cods wrote on Aug 6
th, 2012 at 5:38pm:
not so very long ago the left were aghast at the thought of internet censorship in fact some of you declared you would never vote for Conroys censorship...
If you don't know the difference between censorship and regulations requiring truth in reporting then there's no point.
Just watch just about any episode of media watch (again filthy left leaning ABC program) to understand what is being proposed.
They take everyone to task including the ABC.
The media is more fearful of appearing on that show than ACMA, which is like saying your more worried about the local fat mall security than the riot squad.
here's some reading for you if you care.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4022628.htmlsome salient points
Quote:On the very first day of public hearings, in Melbourne on November 8, Mr Finkelstein categorically ruled out any return to a licensing regime for the print media when the idea was floated by Stephen Mayne, the journalist and shareholder activist. He said that licensing meant the government decreeing who is able to publish news, which, he said, "is as close as going back to the Dark Ages as you could find" as it represents "probably as extreme an encroachment on news dissemination as you could get" (Transcript, 8 November, p 99-100). This is relevant in the light of the dire extrapolations made about the inquiry report's recommendations.
Quote:Dennis Pearce was chair of the Press Council between 1998 and 2000 and apart from being an emeritus professor of law at ANU he has also been Commonwealth ombudsman. In his presentation he described as "disgraceful" a decision by The Australian to refuse to publish an adjudication by the council about a complaint and in fact to withdraw from the council for several months (Transcript, 9 November, p 191).
Quote:Mr Greg Hywood, the chief executive of Fairfax Media, was unable to explain why news media companies could satisfactorily put in place Chinese walls between their editorial and their advertising departments to ensure that governments, which are major advertisers with newspapers, could not influence editorial policy, but that a regulatory body with even partial government funding would be inevitably and irretrievably compromised.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3478634.htmhttp://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3446228.htm