say, who disagree with Fox News. That is the problem today.
Speaking of Justice William O. Douglas...
In Citizen Publishing Co. v. United States, 394 U.S. 131 (1969), the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling affirming that an agreement between two Tucson newspapers violated federal antitrust laws and that the Justice Department was correct in requiring that the two papers act independently of each other.
In so doing, it made it clear that the First Amendment did not exempt news organizations from antitrust laws. In the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, Justice William O. Douglas wrote that the newspapers were, indeed, guilty of the violations as charged. He cited insufficient evidence to support a “failing company” defense — that in the course of liquidating the Citizen, the Star was the only available purchaser.
He also noted that the First Amendment does not support the trade restraints imposed by the joint operating agreement; that is, the First Amendment does not exempt papers from laws aimed at preserving competition.
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/citizen-publishing-co-v-united-states/
In so doing, it made it clear that the First Amendment did not exempt news organizations from antitrust laws. In the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, Justice William O. Douglas wrote that the newspapers were, indeed, guilty of the violations as charged. He cited insufficient evidence to support a “failing company” defense — that in the course of liquidating the Citizen, the Star was the only available purchaser.
He also noted that the First Amendment does not support the trade restraints imposed by the joint operating agreement; that is, the First Amendment does not exempt papers from laws aimed at preserving competition.
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/citizen-publishing-co-v-united-states/
I believe that the Founding Fathers and Justice Douglas would agree with me about the threat to freedom of the press posed by media consolidation.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
165 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"I'll bet you that a good 90% of these people that supposedly voted for him couldn't actually tell you a policy position
Demovictory9
May 2025
#1
Joe Rogan was mocking Biden for talking about airports in the revolutionary war.
Gary 50
May 2025
#84
"Musk stole the election" The prevailing theory I saw here was that he used Starlink
Bonx
May 2025
#4
I'm interested in hearing what anticompetitive behavior FoxNews is engaging in
onenote
May 2025
#148
Could Vladimir come here and spin up a new channel called VladTV and that would be perfectly legal
oldmanlynn
May 2025
#76
Can he start a broadcast channel? No. Could he start a satellite delivered network? Probably.
onenote
May 2025
#90
Yeah, but there was Republicans who stepped up and said that's enough. You can't obstruct justice
oldmanlynn
May 2025
#75
I think the regulations should apply to satellite and cable as well if they don't
Meowmee
May 2025
#140
Ok, so Faux gets banned, not going to happen, but just for shits and giggles,
MarineCombatEngineer
May 2025
#71
Yes, but what you seem to be missing is that in '69, cable, internet and satellite were non existent,
MarineCombatEngineer
May 2025
#116
I imagine dismantling media outlets that disagree with the state would fit the definition
MichMan
May 2025
#40
If it's that inconsequential because so few people watch, why all the angst here and elsewhere then?
MichMan
May 2025
#64
Yeah, start holding your breath on that suggestion now and if wishes were horses,
elocs
May 2025
#48
If the problem is "the feeble minds of Middle America and Rural America" then the larger problem is democracy.
Jim__
May 2025
#54
It would be nice if we had a reasonable media that accurately labeled right wing propaganda as such.
unblock
May 2025
#55
Absolutely spot on. Nothing will change until Fox is dismantled or the total collapse of our society.
Pepsidog
May 2025
#72
Thank you. If people would pay attention to what the Trump FCC is doing they might think twice
onenote
May 2025
#92
How do you defeat the incomprehensible? How do people not choose democracy? How do you fix stupid?
NowsTheTime
May 2025
#85
90 percent of Krasnov's campaign ads in my red district were about one policy position.
GoodRaisin
May 2025
#93
Those ads ran incessantly in my area harping on two things, VP Harris supporting surgery for trans inmates and when
Silent Type
May 2025
#96
Thing is, we handled that very poorly. The campaign never pushed back on the ad
GoodRaisin
May 2025
#105
Don't watch or care for FOX, but I'd oppose dismantling FOX as unconstitutional and we might be next.
Silent Type
May 2025
#94
I couldn't care less if you advocate this, that's the great thing about our Constitution.
MarineCombatEngineer
May 2025
#134
No thank you. Everyone has the right to watch what they want, and no voices should be shut down.
Groundhawg
May 2025
#142
How would you propose we dismantle Fox News within the parameters of the 1st Amendment and
kelly1mm
May 2025
#154