Mediaboss Marketing

The First Amendment is stronger than ever, and is being exercised more freely and aggressively than at any time in our nations history.

That may seem a surprising conclusion based on the handwringing from Big Media outlets like CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, The New York Times, the Washington Post and others who claim that the First Amendment is under attack from President Trump. But it is nevertheless true.

The Big Media outlets are doing their best to conflate themselves with the First Amendment, i.e., an attack on CNN, they say, is an attack on freedom of the press. That is a lie, as CNN would quickly label a dubious assertion by the president. CNN is merely an organization that takes advantage of First Amendment rights to do its job. CNN is not the embodiment of the First Amendment. Neither is The New York Times or the Washington Post.

What really bothers Big Media is that they are not as relevant, respected or necessary as they once were. But they want to be treated as if they are, as if its still 1950 or 1960 or even 1990. They want to be the filter through which news and information flows, but they are no longer that, and it is that fact that leads to their frequent hissy fits.

In this internet age, there are tens of thousands of alternative sources for news and information when it comes to national events, at least several hundred of which are regularly consulted by the masses on a daily basis. Most of these newer, alternative news sources are firmly planted in one ideological corner or the other, and their credibility is often suspect but unfortunately the same can be said for CNN, MSNBC, FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC, The New York Times, the Washington Post and countless additional metropolitan newspapers.

The cratering of respect and credibility for the once powerful Big Media outlets is not the fault of President Trump. It is the fault of the media outlets themselves. Their low standing is the result of their own irresponsible choices, culminating in their outrageously biased coverage of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump is off the mark when he criticizes certain outlets for delivering fake news. The news itself the content is real enough. Its the delivery that is flawed. The problem is not fake news. The problem is horrible journalism.

Understanding good journalism does not require an advanced degree. Good journalism is accurate. It is fair. It does not have an agenda. It is not out to get someone. It presents facts as completely as human beings are capable of gathering them. It does not seek out only the negative or the positive about the subjects that are covered. It follows the facts where they may lead, without a preconceived end result. Virtually none of the Big Media outlets follow these simple precepts anymore.

The First Amendment 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.

What a thing of beauty. So much is covered in so few words. But for todays purpose, our focus is on free speech and the press. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

The First Amendment does not say, The president shall not criticize the media or call it fake news. It does not say, Certain media outlets above others will have rights of access and the front row at press briefings. It does not say, The president shall always call on CNN for a question during press conferences. None of those examples, when they happen or do not happen, in no way threaten, harm or violate the First Amendment.

When he or his staff holds a briefing or event, the president of the United States can handpick any group of media outlets he desires and exclude any he wants to keep out. Doing so violates no ones First Amendment rights. The only way CNNs First Amendment rights could be violated is if Congress passed a law taking CNN off the air.

Everyone associated with the news media, big or small, has gone through battles with various public officials, whether local, state or national, over access and inclusion. There are always cases where some officials or organizations or groups invite some media outlets to an event and not others, or send press releases to one while not sending to the others, or provide information later to others while getting it into a preferred outlets hands first. These are age-old games that are as ancient as the written word.

When it happens, it is not a violation of anyones First Amendment rights. In some cases, open record or freedom of information laws might be violated, but First Amendment rights are not. Nothing is preventing a media outlet from exercising its First Amendment rights, both by complaining loudly about the treatment and by pursuing the information through a less convenient avenue than having it handed over on a silver platter.

But meanwhile, the First Amendment itself is being exercised in this internet age so freely, so aggressively, so without boundaries that it could be mistaken for being on steroids. Anyone with internet access and a blog, anyone with email, anyone with a Facebook or Twitter account both media members and non-journalists has a worldwide platform to exercise their freedom of speech, even the worst kinds of free speech (anonymous and therefore irresponsible). Far from inhibiting the exercise of free speech and a free press, President Trump, intentionally or not, is demonstrating that the jealous entitlement CNN and other Big Media outlets have had on the First Amendment is a thing of the past.

The only way the traditional Big Media outlets can recapture their special claim on the First Amendment and the respect they once enjoyed is by doing what they are most unlikely to do return to a form of journalism that is fair and unbiased, tough but respectful. Short of that, their standing and influence will continue to diminish. The fault will be theirs, not the presidents.

Reach Gary Abernathy at 937-393-3456 or by email at [emailprotected]

http://timesgazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/web1_Gary-Abernathy-CMYK-9.jpg

.

Read more from the original source:
1st Amendment stronger than ever - Hillsboro Times Gazette

The writers at the Daily have done an excellent job of examining the Constitution recently. However, there is one portion of that terrible document they forgot to condemn, and it threatens our lives even more than others they have decried.

