What is AOC advocating for here?

[Ohio Guy]

In a recent instagram story/video, she made the following statement:

I do think that several members of Congress and some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is a part of what happened here,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the event.

“And we're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation. It's one thing to have differing opinions, but it's another thing entirely to just say things that are false.”

Is she talking about reinstating the fairness doctrine or a version of it? I think I'd be in favor of that debate happening. That said, I get a little nervous when I hear legislators talk about reigning in the media. Libel laws already exist and besides, I thought the whole idea of the 4th estate was to keep politicians honest, not the other way around.

 

[UncleMark]

Is she talking about reinstating the fairness doctrine or a version of it? I think I'd be in favor of that debate happening.

The Fairness Doctrine only applied to FCC licensed broadcasters -- i.e. over the air radio and TV. It wouldn't have applied to cable-only content and what has followed. Fox or MSNBC wouldn't have been effected.

 

[iuwclurker]

Americans have it too easy. No need to be real. Even covid couldn’t permeate the bubble of conservatives as some of their friends and relatives dropped dead. The question is, what has to happen to force people to be real?

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

In a recent instagram story/video, she made the following statement:

I do think that several members of Congress and some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is a part of what happened here,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the event.

“And we're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation. It's one thing to have differing opinions, but it's another thing entirely to just say things that are false.”

Is she talking about reinstating the fairness doctrine or a version of it? I think I'd be in favor of that debate happening. That said, I get a little nervous when I hear legislators talk about reigning in the media. Libel laws already exist and besides, I thought the whole idea of the 4th estate was to keep politicians honest, not the other way around.

Dude - free press is the first casualty of every socialist-communist regime in history.

You know how you believe that Trump is the leader of a violent racist movement intentionally trying to end democracy ala MussoHitler? The other side feels like AOC is a young Stalin - forming up ideas on how to throw all unBelievers in the Gulag.

And here she goes ...

Vengeance is always bad policy.

 

[outside shooter]

I don't favor a great deal of media regulation, but I would like a better demarcation between editorial opinion and news reporting.

When I was a kid, news reporters reported the news, with supporting facts. News reporters also occasionally (and more rarely) provided editorial commentary. Sometimes that commentary was scathing. LBJ is said to have woefully remarked that since he had lost Walter Cronkite in an editoral about Viet Nam, there was no way he could win back middle America.

But, get this, when Walter Cronkite was delivering political commentary / editorial content /analysis, rather than acting as a news reporter, this big old whopping graphic appeared on the screen saying "commentary" or something like that, to my recollection. He would also verbally emphasize that he was offering an OPINION. We knew what was news and what was opinion.

We don't any more, mainly since so many stations provide a 95-5 mix of opinion and news. Fox even went to the absurd position that they legally cannot be sued for criminally factually bereft damaging news reporting, becuase there is no way that any sane person would even think that news reporting was going on, during the Tucker Carlson show, which as eveyone ought to know is 100% opinion, bluster, and bravado, not news. Crazy. And I am not saying that guys on the left like Don Lemon don't also focus on opinion, bluster, and bravado, not news.

I am not saying I know how to regulate that, if it can be, or even if it ought to be. Can you force high journalism standards? Should National Enquirer reporting actually not exist?

But lots of people get confused and worked up over nonsense. My Dad was a bitter old angry man in the last years of his life, and biased TV news played a huge part in that.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

In a recent instagram story/video, she made the following statement:

I do think that several members of Congress and some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is a part of what happened here,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the event.

“And we're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation. It's one thing to have differing opinions, but it's another thing entirely to just say things that are false.”

Is she talking about reinstating the fairness doctrine or a version of it? I think I'd be in favor of that debate happening. That said, I get a little nervous when I hear legislators talk about reigning in the media. Libel laws already exist and besides, I thought the whole idea of the 4th estate was to keep politicians honest, not the other way around.

I don't think there is any question what she is saying.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I don't favor a great deal of media regulation, but I would like a better demarcation between editorial opinion and news reporting.

When I was a kid, news reporters reported the news, with supporting facts. News reporters also occasionally (and more rarely) provided editorial commentary. Sometimes that commentary was scathing. LBJ is said to have woefully remarked that since he had lost Walter Cronkite in an editoral about Viet Nam, there was no way he could win back middle America.

