February 17, 2009
For Democrats, imposing draconian censorship on broadcast talk radio is only the beginning — now they are sharpening their long knives in order to impose speech restrictions on the internet.
|Democrat Rep. Henry Waxman|
On February 16, the American Spectator reported on senior FCC staff working for Commissioner Michael Copps holding meetings with advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to discuss ways the committee can create openings for the FCC to put in place a form of the “Fairness Doctrine” without actually calling it such. For Waxman and crew, however, radio talk is only the beginning.
According to the American Spectator:
Waxman is also interested, say sources, in looking at how the Internet is being used for content and free speech purposes. “It’s all about diversity in media,” says a House Energy staffer, familiar with the meetings. “Does one radio station or one station group control four of the five most powerful outlets in one community? Do four stations in one region carry Rush Limbaugh, and nothing else during the same time slot? Does one heavily trafficked Internet site present one side of an issue and not link to sites that present alternative views? These are some of the questions the chairman is thinking about right now, and we are going to have an FCC that will finally have the people in place to answer them.” (Emphasis added.)
For example, it is not “fair” that popular and highly trafficked news sites such as Infowars present “one side of an issue.” According to Waxman and his advisers, in order to remedy this situation the heavy hand of government will be required to force Infowars and other popular sites to spend time and money researching and linking to “alternative” news articles and websites. In short, the government will impose an additional financial burden in the name of “fairness.”
It is not simply websites the Democrats want to control — they are in the process of setting their control sights on internet radio.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee is also looking at how it can put in place policies that would allow it greater oversight of the Internet. “Internet radio is becoming a big deal, and we’re seeing that some web sites are able to control traffic and information, while other sites that may be of interest or use to citizens get limited traffic because of the way the people search and look for information,” says on committee staffer. “We’re at very early stages on this, but the chairman has made it clear that oversight of the Internet is one of his top priorities.”
According to the Democrats and language contained in the recently passed “stimulus” bill, the internet — and internet radio – are part of the national infrastructure and should be controlled by the government:
“This isn’t just about Limbaugh or a local radio host most of us haven’t heard about,” says Democrat committee member. “The FCC and state and local governments also have oversight over the Internet lines and the cable and telecom companies that operate them. We want to get alternative views on radio and TV, but we also want to makes (sic) sure those alternative views are read, heard and seen online, which is becoming increasingly video and audio driven. Thanks to the stimulus package, we’ve established that broadband networks — the Internet — are critical, national infrastructure. We think that gives us an opening to look at what runs over that critical infrastructure.”
|Former Clintonite and president of the Soros funded think tank, the Center for American Progress, John Podesta.|
In addition to congressional Democrats, foundations are involved in the “brainstorming” of this censorship effort, including the Soros funded Center for American Progress run by former Clintonite John Podesta and the “liberal” public policy advocacy group MoveOn.org. Podesta’s think tank produced a report in 2007 entitled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” suggesting government control of commercial radio ownership and “local accountability” over radio licensing. MoveOn.org will play an important role in this effort to control political speech, according to the American Spectator. The Soros funded organization is “speaking to committee staff about policies that would allow them to use their five to six million person database to mobilize complaints against radio, TV or online entities they perceive to be limiting free speech or limiting opinion.”
Henry Waxman and the Democrats are not interested in community standards, they are interested in control and censorship and are not beyond mobilizing a Soros funded horde of “progressives” to enforce their political orthodoxy on “conservatives.”
Finally, it should be noted that the Center for American Progress report suggested that commercial owners who fail to abide by “enforceable public interest obligations” as mandated by the Democrats should pay a fee to support public broadcasting, that is to say government and globalist foundation funded broadcasting.
In other words, the government will force radio stations to finance the competition.