The 2013 Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, which amended the 1948 U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act, is often cited by critics as enabling government "propaganda" to reach domestic audiences. It removed a ban preventing US government-funded media from distributing content within the U.S..
The 2013 Amendment: The amendment (part of the NDAA for fiscal 2013) allows U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) content, such as Voice of America, to be available domestically, which some argue allows government messaging (informally called "propaganda" or "lying") to influence Americans, rather than just foreign audiences.
Context: Proponents argued this modernization allowed for transparency, permitting Americans to see what their government was distributing abroad, rather than enabling deliberate domestic misinformation.
Misconceptions: It is important to note that the amendment did not explicitly repeal the Act, nor did it previously make it illegal for the government to "lie" to citizens through other channels, but rather altered the rules on government-sponsored media broadcasts.
The law did not apply to private news organizations, which are not bound by the same regulations.
The original version of the Act was amended by the Smith–Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 which allowed for materials produced by the State Department (propaganda) and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to be made available within the United States.
Broadcasters' licenses should be cheap. What does that fee pay for? Access to the bandwidth on which to broadcast and the regulatory apparatus to ensure they're following the rules. I do NOT want a country in which the state controls which networks are allowed to broadcast based on whether they like the opinions expressed on that air or not. That's what Zelensky does. It's tyrannical and he should be regime changed for it, IMO (by his own people, not by NeoCon, Inc).
If the issue is truthfulness, then show precisely which regulation they have violated and work through the administrative process to yank their license through regular order for a violation of law. Any other circumstance is not a valid reason to silence them or to put up onerous financial barriers to entry.
If the issue is "I don't like what they're saying," the solution is more free speech. You lower the barrier to entry and allow your own people to speak in opposition and show how they're lying. I'm not compromising on core principles because commies lie.
But, is the MSM news agencies or entertainment outlets? If they crawl under the entertainment label then they might be able to plead their news CAN have bald faced lies because it is merely....entertainment.
Which is why leadman2’s comment is correct. Use the defense that it’s perfectly legal for them to lie; they will lose all credibility, even libtards will have to acknowledge that the msm is not reputable anymore.
If you look at the linked post, good ol Keith doberman decided to go on an explitive filled rant. Theres as much "fuck off kieth" in that post as a subthread as there is actual discourse.
If you look at the linked post, good ol Keith doberman decided to go on an explitive filled rant. Theres as much "fuck off kieth" in that post as a subthread as there is actual discourse.
It's perfectly legal for them to lie......
It will be fun if they use that defense.
Yes...time to get rid of the Smith–Mundt Act. 🤬
Obama repealed it. We need to put it back.
This.
Ok.. I'm confused...by the part in green below:
The 2013 Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, which amended the 1948 U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act, is often cited by critics as enabling government "propaganda" to reach domestic audiences. It removed a ban preventing US government-funded media from distributing content within the U.S..
The 2013 Amendment: The amendment (part of the NDAA for fiscal 2013) allows U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) content, such as Voice of America, to be available domestically, which some argue allows government messaging (informally called "propaganda" or "lying") to influence Americans, rather than just foreign audiences.
Context: Proponents argued this modernization allowed for transparency, permitting Americans to see what their government was distributing abroad, rather than enabling deliberate domestic misinformation.
Misconceptions: It is important to note that the amendment did not explicitly repeal the Act, nor did it previously make it illegal for the government to "lie" to citizens through other channels, but rather altered the rules on government-sponsored media broadcasts.
The law did not apply to private news organizations, which are not bound by the same regulations.
They make it confusing on purpose. The general consensus is that it makes it legal for the press to lie.
Ok ..thanks fren, that was my understanding
It doesn’t matter, the extreme media has been lying to us for centuries anyway. Think about it. All is corruption and lies.
Truth!
10 Days Of MSM Darkness?
Broadcasters' licenses should be cheap. What does that fee pay for? Access to the bandwidth on which to broadcast and the regulatory apparatus to ensure they're following the rules. I do NOT want a country in which the state controls which networks are allowed to broadcast based on whether they like the opinions expressed on that air or not. That's what Zelensky does. It's tyrannical and he should be regime changed for it, IMO (by his own people, not by NeoCon, Inc).
If the issue is truthfulness, then show precisely which regulation they have violated and work through the administrative process to yank their license through regular order for a violation of law. Any other circumstance is not a valid reason to silence them or to put up onerous financial barriers to entry.
If the issue is "I don't like what they're saying," the solution is more free speech. You lower the barrier to entry and allow your own people to speak in opposition and show how they're lying. I'm not compromising on core principles because commies lie.
interesting, looks like a boom!
wondering what can be done for All Baloney Corporation (ABC), Commie Broadcasting System (CBS)…
Nothing But Crap (NBC)
Awesome !
true! whether independent or when owned in the past by General Electric
These are great! first time hearing the truth lol !
Smith mundt act... propaganda is still legal unless they repealed thst and didnt tell us.
But, is the MSM news agencies or entertainment outlets? If they crawl under the entertainment label then they might be able to plead their news CAN have bald faced lies because it is merely....entertainment.
Which is why leadman2’s comment is correct. Use the defense that it’s perfectly legal for them to lie; they will lose all credibility, even libtards will have to acknowledge that the msm is not reputable anymore.
There’s nothing like when Walter Cronkite ended the news by saying “And that’s the news, Goodnight!”.
My Uncle used to call him "Walter Crankcase".
Yes!
A dream come true if the mockingbird media lost their licenses!
If you look at the linked post, good ol Keith doberman decided to go on an explitive filled rant. Theres as much "fuck off kieth" in that post as a subthread as there is actual discourse.
One thing confuses me though - https://x.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/2032855414233047172?s=20 he tells Keith in comments "still not interested in your car tier jewelry". Wtf is that in ref to? A bribe attempt? Some kinda slang?
If you look at the linked post, good ol Keith doberman decided to go on an explitive filled rant. Theres as much "fuck off kieth" in that post as a subthread as there is actual discourse.
One thing confuses me though - https://x.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/2032855414233047172?s=20 he tells Keith in comments "still not interested in your car tier jewelry". Wtf is that in ref to? A bribe attempt? Some kinda slang?
I can't figure that out..unless Keith thinks he's special because he wears a Cartier watch or something...🧐
https://nitter.poast.org/i/status/2032920279148802210