But, get this, when Walter Cronkite was delivering political commentary / editorial content /analysis, rather than acting as a news reporter, this big old whopping graphic appeared on the screen saying "commentary" or something like that, to my recollection. He would also verbally emphasize that he was offering an OPINION. We knew what was news and what was opinion.

We don't any more, mainly since so many stations provide a 95-5 mix of opinion and news. Fox even went to the absurd position that they legally cannot be sued for criminally factually bereft damaging news reporting, becuase there is no way that any sane person would even think that news reporting was going on, during the Tucker Carlson show, which as eveyone ought to know is 100% opinion, bluster, and bravado, not news. Crazy. And I am not saying that guys on the left like Don Lemon don't also focus on opinion, bluster, and bravado, not news.

I am not saying I know how to regulate that, or if it can be. But lots of people get confused and worked up over nonsense, My Dad was a bitter old angry man in the last years of his life, and biased TV news played a huge part in that.

CNN, MSNBC, FOX, Breithbart etc don't even pretend to be news sources anymore.

They are purely entertainment platforms pandering to a specific fanbase.

 

[bawlmer]

You know how you believe that Trump is the leader of a violent racist movement intentionally trying to end democracy ala MussoHitler? The other side feels like AOC is a young Stalin - forming up ideas on how to throw all unBelievers in the Gulag.

The worries of Q-Anon are irrelevant.

 

[mashnut]

Dude - free press is the first casualty of every socialist-communist regime in history.

You know how you believe that Trump is the leader of a violent racist movement intentionally trying to end democracy ala MussoHitler? The other side feels like AOC is a young Stalin - forming up ideas on how to throw all unBelievers in the Gulag.

And here she goes ...

Vengeance is always bad policy.

So Trump riled up a violent mob that literally stormed the center of our democratic government. What "unbeliever" is in a "gulag" because of AOC? Have even one actual example or just expressing some feelings here?

 

[iuwclurker]

Dude - free press is the first casualty of every socialist-communist regime in history.

You know how you believe that Trump is the leader of a violent racist movement intentionally trying to end democracy ala MussoHitler? The other side feels like AOC is a young Stalin - forming up ideas on how to throw all unBelievers in the Gulag.

And here she goes ...

Vengeance is always bad policy.

Shorter M:

Fascism supports a free press.

Punishing white criminals is bad.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Shorter M:

Fascism supports a free press.

Punishing white criminals is bad.

Stupid is your superpower

 

[Harry Hondo]

Dude - free press is the first casualty of every socialist-communist regime in history.

You know how you believe that Trump is the leader of a violent racist movement intentionally trying to end democracy ala MussoHitler? The other side feels like AOC is a young Stalin - forming up ideas on how to throw all unBelievers in the Gulag.

And here she goes ...

Vengeance is always bad policy.

Hahahaha! Since when was AOC President or in any position to wield power?

You are the king of false equivalencies.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Hahahaha! Since when was AOC President or in any position to wield power?

You are the king of false equivalencies.

Yeah. That WAS the imortant point. You nailed it.

Sigh.

Let. Me. Walk. You. Through. This.

I was trying to make a point about how opposing political sides view abuses of power by respective participants in the political process - a "common ground" kind of thing.

Neither a President nor a House member can ALONE abuse a lot, but the alleged or actual IDEAS they espouse can be compared.

Not here. But in places where fair minded folks have discussions.

 

[stollcpa]

In a recent instagram story/video, she made the following statement:

I do think that several members of Congress and some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is a part of what happened here,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the event.

“And we're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation. It's one thing to have differing opinions, but it's another thing entirely to just say things that are false.”

Is she talking about reinstating the fairness doctrine or a version of it? I think I'd be in favor of that debate happening. That said, I get a little nervous when I hear legislators talk about reigning in the media. Libel laws already exist and besides, I thought the whole idea of the 4th estate was to keep politicians honest, not the other way around.

It’s not hard. She wants Congress to determine when speech is true and when it’s false and stop it. She’s a woman so no criticism allowed.

 

[IU_Hickory]

It’s not hard. She wants Congress to determine when speech is true and when it’s false and stop it. She’s a woman so no criticism allowed.

Wouldnt want to trample on the lying rightwing media.