Therefore, I modestly propose one addition to their editorials on the grounds that mine is milder and has more justification behind it. Yes, the First Amendment is outdated. This ill-conceived rule was only made so evil farmers could talk about the government, their peers and anyone else without being jailed for speaking without approval.

Back in those times, they didnt have rapid communication such as telephones and the internet. Words had to travel very slowly by mouth and perhaps carried by horses, giving plenty of time to prevent thought crime, which must be accounted for differently today. Besides, black people and women had a different legal position, so we can automatically discount any ideal from the era as outdated.

People like me who see the wisdom in discarding the First Amendment could amend the Constitution with a heavy majority in Congress. But it would be easier to tell people that its irrelevant and gradually pass laws to eliminate its range of application so we dont have to wade through the tedium of coming up with better arguments and getting more seats in Congress on our side.

Where does the First Amendment even fit in a good world? Should we have every mother and father explain their views of the world to their kids and spend the day worrying that the youth might come to a different conclusion? Should we accept the possibility that any worker you encounter on your daily business has different opinions than yourself?

If a man were to shout fire in a crowded theater, others would repeat his shout and some would shout the opposite, creating a complete mess for authorities determining if there ever had been a fire. Behold, this problem reaches to the beginning of recorded history, with individuals, nations and entire species that were described but whose existence is uncertain.

Lets make the ACLU a division of the government; any group that lobbies Congress is practically in the government already, never mind that some other lobbyist organizations are actually receiving federal funding. Perhaps they can distribute thesauruses or pamphlets on theories of government. When we give everyone a reason to question authority, what could go wrong? If someone shouted a slur at pedestrians from a car and sped away, Id like to see free-speech advocates open their mouths and try to think of a rebuttal to erase the damage.

Pro-speech rights people would rush to wave my example away as an exaggeration and argue that people would have training to prevent poor grammar and logical fallacies. But they forget, we already have plenty of politicians to handle public speaking for us, so letting civilians have their own ideas is redundant. Thats why we should strike the First Amendment.

Im not claiming we need to abandon words or even the English language. We just need to control people more. Lets clamp down the right to speak freely and peaceably assemble. We cant trust 18-year-olds, 22-year-olds or 26-year-olds with responsibility like that; who knows what they might say? More ideas and thinking arent the answer to a complex situation like our modern world. Instead, we should move the designated area to assemble with controversial ideas off campus, then into a basement, and then require a permit to enter the basement. Hopefully, people will forget about free speech and religion before a disaster happens.

Read this article:
Letter: Why not strike the First Amendment? - Iowa State Daily

UPDATED: President Trump understands press freedom about as well as he grasps humility.

In other words, not at all.

But that doesnt stop him from sounding off. His rip-roaring speech Friday to the Conservative Political Action Conference contained an unnerving threat and ironic demands.

Trump renewed his complaints about the media or as he calls it the fake media.

I say it doesnt represent the people, it doesnt and never will represent the people, and were going to do something about it because we have to go out and have to speak our minds and we have to be honest, Trump said.

That going to do something sounded ominous, yet if he just keeps talking, he is going to continue to do wonderful things for TVratings and newspaper subscriptions. Thank you, Mr. President.

Trump gave a journalism lecture: I'm against the people that make up stories and make up sources.They shouldn't be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody's name. Let their name be put out there.

That will never work, but the president happily spins the fantasy.

Unnamed sources drive a lot of coverage, inside and outside Washington. Trump made the complaintshortly afterhis own White House aides gave a briefing on the condition of anonymity.

Ah, hypocrisy. It never registers with the president, who just keeps complaining.

If unnamed sources arent used, Trump predicted, you will see stories dry up like you've never seen before.

He followed that by announcing: I love the First Amendment. Nobody loves it better than me. Nobody. I mean, who uses itmore than I do?

But theres a difference between reportingand shooting your mouth off.

If you want to see stories dry up, you cant really love the First Amendment. Dogged reporting can get at major issues facing the country. Perhaps Trump loves parts of the First Amendment, but the love in this case needs to be all the way.

President Trump has a tendency to make everything personal. He comes at the issues not as a politician but as a TV star who was treated to largely favorable press when he was a performeron The Apprentice.

He made that approach pay offfor him during the unpredictable 2016 campaign, but he cant seem to shift gears as president.

Thin-skinned and self-absorbed, he is not prepared for the rough-and-tumble of Washington.

And were all paying for it because hes easily distracted and offended. He says his achievements arent saluted, but he and his White House keep tripping themselves up.

Maybe he was serving distractions Friday from CNN and New York Times reporting about contacts between Trump associates and Russian intelligence officials. He finds ways to divert attention frombad press.

