Skip to main content

Home/ Dr. Friedman's AP Government/ Group items tagged congress

Rss Feed Group items tagged

paigedeleeuw

The Public Interest Standard in Television Broadcasting | Benton Foundation - 2 views

shared by paigedeleeuw on 29 Oct 14 - No Cached
  • Federal oversight of all broadcasting has had two general goals: to foster the commercial development of the industry and to ensure that broadcasting serves the educational and informational needs of the American people.
  • Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have sometimes concluded that the broadcast marketplace by itself is not adequately serving public needs. Accordingly, numerous efforts have been undertaken over the past 70 years to encourage or require programming or airtime to enhance the electoral process, governance, political discourse, local community affairs, and education. Some initiatives have sought to help underserved audience-constituencies such as children, minorities, and individuals with disabilities.
  • As competition in the telecommunications marketplace becomes more acute and as the competitive dynamics of TV broadcasting change, the capacities of the free marketplace to serve public ends are being tested as never before.
  • ...18 more annotations...
  • A recurring challenge for Congress and the FCC has been how to reconcile the competitive commercial pressures of broadcasting with the needs of a democracy when the two seem to be in conflict. This struggle was at the heart of the controversy that led to enactment of the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934.(1)
  • Under the antiquated Radio Act of 1912, the Secretary of Commerce and Labor was authorized to issue radio licenses to citizens on request.(2) Because broadcast spectrum was so plentiful relative to demand, it was not considered necessary to empower the Secretary to deny radio licenses.
  • ongress expanded the deregulatory approach of the 1980s with its enactment of the Telecommunications Act.(38) Among other things, the Act extended the length of television broadcast licenses from 5 years to 8 years(39) and instituted new license renewal procedures that made it more difficult for competitors to compete for an existing broadcast license.(40) The Telecommunications Act also lifted limits on the number of stations that a single company could own, a rule that historically was intended to promote greater diversity in programming.(41)
  • From the beginning, broadcast regulation in the public interest has sought to meet certain basic needs of American politics and culture, over and above what the marketplace may or may not provide. It has sought to cultivate a more informed citizenry, greater democratic dialogue, diversity of expression, a more educated population, and more robust, culturally inclusive communities.
  • why public interest obligations have been seen as vital to broadcast television—and why a marketplace conception of free speech may meet many, but not all, needs of American democracy.
  • Opportunity for local self-expression. The development and use of local talent. Programs for children. Religious programs. Educational programs. Public affairs programs. Editorialization by licensees. Political broadcasts. Agricultural programs. News programs. Weather and market services. Sports programs. Service to minority groups. Entertainment programming.
  • The 1934 Act, which continues to be the charter for broadcast television, ratified a fundamental compromise by adopting two related provisions: a ban on "common carrier" regulation (sought by broadcasters) and a general requirement that broadcast licensees operate in the "public interest, convenience and necessity" (supported by Congress and various civic, educational, and religious groups).(3) The phrase was given no particular definition; some considered it necessary for the Federal Government's licensing powers to be considered constitutional.(4)
  • If a broadcast licensee airs an editorial that either endorses or opposes a legally qualified candidate, the licensee must notify all other candidates for that particular office within 24 hours, provide them with a script or tape, and offer them a "reasonable opportunity to respond through the use of the licensee's broadcast facilities.
  • the chief legal vehicle for citizens to gain direct access to the airwaves -- or hear diverse viewpoints on controversial public issues -- was the Fairness Doctrine. The principles behind the Fairness Doctrine were first expressed in 1929 in guidelines issued by the FRC, with regard to Great Lakes Broadcasting Co.(50) That Commission statement affirmed the need for broadcasters to serve a diverse public with well- rounded programming.
  • the FCC held in the Mayflower ruling in 1941 that a broadcast station could never editorialize because it would flout the public interest mandate that all sides of a controversial issue be fairly presented. Licensees, the FCC said, must present "all sides of important public questions fairly, objectively and without bias."(51)
  • For decades, the Fairness Doctrine was seen as a primary feature of the public interest standard.
  • In 1963, the FCC formally articulated the principle that the presentation of only one side of an issue during a sponsored program (such as an attack on the proposed Nuclear Test Ban Treaty) required free airtime for opposing views -- a rule known as the Cullman Doctrine.(59) Cigarette advertising, and later, controversial advertising in general, also became subject to the Fairness Doctrine.(60) In 1967 the Commission formalized its "personal attack rule" and political editorial policies in specific and specialized rules.(61)
  • Localism was one reason why Congress enacted the 1962 "all-channel" law -- a law that required that all television receivers be capable of receiving both VHF and UHF signals. The idea, according to a House committee report, was to "permit all communities of appreciable size to have at least one television station as an outlet for local self-expression."(77) With varying degrees of success, the FCC has also sought to promote locally originated programming through the Prime Time Access Rule (a rule that once limited networks to 3 hours of programming during primetime, but has since been repealed) and through policy statements that mention local news and public affairs programming as inherent to the public interest stan- dard.(78)
  • The bond between broadcasters and their local communities was given a new and stronger dimension in the 1960s as a result of United Church of Christ v. FCC.(79) In 1964, after the station owner of WLBT in Jackson, Mississippi, aired a program urging racial segregation but refused to air the views of civil rights activists or even to meet with them, the United Church of Christ and others petitioned for legal standing to challenge the renewal of WLBT's broadcast license. A Circuit Court ruling in 1966 held that citizens have the right to participate in the FCC license renewal process.
  • A primary objective and benefit of our Nation's system of regulation of television broadcasting is the local origination of programming. There is a substantial governmental interest in ensuring its continuation.
  • the Supreme Court in Turner Broadcasting v. FCC recognized Congress's rationale and upheld the must-carry rules as consistent with the First Amendment
  • The Telecommunications Act of 1996 encouraged the television industry to develop a voluntary ratings system that allows parents to assess the suitability of programming for their children.
  • Congress has recognized the public interest in expanding captioning access through two key legislative acts. The Television Decoder Circuitry Act (TDCA), passed in 1990, requires all television sets with screens 13 inches or larger manufactured or imported into the United States after July 1, 1993, to display closed captions through a "decoder chip" built into the sets.
  •  
    I think that if "broadcasters are meant to act as trustees for the public interest, then a corollary is that they must affirmatively present a wide diversity of perspectives." In my opinion, this is fantastic for all other means than politics. I think that both sides of an arguement should be presented publicly. I don't think that a Republican should just watch what the republican candidates are discussing but also look at the side of the Democrat to have a well-rounded political knowledge.
Jason Friedman

