Media

[Rorschach]

I don't agree with Finklestein.
If you had a brain, you wouldn't either.

[Jovial Monk]

Another information–rich post that, again, does not answer my question.

[Rorschach]

You cant be serious.
How can YOU of all people look down on other posters.
You are one of the worst I've ever come across.
Don't flame me and expect respect back you goose.
Don't pretend to be better or holier than thou when you are so clearly worse.

I'm here to debate issues not engage in personal critiques or return flames. So please get your act together or bugger off, because I'm now on a short fuse and I will.

[Jovial Monk]

What is in Finklestein then? How is the government responding? I would ask why this displeases you but obviously you just operate by reflex rather than thinking.

[Jovial Monk]

Notorious anti-Semite discovers he is Jewish

As a rising star in Hungary's far-right Jobbik Party, Csanad Szegedi was notorious for his incendiary comments on Jews.......

His grandmother was an Auschwitz survivor and his grandfather a veteran of forced labour camps....

Since then, the 30-year-old has become a pariah in Jobbik

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/ar ... d=10827074" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

is this not
Quite.Simply.Beautiful. ?

:jump

[Rorschach]

I've decided to play by your rules where you are concerned. I will hence, NOT ANSWER, any of your questions. I will not however stoop to disrupting topics by posting off topic waffle, and being a disingenuous prick.
I will simply post other people's opinions and you can argue with them or as you have so far done, simply runaway from alternate opinions.

Finkelstein report threatens to muzzle free speech
PUBLISHED: 07 Mar 2012 00:09:20
Timothy andrews

The 2011 International Press Freedom Index was released a few weeks ago and Australia had plummeted to 30th place, behind countries such as Niger, Mali, Namibia and Poland.

Reporters Without Borders expressed their alarm at growing media regulation in Australia.

There is no doubt that if enacted, the Finkelstein report, which called last Friday for a statutory media regulatory body, would relegate Australia to the category of authoritarian regimes. And isn't that what Parties which fear dissent and hunger for control and power like the Greens and ALP do want. To stifle debate and dissent. Much like you here JM.

Australia is already drowning in a sea of legislation and regulation, where the most mundane everyday activities fall under the sphere of state interference. Every potential problem leads to calls for more government regulation, more laws and less personal freedom.

Rather than attempting to impose yet another layer of restrictive bureaucracy to take away our freedoms, policymakers ought to focus their attention on the empowerment of citizens, and allowing for personal responsibility by reducing controls over our lives. This is particularly important in so personal a realm as political expression.

The Finkelstein report, by taking away more of our rights and ceding them to government-appointed apparatchiks, is misguided, based on flawed reasoning, and is an unabashed attack on the fundamental human right of freedom of speech. It is a report that, at its core, recommends disempowering ordinary Australians and exacerbates the very “problem” it attempts to solve.

As such, the government has no moral choice other than to reject it outright. Few would openly dispute the fundamental importance of freedom of speech to any functioning democracy. This is why this report ought be of critical concern to all.

A solution to a problem that does not exist, the recommendation to create a statutory behemoth – to regulate not just professional media but everyday Australians posting their thoughts online – is downright scary. What the Green Alp block want is to limit only those who disagree with them.

Despite the obligatory gestures to freedom of speech, any detailed reading of the report reveals not only a profound ignorance of the nature of online communication but a dangerous ideological undercurrent abhorrent to core values of freedom of political expression.

The report’s culmination – the recommendation of a taxpayer-funded super regulator with powers of censorship, and a de facto licensing regime for political expression – is antithetical to the vibrant political discourse necessary for our society to function, and rests upon a profound misunderstanding of human nature, and the relationship between the individual and the state. Former judge Ray Finkelstein’s report relies on several faulty premises, primarily the existence of an industry “market failure” to provide the media Finkelstein approves of. Yes, exactly part of the problem overall where who decides what should be rejected or censored. Obviously the Greens and the ALP have already pointed out who they think such censorship and penalties should be heaped upon.

Such hubris – that Finkelstein’s personal opinion as to what defines quality journalism outweighs millions of Australians who “vote with their feet” in their consuming habits – is simply breathtaking.

The scant “evidence” provided is particularly undercut by the disingenuous splicing of polling data almost half a century old with a contemporary survey to imply a perception of pro-Coalition media bias, and holding this as a rationale for intervention. LOL - scant is right in todays Australian media where the Left is most notably present and biased.

The proposed super regulator, a government-appointed and government-funded body, would have the power to impose an arbitrary “code of ethics”, and to remove opinion pieces it deems unsuitable. Furthermore, it would be able to force the publication of a “right of reply”. Presumably, environmentalist websites would be forced to host a mining industry rebuttal – at their own cost. Big Brother

Not only are professional media outlets included, but any blogger who averages 15,000 hits a year – which includes, essentially, everyone who dares post opinions online – shall be under its power.

In fact, statistical modelling undertaken by David Stockwell has demonstrated the threshold could be reached by anyone with less than one reader a day (only a small proportion of hits are made by actual readers).

So poorly written and broad is the definition that anyone who disseminates public information or opinion online is covered, resulting in comments on micro-blogging sites such as Twitter and even Facebook falling under the super regulator’s purview.

There is no right of appeal, no requirement for reasons to be published, and not even the semblance of natural justice.

If a person has a conscientious objection to posting a piece when they are ordered to, or removing an opinion they believe in, they risk being hauled through the courts, and potential incarceration.

While Big Brother reading private Facebook posts or regulating a small personal blog may not be the intent of the proposals, it is this profound misunderstanding of online communication that is perhaps most demonstrative of Finkelstein’s lack of media experience or knowledge.

More troubling, however, is the proven history of how such regulations grow, and are ultimately used by governments seeking to suppress political dissent. Would anyone trust Labor? I wouldn't.
Throughout history, regulatory bodies dependent on government patronage have become beholden to their masters. Despite the best of intentions at the outset, they ultimately have always led to the stifling of political dissent.

If these recommendations are enacted, there can be no doubt that it shall ultimately happen in Australia.

Timothy Andrews is Menzies House managing editor and freespeechaustralia.com creator.

[Jovial Monk]

So you don’t know what is in Finklestein or what the govt response is?

[Rorschach]

Got the pdf file thanks.
How about you?
If the motives behind the report were not enough, choosing Finkelstein should have been, reading the report only backs up the concerns.

How you going BTW with spelling his name, still not managed to get it right I see. But you have read the report, right?

[Jovial Monk]

So you got the Fink’s stuff, what does it say?

[Rorschach]

I thought you knew.

If you google Finkelstein Report this is one of the options;

Report of the Inquiry into the Media and Media Regulation
http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__.../Report-of ... y-into-the.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
THE HON R FINKELSTEIN QC. ASSISTED BY. PROF M RICKETSON. REPORT TO THE MINISTER FOR BROADBAND,. COMMUNICATIONS AND THE ...

and

Independent Media Inquiry | Department of Broadband ...
http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy ... iry/Cached" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
29 Jun 2012 – Media statement by Ray Finkelstein QC (DOC, 41 KB). The government forwarded the inquiry's report to the Convergence Review Committee ...
Ray Finkelstein - The Independent Media ... - Rate this page

you can get pdf and doc versions there.

You can even get a Summary (which may be all you can handle).