Should the US enact a law that forbids lying by a news station

by kudabux Posted 2012/07/24 14:57:01

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	73 votes	72%
	No	13 votes	13%
	My opinion	15 votes	15%

More polls by kudabux

claona 2013/03/06 14:22:06

Yes

+1
Obviously if someone KNOWINGLY reports something which is a lie, for whatever reason, they should face some sort of legal consequence. The role of the media in society is too important to be tainted by false reporting.

reply
kudabux to claona 2013/03/06 15:05:19

+1
So why is Faux news still airing? I know why--it is a comedy show

reply
Brosia 2012/08/20 21:43:40

Yes

+2
This seems like a no brainer to me. When you ignore the facts, and give only unsubstantiated opinions (or worse, bald-faced lies), dressed as news, you are not furthering anything, as news should do. You are hindering the process of learning in others.

reply
JohnT 2012/08/17 14:56:59

Yes

+3
I am all for it. Having grown up with Walter Cronkite and Huntley and Brinkley those were the days of non-sensationalism Journalism. They told the story with just the facts no talking heads and no so called experts They let you evaluate what you heard without the help of four or five other people examining everything to the point of stupid.
I pick up a lot of news on the net because I cannot stand what I hear on so called news stations CNN, FOX, MSNBC etc.

reply
kudabux to JohnT 2012/08/17 14:58:26

+2
But one must be careful of what is on the net, also.

reply
JohnT to kudabux 2012/08/17 15:00:38

+2
No different than a newspaper, have to always watch for the slanted direction it may take.

reply
Terry M... to kudabux 2012/08/20 23:30:38

+1
...as long as you keep an open mind and have a proper education, you can pick the truth out of anything.

reply
☆stillthe12c☆ 2012/08/05 22:01:44

No

Because then the Government would decide what was to be put on the air. Being it is the biggest group of liars we have to rely on the news to tell us the truth. Sometimes they are going to get it wrong. If you would like to pick on some news agency why not mention MSNBC.

reply
kudabux to ☆stillt... 2012/08/05 22:05:06

+2
Because FOX is the subject here and Canada banned FOX

reply
☆stillt... to kudabux 2012/08/05 22:37:47

I guess than can not stand the light.

reply
Darnel 2012/07/30 06:53:43

Yes

+1
???
You mean there isn't such a law already in place?

reply
kudabux to Darnel 2012/07/30 13:37:20

No there isn't. Read post below

reply
findthelight2000 2012/07/29 03:50:40

Yes

+3
Every time a truth in media bill reaches congress the Republicans filibuster and won't let it pass.
Is there any better evidence to prove that the GOP has close ties with a majority of America's news media outlets?

reply
Brosia to findthe... 2012/08/20 21:47:17

+1
I wonder if a bill could be proposed to deter filibustering...or if that would also be filibustered. Would that then become ironic?

reply
findthe... to Brosia 2012/08/20 22:37:16

+1
It used to be that anyone wanting to filibuster a vote would have to give an 8-hour speech. That was a real deterrent that worked. We should go back to that, and also put a limit in how often it can be used per year..

reply
Brosia to findthe... 2012/08/28 16:59:32

+1
Sounds good to me.

reply
Edwin 2012/07/27 18:52:29

My opinion

+3
Purposeful lying by a news agency should fall into the category of false advertising -- even though the "product" is free, it is a product nonetheless.

So, yes -- news agencies that actively engage in promoting lies should be subject to penalty... assuming a pattern exists.

Proving it is on purpose might be darn tricky, though.

reply
kudabux to Edwin 2012/07/27 19:54:19

+1
Good thoughts.

reply
Edwin to kudabux 2012/07/30 03:54:48

Thanks :)

reply
P. Sturm 2012/07/27 17:11:54

Yes

+1
If you knowingly present lies as news your license is revoked.
PS: When I was up there they warned you twice first, so it has to be repeated behaviour.

reply
kudabux to P. Sturm 2012/07/27 17:13:55

Thanks for that info.

reply
ALL_BAND_FAN 2012/07/26 16:32:59
Lee The Hybrid Snowflake 2012/07/26 15:25:26

Yes

+3
I'm tired of the media both Liberal and Conservative reporting their opinion instead of the facts. I have long ago given up on our media.

reply
Adam 2012/07/26 12:07:15

My opinion

The liberal media is the greatest of liars. I sanction them by not watching them.

reply
kudabux to Adam 2012/07/26 18:27:43

How could you know they lie if you don't watch them? That's ludicrous

reply
Adam to kudabux 2012/07/27 22:11:09 (edited)

