Government monitors in newsrooms: the solution

Ajit Pai, an FCC commissioner, has blown the whistle on a government plan to put federal monitors in newsrooms.

The plan is billed as a study, to determine how major networks assemble their stories—and also as a teaching program to show newspeople what stories are vital and critical, and what stories aren’t.

The Orwellian op even covers newspapers, to which the FCC has no regulatory connection.

Pai writes in the Wall St. Journal:

“…the agency [FCC] plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, SC, is scheduled to begin this spring.

“The purpose 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.’”

Keep this in mind: major media outlets are already heavily censored. As collaborators with governments and other corporations, they lie on a regular basis and omit stories that would expose the men who are actually running things.

So this FCC crackdown is about the leftover bones and bits of flesh. “Leave that bone alone. Talk about this bone.”

If media outlets cared about government agents trampling their home turf, they could implement an easy solution and jack up their ratings through the roof.

Film the monitors.

Film everything they say and do. Film them at lunch and in the bathroom. Film them when they’re giving advice about which stories to run and why.

And live-stream that raw film 24/7. Post it online.

Watch the watchers.

Of course, that won’t happen.

Here’s what will happen. Government monitors will say, “That story on transgender 10-year olds? You’re running it at the bottom of the line-up, just before the weather. We think you should put it up higher. And in the story, in paragraph three, we detect a micro-aggression against transgender boys. You should change the wording. The transgender community is underserved. It needs more positive exposure…”

“Why do you keep running stories about Benghazi? That issue is dead. What are you trying to accomplish? You’re showing bias. Instead, you should be highlighting the progress the people of Libya have made since the death of Gaddafi.”

And so on and so forth.

Government news. Don’t worry, be happy.

The upside is, even more people will shut off mainstream news and go to alternative sources.

Meanwhile, the State will shape news tighter, because they believe they can get away with it.

Jon Rappoport