Michigan considers law to "license"journalists

[saracat]

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/Headlines/state-senator-proposes-law-to-license-reporters-61536-.aspx


State Senator Proposes Law to 'License' Reporters


By: E&P Staff


Published: June 02, 2010


NEW YORK
One Michigan senator is presenting legislation that would register journalists with the state, in order to separate “legitimate” news sources from ones that aren’t quite so credible.

Michigan State Sen. Bruce Patterson is introducing a law that could regulate reporters similarly to how it regulates other professions such as plumbers and auto mechanics. Reporters who work for what Patterson called “a generally recognized media or press association” who apply for a license and meet criteria including “good moral character” could earn the distinction of “Michigan registered reporter” for a $10 fee.

Registering with the state would be voluntary. Applicants would have to possess a degree in journalism or other substantially equivalent degree; have no less than three years’ experience as a reporter; and have earned an award or other recognition for their work.

Patterson claims citizens are being overwhelmed by the amount of media outlets vying for their attention, and such a license would help to separate the wheat from the chaff.

“We have to be able to get good information,” he told Fox News. “We have to be able to rely on the source and to understand the credentials of the source.”

The bill, introduced on May 11, has been referred to the Michigan legislature’s Committee on Economic Development and Regulatory Reform. Patterson admits that he doesn’t believe his bill will become law, but wants to encourage public discussion on the issue.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Brickbat]

1. This is a bad idea.

There was a thread on it about a week ago, IIRC.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. I bet he had help writing that.

It's not possible to come up with an idea that bad all by yourself.

[KamaAina]

3. Bloggers getting under your skin, Brucie?

Good!

(In case you hadn't already figured it out, Sen. Patterson is a repuke.)

[no_hypocrisy]

4. So when Rush, Sean, and Beck broadcast in Michigan, they would have to have a

disclaimer about being mistaken for journalists for each show?

[Skip Intro]

5. “We have to be able to get good information,” he told Fox News.

*facepalm!*

[Echo In Light]

8. "Credible." Translation = Managed

[Oregone]

6. Imagine imposing standards before allowing people to broadcast shitty propaganda

Wow...crazy idea there

[saracat]

9. You do realize this idea is heralded by FOX NEWS? I had to search to find a credible source to quote

FOX loves this idea too!

[Oregone]

10. If my idea of licensing journalists was implemented, Fox would be shit out of luck and shutdown

Passing off propaganda and opinion as news should cause revocation of licensing.

[saracat]

12. Well, then so would a lot of the internet. I despise FOX and I do think they spread propaganda

but who would be the judge?????? And this is talking about evaluating "good morals" as well. By whose standards? Therein lies the problem. Control on speech or opinion or reporting are always bad. We have always had "yellow" journalism and it should be left to the reader/listener/watcher to judge the difference.

[Oregone]

14. Bloggers aren't journalists

They often think they are. But they would be largely ignored (most of them)


A lot of it comes on how information is being presented. Is it being done under the guise of "truth" and news, or with disclaimers regarding opinions and interpretation of current events.


Fox would need a lot of disclaimers, in my opinion, to retain any sane license. And maybe a license should come with some type of guideline regarding what percent of content should be news, and what should be entertainment/opinion. If a channel wants to have 99% entertainment and pundits throwing out talking points, perhaps they should just be a normal channel and not bother being licensed in the first place (and therefore, not having press pass access)


Journalistic outlets get a ton of privileges that normal people do not have. Is asking for a few things back really that far out of line?

[saracat]

16. Don't bet on it. And many "Bloggers" have become extremely influential. Why the heck do you think

they have WH access and Presidential candidates attend their conventions?

[Oregone]

17. "Bloggers" with WH press credentials are journalists IMO

And should get licensed and follow some basic rules about how they present information (news vs opinions).


In the grand scheme of things....not that many outlets really have WH press credentials, do they? I don't think many should. Those that do shouldn't be allowed to say "Obama is a socialist". They should be allowed to put an opinion disclaimer up before a program and state "I believe Obama is a socialist".

