Where is the bathroom. Where is the bathroom, i guess i could be a restroom if you call it that, but i prefer to call it a bathroom because that's the way i grew up. The people that i grew up around called it a bathroom. Well if it doesn't have a bath in it, it cold be called a restroom.
With the instant accessibility of world news via the internet and other mediums, its more imperative than ever that we some regulations of ethical conduct in journalism. The media does not do a good job of policing itself. The media has the power to actually influence the news that they should be objectively reporting
Until everything is vetted by an official of the EEC, I think nothing really matters. It is a bit like having ones own opinion being validated only by ones best friend. Vox populi Vox dei, without the consent of the masses then nothing can be held in any regard, including perhaps this piece of writing.
I don't want the government telling the press that they can't report on controversial stories or hiding stories from the people, but I wouldn't be adverse to a group monitoring the press for consistently fabricating stories or riling up a certain political base for that parties gain, much like Fox News has been doing for a decade.
The press daily publishes reports on the 'death' of our country. It tells us that we are about to go bust. It tells us that we are not doing as well as we should be doing. Although this may be true in some cases, what this does mean is that the innocent civilians who read this rightly think and believe that something needs to be done - and immediately stop spending. This means that there is no money coming into the country through services like VAT, and it means that banks have a lot more responsibility than they need. Consequently, the economy does even worse and this is like a vicious circle. To stop this may be seen as propaganda, it will be good for the long term. We want our country to do well, and be a winner. Not a loser simply because the press can say what they want.
Press today always blame our government . The rarely publish the success of govenment . They just blame and critize the government . Well , everytime we turn on the televison , we always see that press always blame government . It can make people become too hate . And then what's happen ? No nationalism . So press have to be regulated because they are too immoral in publishing the news . Without look at to what's actually happen .
The press is constitutionally protected. That said, the pres should not be allowed to violate people's privacy for no reason, such as taking nude photos of celebrities in the privacy of their own home. The press should have slightly more stringent guidelines about what is and what is not appropriate in the gathering of facts and what is and what is not neceassary. Freedom of teh press should apply only to what is worthy of "news", not for entertainment. A fine line, but one taht shoudl be drawn.
Absolutely it should, and it should be done by the people as that as is who it is supposed to be working for. As it stands now, it is an arm of the state, telling us the "news" they want us to hear, and hiding the news they do not. It very much should be reined in, and held to a higher standard by those it is meant to be serving and informing rather than accepted as a 4th agent of the government in effect as it is right now. So yes I do think the press should be regulated, and done so by the people it is supposed to be informing.
Yes, the press should be regulated. Right now, the press is out of control. The press should be reporting news in an unbiased manner, without personal comments or inflammatory remarks. The press should not be telling us what to think or how to feel about news stories. They should not be taking sides or making judgments. Their job is to honestly and objectively inform the public of newsworthy events through unbiased reporting.
This is an easy one. If you are a democrat or liberal, nothing can prove it to you. If you have an desire for the truth, then just look at different news sites outside this country. They speek far more highly of this country than our media does. Libs hate America and want it destroyed.
According to the Constitution, they have the freedom to exercise their beliefs. The Founding Fathers put this in the Constitution because People needed to have the right to call the Government out on things that they may be doing wrong. This is definitely something that doesn't need to be regulated.
In this day and age scandals will take place, there is no way of permanently stopping them, press regulation would help to 'paste over the cracks' in other words scandals would still take place we just wouldn't know about them as our source of information would be severely restricted. Without freedom of speech within the media we would simply not know about the phone hacking scandal, the Government would although at first staring with little control, they would soon start to control more and more and shelter the population from any information deemed merely inappropriate leading us into a 'nanny' state.
We need the press to help us in life it distinguishes the people that do wrong from the right and we should idolise the good people. Also the press is good as it gives a very good just opinion about what is happening, so if you think they are biased keep that to your self as they really aren't but only try and question biased thoughts
Concerning the phone hacking scandal the newspapers could still do the same hacking; however if the media was to be regulated where would all of our freedom and opinions go? Despite that i only think some aspects of the media should be regulated for example if they were to break the laws of harmful or hurtful opinions being posted then there should be consequences such as suspending the account or permanently deleting it if it comes to that option.
An unregulated press is the only effective way of regulating government. When the government starts to regulate the press they can set the regulation in such a way that they can get away with anything. Also, freedom of speech, isn't being slightly offended by opinions you don't like hearing in newspapers a fair trade off for free speech. Also, once the government starts regulating something they ALWAYS add more and more regulation as time goes on until corruption becomes rife and the regulation becomes pointless, just look at banking if you don't believe that point.
I agree things like phone hacking were wrong but all those celebrities that were hacked could have taken the news of the world to court but they all went for out of court settlements, phone hacking was illegal and still is, you don't need to regulate the press to stop things like phone hacking. The hacked off group that is lobbying for this regulation is a joke, they are all wealthy people that had their phones hacked, instead of sending people to prison for the phone hacking they claimed out of court settlements then lobby for regulation that restricts everyones' freedom.
Unregulated press freedom is a cornerstone of any free society. If you don't like free speech you should stop talking.
Wherever and whenever we look in history, we see that all just governments were or are accountable to their people. When a government is not accountable to its people it becomes corrupt at a remarkably fast rate. An example of this would be Nazi Germany during the third Reich. The government quickly became corrupt under the rule of Adolf Hitler, who completely took away the freedom of the press and thus the people’s knowledge of what went on in the government. Instead of the truth, Hitler only allowed the press to publish Nazi propaganda, all of which was false or greatly exaggerated. Hence Hitler lost his accountability to the German people and subsequently we all know that the German government became corrupt. Thus governments must be accountable to their people. Without the press, the people of a nation wouldn’t know much, if anything about the government’s doings. The press is a key part of a society where the government is accountable. If you didn’t know anything about the presidential candidates last year, how would you make an educated decision about who to vote for? If nothing had published about the state representatives candidates, the same problem applies. This is another reason why the freedom of the press is so important.
It's quite easy to see why many people are angered at the press' practices in the recent years but this should not be used as a reason to add regulation to the press. Yes regulation would clean up the gutter press but it would also chastise the true journalism which helps bring politicians and government to account. Any regulator brought in would be independent, negating this point you say, but it is very easy for a supposedly independent regulator to get bended in an increasingly politicized Britain. When we direct our fury at the whole establishment of journalism we fail to realise that we adversely affect as many moral just journalists, as we do immoral ones. Let us not forget either the high price these bad apples are also currently paying for their past discrepancies, raising doubts they would choose this path again in the future. To end, perhaps we should look at ourselves and judge before we choose to make such a momentous choice for the future of journalism. We continue to support these newspapers and their fantastical stories, if we were to support proper journalism and refuse to fund the modern culture of the gutter press it would soon end. We live in a society that if there is demand for something, it will be met. If we demand proper journalism and use our pockets to back up these demands we can quickly clean up the bad side of journalism without having to throw away our personal liberties by endorsing regulation.
The freedom of press is an essential component to the Bill of Rights in which this nation is founded upon. We should have the freedom to express anything we want to in the press, because that is the promise of a free nation. We should all be allowed to voice our opinions because thats what makes us individuals.