The new Congress is 80 percent white, 80 percent male and 92 percent Christian - The Wa... - 0 views

  •  
    This is relevant to homework #12
paigedeleeuw

House Agrees to Fully Fund DHS Despite Opposition on Immigration - US News - 0 views

  • The vote was a major victory for Democrats
  • funding for DHS through the end of the fiscal year – without making any concessions on immigration.
  • The move would have been the GOP’s last viable avenue for opening negotiations to halt Obama’s actions shielding some immigrants in the U.S. illegally from deportation.
  • ...14 more annotations...
  • the House passed a motion to recede from its version of the DHS funding bill and concur with the clean appropriations measure passed in the Senate last week.
  • he House voted 257-167,
  • most Republicans opposing the bill
  • House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told members that pushing for short-term continuing resolutions to avoid a shutdown was no longer a viable path.
  • So it’s not just waiting for the courts, and in fact, if this bill were to pass, I believe it would actually harm the case in the courts.”
  • To allow a shutdown of these critical functions would be an abdication of one of our primary duties as members of Congress: It is the constitutional duty of this body to provide funding for the federal government – all of the federal government,” said Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho,
  • 5 Republicans ultimately swallowed their opposition and moved to support the full funding bill, saying they preferred to let the courts take up the battle on the immigration actions.
  • federal judge in Texas blocked those immigration actions for procedural reasons, which at the time even some moderate Republicans said was not enough of a reason to give up the fight in Congress.
  • The Obama administration has said it will ask for a stay of the decision to allow immigrants to apply for deportation relief, and conservatives said they feared a vote passing clean DHS funding would send the wrong message to the courts.
  • If I were representing the Department of Justice in front of the Fifth Circuit to try to get this injunction overturned, the first sentence in my brief would be ‘The United States Congress has voted, knowing this program was in existence, to fully fund all operations,’” said Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla.,
  • Republicans supporting passage of the clean funding bill Tuesday made clear they were doing so while maintaining their objections to Obama’s immigration orders, which include protections from deportations for several groups of immigrants, including people who were brought illegally to the U.S. as children and immigrants who are parents of U.S. citizens.
  • Republicans who would prefer to hold up DHS funding in order to win their fight on immigration.
  • Naming line items in the appropriations bill, such as a $700 million increase for border security enforcement, a fully funded E-Verify system for employers to confirm the legal status of prospective employees, and money for biometric entry and exit security systems, Dent said a vote on a clean funding bill would still help meet their goals.“If you’re concerned about illegal immigration,” Dent said, “vote for this bill."
  • Republican leadership capitulated Tuesday in a key early congressional showdown, joining with Democrats to pass a bill to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security without amendments that would undo President Barack Obama’s executive orders on immigration.
bennordpaskin

