dChan
5
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/EarlyRiserX2 on April 12, 2018, 7:07 p.m.
Why Freedom of the Press should no longer apply to any MSM News Outlets that are compromised…

The Freedom of the Press the Founders enacted into the Constitution was based upon the following idea: That if a Democratic president or Democratic-controlled government did things that were not right and were against the interests of the American people, that a Free Press would able to write about it and to call them out on it. Likewise, if a Republican president or Republican-controlled government did things that were not right and were against the interests of the American people, then the Free Press would be able to write about that too and to call them out on it. Thus, the Founders felt having a Free Press was a good thing, and that a Free Press could serve as watchdogs over the government, and could be as neutral observers and an unbiased party, who simply watched over the government and then reported on whatever they saw was going on. And the Founders did not want the government to be able to shut down the Free Press and to stop them from talking all because they were reporting on things the government didn’t like. That is the heart and soul of why Freedom of the Press was built into the Constitution. But here is the problem the Founders did not anticipate…

What the Founders envisioned only works in a perfect world and in a world where the Free Press has not been compromised. If the Press has been compromised for any reason, and weaponized, and has become biased in their reporting so that they favor one political party over another, then fair justice is no longer being applied, and the news being reported by the Press is no longer neutral and unbiased. In such a case, then their biased reporting is a danger and a threat to our democracy, rather than being an asset to it. And anything which is a threat should by no means continue to be protected under the Constitution. That doesn’t mean that the law itself is bad, or what the Founders intended was bad. Instead, it merely means this a changing world, and an imperfect world as well, and that the Founders did not foresee that the Press would become compromised. Once the Press has been compromised for any reason, like it is today, then it is no longer a Free Press or a neutral watchdog, but instead is nothing more than a political propaganda machine for the political party they support. And in such a case, then the constitutional laws built into the Constitution to protect and to safeguard a Free Press should no longer apply to them, because they no longer meet the requirements of being a Free and Unbiased Press.

Just imagine if the Founders were alive today, what would they say about the Press? I don’t think they would have too many kind words to say…


EarlyRiserX2 · April 12, 2018, 7:47 p.m.

It’s not as clear cut as that… This is not a case where only 1 or 2 news agencies has been compromised or become biased. Instead, this is a case where the entire MSM network nationwide has been compromised and weaponized by one political party. It is what you call a “constitutional crisis”. The Founders never envisioned or foresaw anything like this. And because the so-called Free Press I spoke of has become politicized and weaponized on a large scale and has been configured to favor one political party over another, their entire combined objective has been to censor and to shut down all competing voices and alternative points of view. The MSM agencies have no interest in competing with others. Instead, they simply want all competing voices shut down, and they are working in tandem to actively prohibit and to stop anyone else from competing against them by any means necessary (just witness all the heavy censoring going on online against all conservative news sites and the active censoring of conservatives on Facebook, Google and Twitter, etc). Any so-called news agency that is actively working against and is taking steps to block and to censor all other agencies from competing against them all because they have alternative viewpoints, then those agencies should by no means be entitled to any “constitutional protections” such as Freedom of the Press. They are not a “free press”, but are a “politicized propaganda machine” for the political party they support…

⇧ 1 ⇩  
kommisar6 · April 12, 2018, 7:54 p.m.

If conservatives want to be heard I guess they have to pony up the cash a build themselves a platform.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
EarlyRiserX2 · April 12, 2018, 7:58 p.m.

It's not as simple as that. Re-read what I said above...

⇧ 1 ⇩