FCC To Embed Government Informants In News-Rooms Across America; Radio and Television

Submitted by: Susannah Cole, The Pete Santilli Show & The Guerilla Media Network The Pete Santilli Show broadcasts live on The Guerilla Media Network. Please join us on the Guerilla Media Network broadcasting your favorite talk shows, political art and news 24/7.

It has been long affirmed that the government has had a big influence on the news you receive through mainstream media. CNN is largely liberal and Fox of course is conservative to its core. These media outlets have done there shilling for political parties and politicians largely on their own volition but the FCC has big plans to be in the newsroom taking notes and it may well jeopardize the first amendment and freedom of the press. The plan to invade newsrooms across America to take notes and see how they run their business is just another item on a long list of unconstitutional abuses by the Obama administration.

The FCC says the study is merely an objective fact-finding mission. The results will inform a report that the FCC must submit to Congress every three years on eliminating barriers to entry for entrepreneurs and small businesses in the communications industry.

Ajit Pai, a commissioner with the Federal Communications Commission, warned this week that a plan to dispatch researchers into radio, television and even newspaper newsrooms called the “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs” is still going forward, despite the grave danger it presented to the First Amendment. Pai warned that under the rationale of increasing minority representation in newsrooms, the FCC, which has the power to issue or not issue broadcasting licenses, would dispatch its “researchers” to newsrooms across America to seek their “voluntary” compliance about how news stories are decided, as well as “wade into office politics” looking for angry reporters whose story ideas were rejected as evidence of a shutout of minority views.

Pai questioned if such a study could really be voluntary, given FCC’s conflict of interest (and, he might have added, the Obama record of going after political opponents). The origin of the idea is a recrudescence of the Fairness Doctrine, inoperative since 1987 or so, to provide equal time to leftist points of view in broadcasting and other media that otherwise wouldn’t have a willing audience in a free market. It’s an idea so fraught with potential for abuse it ought to have news agencies screaming bloody murder. The very idea of Obama hipsters showing up in newsrooms, asking questions and judging if newspapers (over which they have no jurisdiction), radio and TV are sufficiently diverse is nothing short of thought control. But the reaction from the National Association of Broadcasters was mealy-mouthed.

The FCC “should reconsider” “qualitative” sections of its study, it wrote. The FCC now says it will be “closely reviewing the proposed research design to determine if an alternative approach is merited,” as a result of Pai’s warning. Adweek actually reported that as a “retreat.” The U.S. has one of the most significant declines in press freedom in the world last year, dropping 13 places to a wretched 46th in its newly released global ranking.

Participation in the Critical Information Needs study is voluntary—in theory. Unlike the opinion surveys that Americans see on a daily basis and either answer or not, as they wish, the FCC’s queries may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore. They would be out of business without an FCC license, which must be renewed every eight years.

This is not the first time the agency has meddled in news coverage. Before Critical Information Needs, there was the FCC’s now-defunct Fairness Doctrine, which began in 1949 and required equal time for contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues. Though the Fairness Doctrine ostensibly aimed to increase the diversity of thought on the airwaves, many stations simply chose to ignore controversial topics altogether, rather than air unwanted content that might cause listeners to change the channel.

The Fairness Doctrine was controversial and led to lawsuits throughout the 1960s and ’70s that argued it infringed upon the freedom of the press. The FCC finally stopped enforcing the policy in 1987, acknowledging that it did not serve the public interest. In 2011 the agency officially took it off the books. But the demise of the Fairness Doctrine has not deterred proponents of newsroom policing, and the CIN study is a first step down the same dangerous path.

If you would like to express your opinions or concerns on the air during the live broadcast of The Pete Santilli Show, please call (218) 862-9829 Be sure to tune in to the Pete Santilli Show daily at 10am-2pm PST / 12pm-4pm CST / 1pm-5pm EST. Pete & his co-host Susannah Cole broadcast daily for 3 hours to discuss breaking news headlines, and interview some of our nation’s most interesting patriots & controversial guests.

Please “LIKE”, share and recommend this story..

We welcome your comments in our Facebook comment thread! Fair Use Notice: This article contains some copyrighted material whose use has not been authorized by the copyright owners. We believe that this not-for-profit, educational, and/or criticism or commentary use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Fair Use notwithstanding we will immediately comply with any copyright owner who wants their material removed or modified, wants us to link to their web site, or wants us to add their photo