What Key Players Say About Netanyahu's Speech -- NYMag - 2 views

  • He went on to argue, however, that, despite this, he could not stay silent while Iran remained a threat to his country. He believes the agreement as currently formulated will still allow Iran to be a formidable nuclear power. 
  • John BoehnerThe Speaker of the House was the person who invited Netanyahu to speak to Congress in the first place. 
  • President Obama asked Congress to put off these plans during his 2015 State of the Union, to ensure that Iran's interest in the negotiations does not evaporate. 
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • The Obama administration, besides being miffed that Republican lawmakers invited a foreign leader without asking permission, is also trying to refute the arguments Netanyahu has been making against the nuclear negotiations.
  • Representative Steve Cohen told the New York Times, “I stand with Israel, always have stood with Israel, and always will, but this speech is not about Israel. Netanyahu is not Israel just like George W. Bush wasn’t America.”
  • Kerry really wants these talks to work out, especially since his diplomatic forays in Israel and Syria have not worked as well. 
  • Kerry also made an effort to show he was very much aware of what Obama administration opponents were saying about his schedule during a speech to the U.N. Human Rights Council on Monday, According to the Associated Press, Kerry urged the organization "to end what the United States says is its unfair and biased focus on the Jewish State."
  •  
    A news article that gives a description of the current situation in Washington with visiting Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. The article briefly outlines the state of the pending negotiations with Iran concerning the nuclear weapons that Iran is possibly in possession of.
  •  
    Benjamin Netanyahu, who was originally a supporter of Mitt Romney, visits congress in attempt to cut down the sanctions in Iran for the country's agreement to not make nuclear weapons. Throughout his visit, Netanyahu tried to play down the dramatism of the situation.
paigedeleeuw

U.S. Should Arm Ukraine to Help Check Russian Aggression - US News - 0 views

  • Despite President Barack Obama’s repeated assurances that Russia faces political isolation and an “economy in tatters,” Russia is still a very real threat to Ukraine – and potentially to other former Soviet satellites as well.
  • More than 5,400 people have been killed in the Ukraine conflict since Russian-backed rebels seized parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions last April.
  • Western pressure has not been able to successfully end the conflict.
  • ...16 more annotations...
  • Russia’s military budget has still increased this year by 33 percent to 3.3 trillion rubles or more than $50 billion.
  • Moreover, some European politicians appear to be having second thoughts about maintaining sanctions against Russia.
  • current diplomacy is clearly failing.
  • On Feb. 12, Hollande, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko announced a peace deal after 17 hours of talks, yet these negotiations have not done much to end the conflict.
  • Russia has flouted the so-called Minsk II ceasefire, and Russian weaponry and soldiers continue to flow into Ukraine, with serious detrimental effects.
  • the need for the U.S. and its diplomatic partners to come up with a concerted strategy to push back against Russian imperialism. Increasing Ukraine’s military capabilities is a step in this direction.
  • Providing Ukraine with the weapons and training it needs in order to defend itself as part of a coordinated strategy to strengthen the Ukrainian state can contribute to stability by increasing the potential costs to Russia for its aggression.
  • supporting Ukraine will also ensure that Russia does not use its gains there as a precedent for invading other former-Soviet countries and re-establishing control.
  • Congress passed new legislation authorizing the provision of arms to the Ukrainian military.
  • Pentagon officials have confirmed that U.S. troops will deploy to Ukraine this spring to train four companies of the Ukrainian National Guard.
  • military aid to Ukraine will escalate tensions between the U.S. and Russia and prompt retaliation from Moscow.
  • the provision of weapons and training to Ukraine’s troops may strengthen Putin’s cry for a united nationalistic front against the West.
  • But Russia’s government, and its proxies in eastern Ukraine, has demonstrated that it will not be easily satisfied.
  • If it is not stopped there, it is liable to set its sights on still more territory that it hopes to acquire.
  • For Moscow, Ukraine represents the first step in a larger imperial project.
  • The U.S. should follow through with Congress’ determination to arm Ukraine and thereby help Kiev to secure its borders – and its sovereignty.
kyrranielson

Netanyahu: Nuclear Deal 'Paves Iran's Path to the Bomb' - US News - 1 views

  •  
    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday in Washington, D.C. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Congress on Tuesday that the current nuclear deal being negotiated with Iran could spark an arms race in the Middle East and turn it into a "nuclear tinderbox."
  •  
    "Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted," Netanyahu said. "We must all stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest, subjugation and terror." I think that this is a very interesting subject matter because other countries are saying they can't trust Iran with nuclear weapons, but who gets to decided which country is trusted and can have nuclear weapons?
Jason Friedman