He can bean aggrieved star, and his White House can take revenge on reporters he doesnt like. Reporters from CNN, The New York Times, Politico, the BBC, the Huffington Post and The Los Angeles Times were kept out of a White House briefing on Friday.

Even so, the administration is probably helping those news organizations gainrespect. The digging about Russia wont end; Trump gives the press more reason to keep looking. Thank you, Mr. President.

The president has announced he wont attend the White House correspondents dinner in April. Thats for the best. Why try to fake that youre having a good time in front of the fake media?

For now, Trump is sending more than enough head-scratching messages. His media bashing on Friday was especially confused. But thats because when Trump talks about the First Amendment, hes just giving lip service.

hboedeker@orlandosentinel.com

Link:
Trump: Fake love for First Amendment - Orlando Sentinel

A few weeks ago, I wrote about Donald Trumps attacks on our nations news media and his attempts to position his Twitter account as the only official news outlet of the administrationeffectively a state-run media outlet built upon a social media platform. Unfortunately, since I wrote that piece, Trump and his entire administration have effectively tripled-down on their war against the American news media and have taken unprecedented actions to counter it.

If youve had a chance to watch any of Sean Spicers White House press briefings over the last month (I usually see them on CBSN), you have probably seen at least a couple of instances of Spicer directly arguing with and attacking individual reporters, much the way that Trump did with Katy Tur during the campaign. Spicer has already shown himself to be combative with the news media, and Trump himself continues to decry established media outlets, such as CNN and The New York Times as fake news and now, very fake news (emphasis mine).

This, of course, is just a small sampling of his tweets directed at delegitimizing the entire media apparatus of this nation. But that last one may be the most alarming: Trump has officially declared the news media the enemy of the American People. Let that one sink in just for a minute.

The American news media is effectively our liaison into the workings of our state and federal governments. Whenever reporters include quotes in newspaper or on-line reports, or sit down with officials in one-on-one interviews, they are giving the American people a brief glimpse into that representatives policy positions, personality, and method of governing. Reporters can communicate with inside sourcesoften anonymously for fear of reprisalsand find out more of what is going on behind the scenes, which is often how questionable policies and even outright corruption are revealed to the populace. The media also brings crucial information, such as product recalls, threats to public safety, and foreign policy, to the attention of the populace. Their ability to communicate effectively has only grown in the technological age, with social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook serving to provide additional ways for people to receive their news and stay informed.

It is perhaps this latter outlet which Trump is trying to monopolize and control. By labeling many media organizations as fake news through his Twitter account, Trump seeks not only to control his own narrative, but also the medias ability to effectively communicate with the American people. Every time Trump mentions a specific organization or reporter in a speech or in a tweet, he is singling that person or entity out for public ridicule, knowing that if they have a public Twitter account (the vast majority do), his supporters and followers will assail them with harassment. This is a way to not only undermine their credibility with the nation, but also an attempt to silence them completely. Individual journalists especially may feel pressured to disconnect from social media due to constant harassment and threats made against them. Donald Trump is both enabling and encouraging such behavior.

So maybe it should come as no surprise that, just a few days ago, the Trump Administration literally blocked a number of news media outlets from participating in a press briefing. Reporters from CNN, The New York Times, Politico, and The Los Angeles Times were all barred from entry. In fact, according to the report, Sean Spicer was literally hand-picking the news outlets he wanted in attendancea form of journalistic discrimination. This is potentially the beginning of a total media blackout of journalistic outlets the administration seeks to impugn. If Trump and his team can ultimately position the American news media as something to be shunned and discredited, his supportersand potentially a large chunk of the American populacewill be less likely to trust their reporting as the full gamut of their offenses comes to light. This in itself will make it much harder to eliminate the threats his administrations policies present to America.

The administration has also taken the media to task as of late for its very use of anonymous sources. On CBS Face the Nation recently, Reince Priebus declared:

This is disingenuous at best, given the administrations use of its own anonymous sources in an attempt to confuse the public. Furthermore, there is little question that, for certain types of stories, anonymity is the only way to get the story out there. Sources may be, depending on the story, risking their careers and potentially even their lives by simply speaking to a reporter. Outing the identities of these sources simply puts a target on their backswhich, given how vindictive this entire presidency has become, may be exactly what Trump and Priebus are hoping for, to squelch as much public criticism as possible.

