BOY, IS THIS EVER CHILLING – AT 10:30 A.M. ET:  Under the radar, there's an assault on free speech in America, but, as usual, it comes dressed as a noble effort.  From Andrew Malcolm's great Top of the Ticket blog at the L.A. Times:

...a year ago the new Democrat administration of Barack Obama launched a major internal study intended to design a major government rescue plan for the nation's financially-troubled information media, primarily newspapers.

That strident sound you hear are the alarms going off in minds and offices across the country: Government helping the press? Which press? How help? In return for what?..

...The Federal Trade Commission has just released a major staff study of modern American media titled "Potential Policy Recommendations to Support the Reinvention of Journalism." And....

...silly you thought the private business of journalism was doing that by itself in its own stumbling ways without the help of the Washington branch of the Chicago Democratic political machine.

And...

...this FTC study is rated R for anyone who thinks the federal government, the object of copious news coverage itself, has no business deciding which sectors of the private media business survive and thrive through its support, subsidies and encouragement with things like tax incentives.

Yet that's what this Obama administration paper is suggesting as another of the ex-community organizer's galactic reform plans.

Would you believe: major changes to the copyright law, including government licensing provisions; government pilot programs to investigate potential new media business models, antitrust changes to allow media companies to unite on imposing online pay walls, establish a journalism division of AmeriCorps with government underwriting the training of young journalists, tax incentives per news employee, increased funding of public broadcasting, a 5% tax on consumer electronics and/or assessments on users of public airwaves.

Oh dear, oh dear.  You know just where this is going.  Who needs a free press when government is there to shape things? 

And how about this gem, from The Hill:

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is being urged to monitor "hate speech" on talk radio and cable broadcast networks.

A coalition of more than 30 organizations argue in a letter to the FCC that the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news.

The groups also charge that syndicated radio and cable television programs "masquerading as news" use hate as a profit model.

"As traditional media have become less diverse and less competitive, they have also grown less responsible and less responsive to the communities that they are supposed to serve," the organizations wrote to the FCC. "In this same atmosphere hate speech thrives, as hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable television program masquerading as 'news.'"

The organizations, which include Free Press, the Center for Media Justice, the Benton Foundation and Media Alliance, also argue that the anonymity of the Web gives ammunition to those that would spread hate.

COMMENT:  And you know where this is going, too.  Can you guess who it's aimed at?  Does the name "Fox" come to mind?  Does "Limbaugh" come to mind?

How do you define "hate speech"?  To the people behind this letter, hate speech is anything they don't agree with, and "bigotry" is what the other side practices.

June 2, 2010