If you thought rightwing media was telling the truth then you shouldn't be worried about anything aoc just said.

Gotta defend the right to brainwash the idiots

 

[stollcpa]

Wouldnt want to trample on the lying rightwing media.

If you thought rightwing media was telling the truth then you shouldn't be worried about anything aoc just said.

And the left wing media was a beacon of truth. 😂 Christ.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Wouldnt want to trample on the lying rightwing media.

If you thought rightwing media was telling the truth then you shouldn't be worried about anything aoc just said.

Gotta defend the right to brainwash the idiots

If you're not violating the law, you should have no problem with a plan to have cops search your house very day, either right? I mean, the government SHOULD decide what is true and punish what is not. And prevent what is illegal? In fact, the government should decide what we get say BEFORE we say it, and what we can bring INTO our houses, right?

Keep away from me, Hickory. I'm an agent of Goldstein. I didn't know it myself. Thoughtcrime is so insidious. It just creeps up on you.

 

[IU_Hickory]

And the left wing media was a beacon of truth. 😂 Christ.

A lot more than the right. I am not scared of everyone having to tell the truth.

Why are you?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

In a recent instagram story/video, she made the following statement:

I do think that several members of Congress and some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is a part of what happened here,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the event.

“And we're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation. It's one thing to have differing opinions, but it's another thing entirely to just say things that are false.”

Is she talking about reinstating the fairness doctrine or a version of it? I think I'd be in favor of that debate happening. That said, I get a little nervous when I hear legislators talk about reigning in the media. Libel laws already exist and besides, I thought the whole idea of the 4th estate was to keep politicians honest, not the other way around.

It sounds to me like she's talking about Congress having a conversation about what can be done, which will probably turn out to be not much. Anyone getting bent out of shape over these comments is getting way ahead of himself or herself.

 

[IU_Hickory]

If you're not violating the law, you should have no problem with a plan to have cops search your house very day, either right? I mean, the government SHOULD decide what is true and punish what is not. And prevent what is illegal? In fact, the government should decide what we get say BEFORE we say it, and what we can bring INTO our houses, right?

Keep away from me, Hickory. I'm an agent of Goldstein. I didn't know it myself. Thoughtcrime is so insidious. It just creeps up on you.

Why can't you stay on topic, or is that too hard for you?

 

[stollcpa]

A lot more than the right. I am not scared of everyone having to tell the truth.

Why are you?

You and those like you are only interested in hearing your truth. I am for people getting say whatever they like. You’re the one afraid.

 

[IU_Hickory]

You and those like you are only interested in hearing your truth. I am for people getting say whatever they like. You’re the one afraid.

I said truth, not my truth

Is the english language that difficult for you?

 

[stollcpa]

I said truth, not my truth

Is the english language that difficult for you?

Truth is only what you guys agree with.

 

[IU_Hickory]

Truth is only what you guys agree with.

Truth is what actually happens. You really need a dictionary

 

[stollcpa]

Truth is what actually happens. You really need a dictionary

Truth is what you say it is. Lol

 

[outside shooter]

Truth is what Kayleigh says it is.

FIFY

 

[UncleMark]

It’s not hard. She wants Congress to determine when speech is true and when it’s false and stop it. She’s a woman so no criticism allowed.

LOL. No newly divorced bitterness there. Nope. Not a bit.

 

[cosmickid]

Dude - free press is the first casualty of every socialist-communist regime in history.

You know how you believe that Trump is the leader of a violent racist movement intentionally trying to end democracy ala MussoHitler? The other side feels like AOC is a young Stalin - forming up ideas on how to throw all unBelievers in the Gulag.

Dude - free press is the first casualty of every socialist-communist regime in history.

I know you're not stupid- you must think we are?...

Your continued, selective revision of history is annoying. The type of autocratic authoritarian Govt that Marx wrote the Manifesto in response to preceded Marx and featured exactly the same type of censorship of the free press that you seem to want to lay solely at the feet of every "socialist-communist regime in history"...

I doubt you can even name a single "democracy" that enjoyed a free uncensored press that has ever been overthrown by a "socialist-communist regime". The German nation-states of the 1840s weren't bastions of Democracy and a free press. Tsarist Russia wasn't a Democratic paradise, and the same is true of Chiang Kai- Shek's Kuomintang Military Dictatorship, Batista's Cuba, various Miltary junta's in Central and South America, and on and on Infinitum...

