The FCC Attack on the First Amendment - Another Reason to Impeach Obama

After public outrage over its study on editorial choice in newsrooms, the Federal Communications Commission will “amend” the research project - but still plans to conduct it. FCC chair Tom Wheeler will remove the questions in the study relating to news philosophy and editorial judgment, the commission announced, which leaves the question of what exactly the FCC will end up studying. The Hotair site has published the questions to be asked of journalists and publishers/managers in the study, concluding that "it’s difficult to see what value it has." The study was supposed “to identify and understand the critical information needs (CINs) of the American public (with special emphasis on vulnerable/disadvantaged populations).” A direct assault on news philosophy and editorial judgment. Here are the questions asked in the study of (1). Owners/operators and editors :• What is the news philosophy of the station?• Who is your target audience?• How do you define critical information that the community needs?• How do you ensure the community gets this critical information?• How much does community input influence news coverage decisions?• What are the demographics of the news management staff (HR)?• What are the demographics of the on air staff (HR)?• What are the demographics of the news production staff (HR)? (2). Editors and mid-level managers :• What is the news philosophy of the station?• Who else in your market provides news?• Who are your main competitors?• How much news does your station (stations) air every day?• Is the news produced in-house or is it provided by an outside source?• Do you employ news people?• How many reporters and editors do you employ?• Do you have any reporters or editors assigned to topic “beats”? If so how many and what are the beats?• Who decides which stories are covered?• How much influence do reporters and anchors have in deciding which stories to cover?• How much does community input influence news coverage decisions?• How do you define critical information that the community needs?• How do you ensure the community gets this critical information? ~~~~~ The FCC simply is so far off base here that one wonders what to say. Last May the FCC proposed its "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs," or CIN. A field test in Columbia, South Carolina, was scheduled to begin this spring - it's interesting that the FCC chose a conservative, Republican-leaning state for its first test...no doubt to be able to prove its liberal-leftist premise that most American news is not of the far left persuasion represented by MSNBC and CNN and The New York Times. The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about "the process by which stories are selected" and how often stations cover "critical information needs," along with"perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations." The study would have started, except for GOP-appointed FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, who blew the whistle on the study plan. Pai has told Newsmax that the survey has been "suspended," not canceled as the FCC has said. The FCC declared last week that it had shelved the controversial survey on how newsrooms cover various news stories, which was excoriated by critics as a threat to the First Amendment right of press freedom. But in explaining the decision, FCC spokeswoman Shannon Gilson said that "the pilot will not be undertaken until a new study design is final," suggesting the program could be brought back at a later date. "It's suspended, and the way I like to think about it is [how] you would think about a baseball game being suspended," Pai told Newsmax TV. "It’s not being canceled, it could come back," he said Monday. "The good thing is that the FCC has said that any study along these lines will not involve government researchers going into newsrooms and asking questions about a perceived station bias or how they decide to cover certain stories, not others, whether they're covering the critical information needs that people need to know. "But nonetheless, we need to remain vigilant to make sure that any future study doesn't intrude on that core constitutional freedom of the press. The devil's going to be in the details, and if they decide to go ahead with this study, you can rest assured that I'll be watching to make sure that nothing like this is attempted again." Pai had revealed earlier this month to The Wall Street Journal that the FCC planned to infiltrate newsrooms with the potential that media organizations would eventually be pressured into covering certain stories. But Pai told Newsmax that the agency, as part of its apparent plan to intrude on media coverage, had twisted a provision of the law that requires the FCC to report to Congress every three years on barriers that businesses face when they're trying to get into the communications industry and the broadcasting business. "As I looked over the study design, it seemed to me that some of the questions and some of the purposes had nothing to do with that report. I mean, they're trying to figure out what a station's perceived bias is or whether reporters have been told by management not to cover certain stories," Pai said. "I mean, that has nothing to do with barriers to entry, and that's one of the reasons why I got a little bit concerned, especially because this was an initiative that none of us voted on. This wasn't decided by a vote of all the commissioners, and it was important to bring public awareness to this issue." ~~~~~ Dear readers, the very idea that news in any form ought to meet "critical information needs," and study "perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations" is opposed to every liberty enshrined in the First Amendment : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for the redress of grievances." That is a very clear prohibition against any governmental interference in the fundamental right to free speech. The FCC must unequivocally end this CIF study. Now. And, we have every right to ask why the President - under oath to defend, preserve and protect the Constitution - is silent. This is one more example of Barack Obama encouraging his administration to trample the US Constitution when it interferes with his goal of weakening the liberties that the Constitution confirms and grants to Americans. Why is President Obama not under Articles of Impeachment?