[saracat]

20. That is opinion and not FACT. Remember Jeff Gannon?

Not that he should be praised but he was a "blogger" And now there are many bloggers at the WH Press conferences. It has to be noted there is a difference between "permanent " seats and day passes. Day passess are relatively easy to get if you know who to ask ,and you can get them repeatedly. Many organizations rotate their people. A story on the first recognized blogger below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/07/technology/07press.html

But the Michigan law is a step in the wrong direction of censorship of the press for all reporters. Would any want all journalist judged by the FOX Standards? That would be the risk taken. No view should be suppressed. And as for education and degrees, some of our best journalist never attended journalism school. That is a fairly recent development.

I myself have various press credentials from varying media outlets and I would strongly object to being "told" how to report a story.That is exactly how FOX treats its personnel. That is the antithesis of a free press.

[Greyhound]

15. "The road to hell..." n/t

[Oregone]

18. The US is already on the road to hell

Your driver, Glenn Beck, is asking you to buckle up for the bumpy ride.

[Greyhound]

26. So because I apparently understand more about media than you do, Glen Beck must be "my driver"...

And we wonder what is wrong with The U.S...
:eyes:

[LiberalFighter]

7. How will they impose standards on journalists, reporters that broadcast nationally?

[Greyhound]

13. "Write what we tell you to write of we jerk your ticket" will be the standard. n/t

[LiberalFighter]

21. But state laws don't have jurisdiction over nationally syndicated or broadcasters.

[saracat]

22. Exactly. Once again, it will come down to "WHO" would make these judgment calls. The Bill also

calls for the evaluation of writing? WHO will do That? WHO will judge "Good moral character" and what does that mean? Anyone who would support something like this has absolutely no idea of the nature of journalism and certainly zero understanding of hoe critical a Free Press is to Democracy. Nowhere do the Founding Fathers ever refer to a "Good Press",or a "Factual Press". They refer to a "Free Press", which is unfettered by regulation or censorship.

Some of the folks who cry out for this regulation would never support it should the media reporting not reflect their personal POV. But fortunately for now, ALL POV'S must be heard, whether we like them or not.

[Greyhound]

11. Still one of the dumbest, most dangerous overreactions to a non-problem I've seen.

A few years ago I wouldn't have worried as this is obviously unconstitutional, but today's SCOTUS is just twisted enough to allow it.

[KonaKane]

30. The devolution of the fourth estate is not a problem to you?

It sure as hell is to me. A good, CREDIBLE free press is essential to a free society. Right now we have dwindled to McNews. I do have a probem with that.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

19. K&R they're idiots. did ever read the bill of rights?

[cornermouse]

23. This is the step that follows embedding reporters.

Next will be when their on-air script is printed and emailed from the party in power.

This is a really bad idea.

[fishwax]

24. a rather dumb idea n/t

[freddie mertz]

25. A useful first step to mass government censorship.

Thanks for posting this.

[Posteritatis]

31. And it'd be cheered by any number of DUers if it passed, too. (nt)

[bobthedrummer]

27. The role of a free press, like our experiment in democracy, was tossed away by those too big to fail

[Spike89]

28. Even here the cause seems to be lost

Rail against the media, I can agree on many points where broadcast and print media is faltering. However, attacking journalists because you think Rush, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly...yes and even Keith, Rachel, and Thom are practicing journalists is just goofy. They are all commentators, hosts, and entertainers. Very rarely do any of them even make a pretense of reporting.

Even if you do some occassional reporting, that doesn't make you a news journalist any more than cooking a burger here and there makes you a chef. What makes this entire discussion a farce is that not one of the people I listed above would be affected in any way...they are all part of the entertainment section of their networks. Basically, go after the guy that does the SNL news parody, Jon Stewart, and Colbert...they are all doing the same job the "more serious" folks are doing.

90% of the problem is shockingly poor media literacy among the population. (The other 10% is just general stupidity). Most bloggers are NOT journalists either...they are simply reposting news (that real journalists dug up in most cases) and commenting on it.

I had hoped more people on this site would know the difference between news (journalism) and commentary (entertainment). Granted, TV does try and blur the lines, but it really isn't that hard to tell the difference.

[bobthedrummer]

29. .

:argh: