Home | About | Donate

Fake News Is Only the Beginning. The FCC Votes to Let Monopolies Decide What Local News You See


#1

Fake News Is Only the Beginning. The FCC Votes to Let Monopolies Decide What Local News You See

Sue Wilson

Ten years from now, people could look at their local news reporting and wonder how it ever went so wrong. You’ve heard of fake news? You ain’t seen nothing yet.


#2

All the more reason to ditch your TV and, if you do not have a computer, go to your local library and get your news online. Also, how about people join forces locally to create an independent newspaper and sell at cost? The Catholic Worker Movement did this and still charges one penny per copy.


#3

The oligarchy can control the news on tv and print, but it can’t have total control of opinion-makers until it controls the Internet.


#4

Let monopolies decide what news we see?

I have got news for you Sue, the MSM has been doing that for a long,long time!


#5

How can oligarchy control an AI that knows all and thinks for itself?

Direct Democracy


#6

Thank you Sue, I’ve been saying for years that we need to March on our media and break up the conglomerate robber barons who think they own our airwaves. Citizens United and the consolidation of all media sources is very bad for democracy.


#7

because 60 million of we the people listen to only conservative news because it is concentrated in their hands and sometimes the only news they get.


#8

Why would AI care about illogical things it sees on the MSM?


#9

The total destruction of US governance just doesn’t have an end as we slide ever closer to a real as opposed to an inverse totalitarianism we now live under. The hits just keep coming with no end in site as the current FCC chair Ajit Pai seeks to undermine net neutrality and consolidate media into even bigger entities; what ever happened to anti-trust actions? With the loss of neutrality the next step will be continued demise of alt-news sites, as Common Dreams is, and various other left leaning or socialist sites in a sweep the will equal or even exceed the 50’s witch hunts for communists with the subsequent destruction of many people’s lives in the process.Then outright censorship will be the norm and no room left for dissent, at all. Then full blown totalitarianism will become the law of the land and the freedoms we now have will evaporate. Even now there’s been a continual erosion of the Bill of Rights by all the forces in government, from local sheriffs and cops confiscating property, to government removal of all internet and phone calls made the world over, storing them in massive storage facilities, the most obvious one in Utah for the NSA.
Dystopia is here in all the ugliness predicted and and many ways unforeseen even 20-30 years ago before technology connected everyone on the planet. We all need due diligence ti at least try to keep ‘them’ from taking over and destroying many, many lives in the process. I’m afraid the darkness will just keep getting darker in my lifetime anyway.


#10

I use my TV primarily to watch Netflix and Amazon. I read the web while the morning news shows are on in the background just in case something slips through. I don’t have cable and never have. I support the independent sites I view as is Common Dreams and Counterpunch. The stuff on TV is primarily entertainment ‘sold’ as ‘news’.


#11

Big Money always finds a way. It centralizes power, corrupts politics, the media, society, destroys our environment, causes wars and makes the tax laws.


#12

Coincidence? I think not!


#13

But they have had much less control over locally produced news. That is her point. With people like Sinclair controlling all print, radio and broadcast television in a given market, it will get much worse, and remove much of our population even farther from reality.


#14

You see it coming don"t you Olhippy? Me too.


#15

You have it right this cuts to the core of democracy. Since Reagan the media has been becoming the voice of the Oligarchs.


#16

You have a good idea about indie newspapers, especially that can go online to avoid huge printing costs. The big thing is that we need a variety of reporters who do actual boots on the ground reporting. When we say we go “online” for news, what does that mean in terms of sourcing? Whose newsrooms are you reading? People go online for Alex Jones, but that doesn’t mean the “performance artist” has any credibility.


#17

Yep. And, in this Thanksgiving week, the FCC just announced their plan to take over the Internet. They are pretending to act in the light of day, when they’re pulling the wool over our eyes. It’s time to take away the power from this political agency and give it to lawmakers - where, in theory anyway, we the people have a voice!


#18

Right you are, jujudahl. Google Sue Wilson Reports and “Right WIng Hijacks Radio” and you’ll find my serious 2009 research on this phenomena. Watch the video also, it’s only a couple of minutes long.


#19

Hello. This is a question for Sue or anyone who has more information on this subject. I would like to campaign against this FCC move and others like it.

Where, specifically, can we find evidence that the FCC is attempting this? Specifically, proceeding numbers, rulings, and other info from the FCC? I have found this document which is from the open meeting you refer to on November 16, 2017: LINKhttp://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1026/DOC-347455A1.pdf

Could you please point out the part which you are referring to in this article? If this is not the correct document, could you please point me in the right direction?

Additionally, here is another document I found the FCC website which is from the same meeting and pertains to broadband Internet: LINKhttp://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1026/DOC-347451A1.pdf


#20

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/readers-opinion/guest-commentary/article187422708.html