Initially, I mainly took issue with your use of the word "every". But the more I think about it, I think you'd be pretty hard-pressed to even come up with a SINGLE example of a "Communist-Socialist regime" coming to power and a "free press" being a casualty. You're welcome to try, but I think finding a country that enjoyed a free press prior to the ascension of a Socialist-Communist regime to power in that country will prove an exercise in futility for you...

 

[stollcpa]

LOL. No newly divorced bitterness there. Nope. Not a bit.

I could see where you think that. 😂

 

[brianiu]

As the OP stated, the issue she is talking about is already addressed by libel laws. The burden of proof is intentionally steep in those cases because of the importance of a free press. I may not be a fan of how Fox, MSNBC and many others present the news but the government has no business or right to meddle in it. I don’t know exactly what AOC has in mind here but it certainly doesn’t sound like a liberal policy to me.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

It sounds to me like she's talking about Congress having a conversation about what can be done, which will probably turn out to be not much. Anyone getting bent out of shape over these comments is getting way ahead of himself or herself.

"People who would not talk of secession months ago are now openly talking about it". " The crisis is not far off".

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

"People who would not talk of secession months ago are now openly talking about it". " The crisis is not far off".

Maybe. Maybe our country has to hit rock bottom before it can heal. I don't know. I'm just saying people are going to throw a lot of things against the wall, and some of those things, when taken to their logical conclusion, are going to sound outright crazy. If AOC's comments are indeed hinting at a conversation about restricting the press, then they will turn out to be a good example. But my guess is it leads nowhere.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

Maybe. Maybe our country has to hit rock bottom before it can heal. I don't know. I'm just saying people are going to throw a lot of things against the wall, and some of those things, when taken to their logical conclusion, are going to sound outright crazy. If AOC's comments are indeed hinting at a conversation about restricting the press, then they will turn out to be a good example. But my guess is it leads nowhere.

She is very hard to respect.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

She is very hard to respect.

I guess it depends what you're looking for in a representative. Or what you focus on. If nothing pisses you off more than overreaction, then I'm guessing she pisses you off regularly, because she isn't exactly, well, subtle about most things. On the other hand, she does bring some fire to the discussion by being a relative outsider who surprises insiders with her knowledge, preparation, and bluntness, which a lot of people find very refreshing.

*Shrug* When push comes to shove, she's still just one person in the House without a whole lot of pull with leadership, so her role is going to be necessarily limited.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

I guess it depends what you're looking for in a representative. Or what you focus on. If nothing pisses you off more than overreaction, then I'm guessing she pisses you off regularly, because she isn't exactly, well, subtle about most things. On the other hand, she does bring some fire to the discussion by being a relative outsider who surprises insiders with her knowledge, preparation, and bluntness, which a lot of people find very refreshing.

*Shrug* When push comes to shove, she's still just one person in the House without a whole lot of pull with leadership, so her role is going to be necessarily limited.

She couldn't hold Abbie Hoffman's Jock.

 

[iuwclurker]

"People who would not talk of secession months ago are now openly talking about it". " The crisis is not far off".

They can have the Arctic ice flats. White and racy.

 

[iuwclurker]

She is very hard to respect.

,” he expectorates.

 

[iuwclurker]

Stupid is your superpower

I understand. All your DuMbitches are losing now.

 

[F.Fletch]

Fact of the matter is she got 17,000 votes in her 2018 primary. The left wing media absolutely adores her, and Chuck and Nancy are scared shitless of her.
This notion that she's knowledgeable and prepared is really a media creation. She was absolutely destroyed by former ICE director Tom Homan in the hearing about children supposedly being kept in cages. Totally out of her league.

 

[bawlmer]

Fact of the matter is she got 17,000 votes in her 2018 primary. The left wing media absolutely adores her, and Chuck and Nancy are scared shitless of her.
This notion that she's knowledgeable and prepared is really a media creation. She was absolutely destroyed by former ICE director Tom Homan in the hearing about children supposedly being kept in cages. Totally out of her league.

Pelosi is hardly scared of AOC. Look at her response to a question about AOC during the 60 minutes interview. She pushes back on the suggestion that AOC has influence.