Mediaboss Marketing

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, and ensures that there is no prohibition on the free exercise of religion, no abridging the freedom of speech, no infringing on the freedom of the press, no interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, and no prohibition against the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

I am becoming more and more alarmed at the present administrations attack on our sacred First Amendment rights. I preface this letter with this amendment because I feel few Americans know or even care about the words contained within it.

During the most recent presidential campaign, and most glaringly in the first month of this administration, a constant demonizing of the press and the inference that the press cannot be trusted are becoming more unnerving every day. Recently, White House press secretary Sean Spicer spun his press conference restriction of not inviting four high-profile news outlets, stating that the room was "just too small." President Trump revealed in a tweet not one hour later that the press restriction was due to Trumps personal belief that these outlets reports fake news or are failing.

Clearly, Trump is seeking to control the press corps, limiting it to those he believes will write the news he wants written. No other president in modern history has attempted to squash the press like this.

Republican Sen. John McCain said in a recent interview with Chuck Todd of Meet the Press, "I hate the press. I hate you especially. But the fact is we need you. We need a free press. We must have it. It's vital." The Arizona senator, who was just re-elected to another six-year term, added that in order to preserve democracy, a free and many times adversarial press is essential. Thats how dictators get started, he continued. They get started by suppressing a free press; in other words, a consolidation of power. When you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press.

This constant attack on the press is the first step at the chipping away of our First Amendment and our democracy. We live in a 24/7 social media culture. It is our responsibility to weigh carefully what is said and videotaped and then held up against the untruths that seem to follow. We cannot become indifferent or complacent when a threat such as this occurs.

Kathleen Afflerbach

Quakertown

More:
Constant attacks on press chip away at 1st Amendment | Letters to ... - The Intelligencer

SAM LUKES 12:01 a.m. PT March 5, 2017

The First Amendment, contained within the Bill of Rights, was initiated on Dec. 15, 1791 and states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

For far too long now, these noble tenets have steadily undergone a massive, full scale assault by insolent judges/lawmakers who insist upon delegating their own preconceived, egregious opinions and indecorous ideologies which they unashamedly dictate from the bench.

Contrary to popular opinion, the Founding Fathers of our Judeo-Christian influenced republic, never intended a separation of church and state. They simply wanted to make sure that government would not compel or infringe upon its citizenry to adhere to a federally imposed, national religion. Hence, believers in God could choose to follow their religious beliefs without being forced to submit to biased governmental regulations. Atheists, agnostics, etc., are granted freedom to decide otherwise.

George Washington transcribed in his Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation: Use no Reproachful Language against any one neither Curse nor Revile. Remarkably, at the time, he was not yet 16 years old! Years later, as acting general of the Continental Army, on Aug. 3, 1776, he imposed a written order to his troops for them to refrain from using profanity.

Today, misguided attorneys and judges have soundly disregarded and rejected President Washingtons advice, deceitfully interpreting that the First Amendment protects all manner of profanity, including any number of vile idiosyncrasies, perverted sexual innuendos, and so forth.

The filthiest, most prurient books, songs, movies, plays, documentaries, television shows, internet sites, i.e., are all protected under the deceptive guise of freedom of speech. Jesus Christ condemns all such provocative behavior, labeling those misdirected individuals as poisonous snakes who bringeth forth evil things (Matthew 12:34-36). He warns that every idle word (which anyone speaks), if not repented of, will be brought into full judgmental account in HIS future courtroom. He further admonishes: For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned (Matthew 12:37).

Those rappers whose songs contain unbridled profanity and certain sexually charged wording in the lyrics, beware. Miscreants who advocate filthy, degenerative speech, whose conversations are laced with flippant cursing, have been deceived into believing that they have a right to disregard common decency and to irresponsibly throw all caution to the winds. To reiterate ... beware.

Society has regressed to such a mindless low that naked entertainers(?), who shamelessly perform in nightclubs/strip clubs, bars and like venues, are given a free pass for displaying their blatant nudity (shades of artful freedom of expression?). Whereas, astonishingly, a construction worker on a hot summer day, who can no longer wait in a long line to access a lone Porta Potty, can be arrested for indecent exposure when seen urinating behind a shed, tree or lumber pile!

In certain states, such offenders can be charged with lewd and lascivious behavior, and their names even added to a sex offender registry for relieving themselves. Give me a break! These judges would do well to realize that God Himself, became humanities permanent clothier, regardless of mans inane societal laws that grant immunity to wanton nude exposure (Genesis 3:21).

It is becoming alarmingly clear that we are witnessing a seemingly dishonest press/media, who, all too often, deliberately lie or decide to omit or misconstrue ones words or actions out of context. Such shameful conduct is hardly what freedom of the press was meant to represent. Likewise, those clueless mobs who destructively demonstrate, loot or engage in violent, angry protests and assaults, are not assembling peaceably under the true intent and meaning of the First Amendment.

One of the reasons America has gotten itself into such a spiteful, demeaning state of circumstances, is that it has foolishly allowed the American Civil Liberties Union to dictate to the courts, their atheistic, humanist agenda, directed against decent values which were once nobly instilled in traditional families, and likewise included in churches, schools, government, and even in the military. The ACLU (Arrogantly Championing Lucifer's Underground) MY personal acronym has haughtily, godlessly, erroneously determined: The First Amendment is based upon the belief that in a free and democratic society, individual adults must be free to decide for themselves what to read, write, paint, draw, see and hear.

Compare this insipid, flawed ideology with Proverbs 14:12: There is a way which seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death (eternally). That is precisely why Jesus instructed his true followers to live their lives in accordance to Gods Living Word (Matthew 4:4), and the reason why the Apostle Paul refers to the worldly proud who profess to be wise, as becoming mere fools (Romans 1:22).