I've seen many clips of their deranged hypocrisy. I don't watch them through tv broadcasts.

reply
kudabux to Adam 2012/07/27 22:54:01

You wormed your way out of that one. LOL

reply
Murph 65 2012/07/26 02:38:00

No

+1
Oh, dear lord no, you'd shut down every major news organization in the country.

reply
Brosia to Murph 65 2012/08/20 21:50:22

+1
They would just have to tell the truth, like they used to, before anything relating to the Kardashians became news worthy.

reply
Murph 65 to Brosia 2012/08/20 22:22:05

+1
The scary part is that a great many of those who watch everything Kardashian can also vote!

reply
Geenie Nabottle 2012/07/26 02:03:55

My opinion

+1
They should be outlawed and banned from pushing false equivalency in stories just to "appear" impartial!

reply
WhereIsAmerica? ~PWCM~JLA 2012/07/25 22:16:11

No

+3
Just say NO to censorship!

reply
kudabux to WhereIs... 2012/07/25 22:29:37

+2
Just say no to lying

reply
Murph 65 to kudabux 2012/07/26 02:39:06

Just say no to censorship. I take you've never lived where there is such a thing. You're not sure a story is true, go do some research and determine for yourself.

reply
kudabux to Murph 65 2012/07/26 13:35:31

+2
What makes you think I don't research? Don't assume, you will be called out. And the problem here is when lies are perpetrated purposely, they are spread and some will take it for truth. One example: the Swift Boat lies about John Kerry

reply
Murph 65 to kudabux 2012/07/26 16:23:56

Sorry, didn't mean to imply the you was actually you. Usually put in a bit about you being generic - that's what happens when you get in a hurry, you screw up. You in this case means me.

reply
U-Dog 2012/07/25 21:03:54 (edited)

No

+2
Laws by the political class which prohibit lying only make individuals lazier while making it easier for the political class to perpetrate their own lies.

If any individual or business or government wants to perpetrate lies then they are risking their reputation, which when lost, is very hard to get back. If someone wants to bring FOX or MSNBC or some corporation or politician down then the best way to do it by exposing the lies they tell, not force them to quit telling them.

The political battle ground is about fundamental ideas and if ideas are not allowed to compete freely, society, as a whole, suffers.

For centuries, Europe had some very heavy punishments for "liars" against the King and the Orthodoxy. People such as Copernicus and the people who were tortured and or burned at the stake learned that first hand. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other butchers had similar laws too and you are fooling yourself if you believe that any political class --simply because it has changed religions or philosophies-- is any better a steward of the "facts" or "truth" today than it has been in the past.

America was covered in lies and rumors at the founding of this great nation but having experienced a lack of freedom knew first hand the dangers of any political group controlling the "tr...

Laws by the political class which prohibit lying only make individuals lazier while making it easier for the political class to perpetrate their own lies.

If any individual or business or government wants to perpetrate lies then they are risking their reputation, which when lost, is very hard to get back. If someone wants to bring FOX or MSNBC or some corporation or politician down then the best way to do it by exposing the lies they tell, not force them to quit telling them.

The political battle ground is about fundamental ideas and if ideas are not allowed to compete freely, society, as a whole, suffers.

For centuries, Europe had some very heavy punishments for "liars" against the King and the Orthodoxy. People such as Copernicus and the people who were tortured and or burned at the stake learned that first hand. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other butchers had similar laws too and you are fooling yourself if you believe that any political class --simply because it has changed religions or philosophies-- is any better a steward of the "facts" or "truth" today than it has been in the past.

America was covered in lies and rumors at the founding of this great nation but having experienced a lack of freedom knew first hand the dangers of any political group controlling the "truth". Jefferson and Madison were the best of friends and among the greatest of our founders and yet when they competed head to head both funded news papers that told the worst of lies and outrageous rumors about the other... And yet we are still here.
(more)

reply
kudabux to U-Dog 2012/07/25 21:40:54

+1
You say: "The political battle ground is about fundamental ideas and if ideas are not allowed to compete freely, society, as a whole, suffers."
This is about lies, not ideas. If you expose them for what they are, liars, that should be the end of it. But the masses still continue to believe the lies.

reply
U-Dog to kudabux 2012/07/25 21:54:30

+1
And who decides what the facts and the myths are and what the truth and the lies are? The people are the best disseminaters of the truth; they may not always get it right the first time but once you lose faith in their ability to do so you are left with no other option but to turn back to some special political group of "expert" truth seers with guns.

reply
Murph 65 to U-Dog 2012/07/26 02:39:34

+1
Your very first sentence says it all - way to go!!!!!

reply