And then earlier tonight, this story popped up on my Twitter feed. Sebastian Gorka, an Islamophobe who was also hired by Steve Bannon to serve as a terrorism advisor to Trump, personally phoned one of his critics with threats of a lawsuit for tweeting his criticism of Gorka. Michael S. Smith II, a regular contributor to discussions on terrorism and how groups like ISIS are using social media to leverage support, has tweeted criticisms of both Trumps and Gorkas handling of radical Islam. Gorka apparently expressed hurt feelings at being criticized by someone hes never met and threatened the lawsuit at the beginning of the conversation:

Which begs the question: Is the Trump Administration now seeking to pursue lawsuits against individual Twitter users who denounce and criticize their policies on the platform? If Gorka does indeed press for charges against Smith, it would certainly set that precedent. It would also send a clear and direct message to every citizen in the United States: Donald Trump is not to be questioned. In fact, Stephen Miller, Trumps senior advisor, recently said in so many words:

This should make every American tremble in fear. Welcome to the new reality under Donald Trump.

See the original post here:
Trump's Unprecedented War on the First Amendment Has Gone ... - Huffington Post

Organizers of a Celebration of the First Amendment Saturday afternoon at Floyds Eco-System had to set up extra chairs for the additional attendees who heard speeches, panel discussions, songs and poems about the Constitutional amendment that protects freedom of speech, the press and other such freedoms.

Designed to speak out against what many see as assaults on such freedoms, the crowd applauded and cheered when speakers discussed the right to protest against the government and freely express opinions. Floyd Countys Commonwealths Attorney Eric Branscom kicked off the speeches with a history lesson that talked about a President who wanted to suppress freedom of speech and the press and jail those who did not agree and was backed by the political party that controlled Congress.

Turned out he was talking about President John Adams in 1794 and control of the Federalist Party over Congress then. Branscom said it took Virginians Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who followed Adams, to implement a version of states rights and pardons to get those who disagreed with Adams out of jail and protest the then-new First Amendment.

Even so, Branscom said, it would take 165 years before the U.S. Supreme Court would fully overturn the legal challenges from the 1700s in the Times v. Sullivan case that reaffirmed freedom of the press and the other freedoms of the amendment.

Radford University media professor, author and former newspaperman Bill Kovarik introduced himself to the audience as an enemy of the people, citing a term used by current President Donald Trump, and then brought applause and cheers in a speech where he called for strong opposition and protest against the head of state.

We are friends of the people, Kovarik said, adding that the media must questions those elected to office locally, statewide and nationally.

I work in the tradition of Ben Franklin, Joseph Pulitzer, Ernie Pyle and Woodward and Bernstein, Kovarok said.

The press is not perfect, he said. Were watchdogs.

He said that being called an enemy of the people is dangerous speech.

The press is the Constitutions best friend, he added.

A panel on free speech included Branscom, Floyd County Sheriff Brian Craig, activist Tree Gigante and attorney and columnist Alan Graf, who answered questions from the floor and talked about protest.

Craig praised organizers of events like the Womens March in January for working with his department.

We know the people involved in these events, and we work with them, he said.

Graf said that he, as an attorney, has represented people charged with crimes because they protested legally.

When I came to Floyd, I told the sheriff that I also had sued the police over handling of protests, he said.

As a living, Craig answered with a laugh.

Gigante said protests in many cases are not only a right but should also be considered a duty.

Sometimes, she added, it may be necessary to violate the law to carry out that right.

Brancom said law enforcement must establish where the line is drawn between peaceful and violent protest.

What are the boundaries? Sometimes the limits must be it comes back to pushing against the government, he said.

A panel on freedom of religion consisted of Graf, who told the audience Im Jewish and I come from a holocaust family, Imam Abdullah Ferrom of Roanoke Mosque and Quaker Kim ODonnell.

ODonnell said her religion considers relationship with God a deeply personal thing. Our right to practice is a something we strive to protest.

Ferrom said Muslims work to peacefully co-exist with other religions but face a lot of distrust from others who cite their religion as justification for violence against his beliefs.

He cited threats of having a Muslim registry required in America as a threat.

If there such a thing as a Muslim registry, I will register as a Muslim, Graf said, which brought applause and comments of so will I from members of the audience.

The event also awarded youth and adults for essays, poems and songs about the First Amendments and threats against the freedoms it is designed to protect.

First place winners who were present read their essays or poems to the audience and sang their songs.

Michael Kovick closed the event with his second-place winning song.

Linville M. Meadows, Second Place

Will Bason, Honorable Mention

Andrew Finn, Honorable Mention

Alex Hicks, Honorable Mention

Leah Pierce, Honorable Mention

Kaci Marshall, Honorable Mention

Greg Arens, Honorable Mention

Jillian Greenhalgh, First

Cameron Callahan, Third Place

Julian Hensley-Buzzell, Honorable Mention

Isaac Byrd, Honorable Mention

Stella Sessions, Honorable Mention

Read more here:
Crowd attends event celebrating the First Amendment - Southwest Virginia Today