Seemingly, worldwide events are rapidly beginning to occur which reveal our present generation might very well be the one wherein the minute hand of the noted doomsday clock, is inching closer and closer to the midnight hour with each notorious, infamous tick. Unfortunately, prophetic perilous times await (2 Timothy 3:1-5) as the entire globe may be witnessing, with careless disregard and abandon, the infant stages of reaping what they have brazenly sown towards their Creator.

Sam Lukes is a resident of Visalia

Read or Share this story: http://vtd-tar.co/2ls2Npf

Read more:
ACLU, courts' ungodly interpretation of First Amendment - Visalia Times-Delta

I know the paper supplies the headline, but the headline of a Feb. 16 letter, First Amendment only applies to Americans, seems to be an adequate re-statement of the letters point. That point is wrong.

The First Amendment doesnt give anyone rights except as the result of the fact that it forbids the U.S. government from doing certain things; specifically, it provides in part that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof Congress cant make such law whether it affects Americans or anyone else. It is a limitation on what we want our government to be able to do.

The Constitution was written at a time when European events had demonstrated clearly that getting governments involved in religion had horrible consequences the Thirty Years War, the Inquisition, the English Civil War, etc. Our Forefathers believed in freedom of conscience, freedom of thought, and freedom of speech from government interference. So do I.

Of course the U.S. Constitution cant guarantee the right of a person in another country to believe as he or she chooses, but neither can our government establish one religion or another as the basis for granting or denying immigration or visits. We told it "No!" in the First Amendment.

Read this article:
Letter to the editor: 1st Amendment applies to govt - The Bakersfield Californian

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

Read more from the original source:
In appeal, Lamar calls banner First Amendment right; Pittsburgh ... - Tribune-Review

Speaking at the NAB's State Leadership Conference Tuesday, Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) went after President Trump and his administration for their "unprecedented series" of attacks on the news media attacks thatculminated Feb. 17 with a tweetfrom the commander in chief calling "FAKE NEWS media" namely theNew York Times, NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN the "enemy of the American people."

"Turning reporters into enemies not just adversaries, but enemies is a strategy that strongmen use to silence critics and maintain power," Durbin said after cataloging the Trump assaults. "Their goal is to discredit the messenger. That way, when there is bad news, or news that contradicts the official line, people wont believe it.

Story continues after the ad

"Soon enough, people start to lose faith ... not just in the media, but in all of the institutions that hold a society together. They lose faith in the power of debate and elections to change anything. They become cynical and apathetic."

Well said.

The attacks have provoked a predictable public response from the targeted news media. Bring it on, they say. We are simply going to continue to do what we have always done, provide a check on the government by throwing as much light on its doings as we possibly can.

Rather than intimidate the media, the attacks have energized them and engendered waves of public support that can be clearly measured in "Trump bumps"to Nielsen ratings and paid subscriptions.

At the same time, the Trump thumps have provided an impetus for the news media to rally and redouble their collective efforts to preserve and perhaps expand their First Amendment rights. There is nothing like a hostile outside force in forging solidarity among the beleaguered.

On Jan. 17, representatives of more than 50 news organizations met at the Newseum in Washington to plota common strategy for strengthening news media. It was organized by the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press and the American Society of News Editors and hosted by the Democracy Fund.

The journalists, lawyers and other media advocates discussed legal and legislative ways to insure access to government offices and information, protect whistle blowers from government retribution, protect themselves from frivolous libel suits and protect reporters from government harassment.

They also talked about the need to restore trust in the news media and floated ideas about how to do it.

I am happy to report that broadcasters were well represented at the "summit" by the Radio Television Digital News Association in the persons of Executive Director Mike Cavender and General Counsel Kathleen Kirby of the Wiley Rein law firm.

Cavender tells me to expect a full report from the organizers in the next week or two.

Whatever strategy emerges from the summit is just so much talk unless it wins the financial backing of newspapers, the national news networks and, yes, TV station groups. Legal defense funds, legislative initiatives and appeals to the public cost money.

It should go without saying that broadcasters need to support fully the RTDNA. In addition andCavender may hate me for saying this but broadcasters should also consider supporting other worthy organizations like Investigative Reporters and Editors.

I've been arguing that stations should eschew on-air commentary, especially on hot partisan issues, figuring that there is enough opinion out there and that it will only serve to undermine trust in stations' reporting. If a station's commentary is perceived as consistently liberal or conservative, its reporting may be dismissed as such.

However, I'm making an exception to that rule: the First Amendment. Stations should take to the air to defend freedom of speech and the press and argue for expansion of its rights and protections be that access to the dashcam video at the local police station or a federal shield law for whistle blowers.

A CBS affiliate should not allow the president to get away with saying that CBS News is "an enemy of the people." Ditto for NBC and ABC affiliates.

Stations must be careful not to preach or talk down to their viewers. That's how the national media alienated Trump voters. Stations need to listen to their viewers and win them over by convincing them that their interests are aligned, that press freedoms are ultimately their freedoms.

And it would be good to hear from the heads of the station groups, the ones who are always saying what swell jobs they do producing news and serving the public interest.

They can speak out in op-eds and in speeches before civic groups and at universities. They can direct the executives of the NAB and state broadcast associations to do the same.

I fully understand that the No. 1 job and responsibility of the station group executives is to make money, and so they have to be mindful of what they say. They have big issues pending before Congress and the FCC, notably ownership deregulation, the repack and ATSC 3.0. Criticizing the administration is not the way to get your way in Washington.

Go here to read the rest:
Rally Round The First Amendment - TV News Check