Confessions of a congressman: 9 secrets from the inside - Vox - 0 views

  •  
    This is a fascinating read
Jason Friedman

Obama Will Fight ISIS With George W. Bush's Legal Theories - 0 views

  • Relying on Article II, Yoo wrote: “The president may deploy military force preemptively against terrorist organizations or the States that harbor or support them, whether or not they can be linked to the specific terrorist attack of September 11.” The fact that Congress had explicitly rejected the preemption language didn’t matter because, in Yoo’s reading, the president already had that authority.
    • Jason Friedman
       
      Do you agree with Yoo?
  •  
    We will cover the War Powers Act in chapter 13.
featherp

U.S.-Israeli bond still strong at AIPAC - 2 views

shared by featherp on 03 Mar 15 - No Cached
  •  
    Surrounding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's address to Congress regarding Obamas capability in handling each situation.
  •  
    This video shows that the relationship between the two nations is positive and is strong, although there has been controversy over the relationship.
campbellcondon

Cybersecurity Bill Is Blocked by G.O.P. Filibuster - 2 views

  •  
    A cybersecurity bill that had been one of the Obama administration's top national security priorities was blocked by a Republican filibuster in the Senate on Thursday, severely limiting its prospects this year.
  •  
    Since cybersecurity problem is a problem that is recognized by both sides of the party, I think it is crucial for the government to find a solution other than the bill, since it is now blocked by the filibuster.
Joanne Kim

Secretary of State John Kerry working on Iran nuke deal not likely to please Israel's N... - 2 views

  • Senior U.S. and Iranian officials kicked off the second day of the latest round of nuclear negotiations here on Tuesday as Israel's leader prepared to deliver a speech to Congress denouncing a potential deal as dangerous to the Jewish state and the world.
  • Iran would have to suspend its nuclear activities for at least a decade as part of any final agreement.
  • It is clear that Obama's stance is aimed at confronting propaganda by Zionist regime's prime minister and other extremist opponents of the negotiations,"
  •  
    This article shows how the secretary of state is working with Israel and discussing how to deal with Iran and its nuclear activities.
  •  
    It makes sense that Israel is not pleased with the US trying to Negotiate with Iran, without completely removing their nuclear advancement, but instead only delaying it in return for the removal of the US sanctions. Not only does that make Israel Iran's major target, but it also allows for Iran to become more wealthy during that delay period, which makes them an even larger threat to Israel.
  •  
    It's very interesting that the Iranian leader is offended by the president's actions and how that might take accord in the rest of the agreements.
kyrranielson

Broadcasting -- Encyclopedia Britannica - 1 views

  • roadcasting, electronic transmission of radio and television signals that are intended for general public reception, as distinguished from private signals that are directed to specific receivers.
    • kyrranielson
       
      Definition of Broadcasting
  • Sound broadcasting in this sense may be said to have started about 1920, while television broadcasting began in the 1930s.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • The first known radio program in the United States was broadcast by Reginald Aubrey Fessenden from his experimental station at Brant Rock, Mass., on Christmas Eve, 1906.
  • he first commercial radio station was KDKA in Pittsburgh, which went on the air in the evening of Nov. 2, 1920, with a broadcast of the returns of the Harding-Cox presidential election.
  • Government regulation Although the growth of radiobroadcasting in the United States was spectacularly swift, in the early years it also proved to be chaotic, unplanned, and unregulated. Furthermore, business arrangements that were being made between the leading manufacturers of radio equipment and the leading broadcasters seemed to threaten monopoly. Congress responded by passing the Radio Act of 1927, which, although directed primarily against monopoly, also set up the agency that is now called the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to allocate wavelengths to broadcasters. The government’s attack on monopoly resulted eventually in four radio networks—the National Broadcasting Company, the Columbia Broadcasting System, the Mutual Broadcasting System, and the American Broadcasting Company—while the FCC permitted orderly growth and ensured the survival of educational radio stations.
    • kyrranielson
       
      Government Regulation: FCC, Radio Act of 1927
  • commercial firms that regarded broadcasting primarily as a means of point-to-point communication.
  •  
    I liked the fact that you introduced a definition. It was a nice refresher to see what it is that is being discussed, and then to be given examples. I thought it was really interesting to see just how much people are affected daily by the idea and motives of broadcasting. Most of the time we are being influenced not really knowing what it is that is actually going on. It really forces someone to stop and think about what is being broadcasted to them via t.v. and the radio.
1 - 20 of 21 Next ›
Showing 20 items per page