Little-Acorn
Well-Known Member
If you accept the government's money (or tax breaks in this case), you have to do more of what government tells you.
This is becoming the main characteristic of all the activity from our Congress and President for the last few months. And now it's the newspapers' turn.
It's not clear how the newspapers' problems constitute any kind of national emergency, nor how the demise of a few of them would threaten the stability of the U.S. economy. But nonetheless, Congress has decided that they, too, should be the recipients of government largesse... and just a teeny bit more government control over what they can print. First amendment? No, sorry, this is an emergency, and so we can ignore that.
This bill puts only a small restriction on them - they can no longer print political endorsements. It's just a little thing - look at all the stuff the government will still allow them to print! Who could possibly care about such a small restriction.
You don't think the government later on, say in a few years, will add just a little more restrction to the list, now do you? Like maybe, they can no longer print political opinions? Or how about a "fair and balanced" restriction: For every conservative opinion, they must also print an equally long liberal opinion. Hey, it's just a little bit more. Who could possibly complain.....
And the people who worry that there is a connection between the desire to HELP (and regulate just a little) newspapers, and the administration's desire to regulate the pay of just a few executives (for now) and seize just a few really critical companies, surely are silly and paranoid. I mean, what precedent can you point to, to a government gradually expanding its control and eventually making those restrictions serious?
Naw, we can trust our government to never do that. So, there's no need to follow silly, antiquated laws in some 200-year-old document, designed to prevent such a thing.
----------------------------------------------
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE52N67F20090324
U.S. bill seeks to rescue faltering newspapers
Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:05pm EDT
by Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.
"This may not be the optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains but it should be an option for many newspapers that are struggling to stay afloat," said Senator Benjamin Cardin.
A Cardin spokesman said the bill had yet to attract any co-sponsors, but had sparked plenty of interest within the media, which has seen plunging revenues and many journalist layoffs.
Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.
Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.
Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax exempt, and contributions to support news coverage or operations could be tax deductible.
(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)
This is becoming the main characteristic of all the activity from our Congress and President for the last few months. And now it's the newspapers' turn.
It's not clear how the newspapers' problems constitute any kind of national emergency, nor how the demise of a few of them would threaten the stability of the U.S. economy. But nonetheless, Congress has decided that they, too, should be the recipients of government largesse... and just a teeny bit more government control over what they can print. First amendment? No, sorry, this is an emergency, and so we can ignore that.
This bill puts only a small restriction on them - they can no longer print political endorsements. It's just a little thing - look at all the stuff the government will still allow them to print! Who could possibly care about such a small restriction.
You don't think the government later on, say in a few years, will add just a little more restrction to the list, now do you? Like maybe, they can no longer print political opinions? Or how about a "fair and balanced" restriction: For every conservative opinion, they must also print an equally long liberal opinion. Hey, it's just a little bit more. Who could possibly complain.....
And the people who worry that there is a connection between the desire to HELP (and regulate just a little) newspapers, and the administration's desire to regulate the pay of just a few executives (for now) and seize just a few really critical companies, surely are silly and paranoid. I mean, what precedent can you point to, to a government gradually expanding its control and eventually making those restrictions serious?
Naw, we can trust our government to never do that. So, there's no need to follow silly, antiquated laws in some 200-year-old document, designed to prevent such a thing.
----------------------------------------------
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE52N67F20090324
U.S. bill seeks to rescue faltering newspapers
Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:05pm EDT
by Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.
"This may not be the optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains but it should be an option for many newspapers that are struggling to stay afloat," said Senator Benjamin Cardin.
A Cardin spokesman said the bill had yet to attract any co-sponsors, but had sparked plenty of interest within the media, which has seen plunging revenues and many journalist layoffs.
Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.
Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.
Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax exempt, and contributions to support news coverage or operations could be tax deductible.
(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)
