no more slants or spins to express the views of any political party but the cold hard facts on event of national intrests and security so that the people can see the state of their government for themselves
2006-09-14 12:13:20 · 5 answers · asked by matthew_yelle 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
O.K the government will continue to control what we know when we are to know it and what light it should be reported in please tell me how that is free spech
2006-09-14 12:44:53 · update #1
No. I wouldn't wast my time. Because it would be overturned as an invalid First Amendment restriction on freedom of the press.
And even if it weren't a constitutional violation, there is so much debate and disgareement over what the facts are, versus what they mean, that the law would be impossible to enforce.
2006-09-14 12:17:42 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would but I don't think it'd work. Sometimes what's biased and what's not is border line opinion. And more importantly, it violates our first amendment right.
There should be more unbiased media, but the truth is biased opinions sell. (Republicans don't want to hear about how Bush messed and Democrates don't want to hear that he did something good for our nation.)
2006-09-14 19:19:10 · answer #2 · answered by SafiMoyo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the only problem is... who decides what is unbias? bias to you would almost certainly be unbias to others... it's a very fine line...
and when the government starts deciding what "bias" or not, all of a sudden everything against the government is "bias" reporting...
it's not as easy as you think...
2006-09-14 19:18:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
FOX NEWS
Already does this.
The problem is with the liberal media like BBC and DWTV
Go big Red Go
2006-09-14 19:17:05 · answer #4 · answered by 43 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
hey moron that is against freedom of speech!!!
2006-09-14 19:16:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