And they call the Tea Party Fascist? Liberal Journalists/UCLA's Zasloff via Journolist Suggest Government Shut Down Fox News

by the Left Coast Rebel

Consider this one today's teachable moment into the mind/heart of the progressive-collectivist movement and train of thought.

Attention liberal press-people ---

Do you loathe Fox News and reside firmly in the Leviathan/media complex? Do you despise 'performers' like Glenn Beck? Perhaps Fox News' incessant coverage of the Tea Party movement - or even worse, the fact that they give the stage to radical anti-government types like judge Andrew Napolitano?

Do you want a solution for the Fox News 'problem' since you can't get the traction you desire as a radical statist in the realm of ideas (other than throwing the race card around like a tattered ragdoll)?

Why not just get rid of any dissenting voices out there, starting with the 800lb. elephant in the room - Fox News!

On this, the Daily Caller points out conversations from top journalists grabbed from Journolist that will blow your mind:

The very existence of Fox News, meanwhile, sends Journolisters into paroxysms of rage. When Howell Raines charged that the network had a conservative bias, the members of Journolist discussed whether the federal government should shut the channel down.

“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “I hate to open this can of worms,” he wrote, “but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”

And so a debate ensued. Time’s Scherer, who had seemed to express support for increased regulation of Fox, suddenly appeared to have qualms: “Do you really want the political parties/white house picking which media operations are news operations and which are a less respectable hybrid of news and political advocacy?”

But Zasloff stuck to his position. “I think that they are doing that anyway; they leak to whom they want to for political purposes,” he wrote. “If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”

Scherer seemed alarmed. “So we would have press briefings in which only media organizations that are deemed by the briefer to be acceptable are invited to attend?”

John Judis, a senior editor at the New Republic, came down on Zasloff’s side, the side of censorship. “Pre-Fox,” he wrote, “I’d say Scherer’s questions made sense as a question of principle. Now it is only tactical.”

So let's do a quick LCR recap (click hyperlink for full text/screen cap of journolist) ---

• Guardian columnist Daniel Davies is a solid 'yea' on 'solid legal framework' against Fox which I would translate as censorship. Leave it to a Brit journalist to advocate statism better than even our lame-stream talking bobbleheads.
• Michael Scherer of Time Magazine seems to be a 'yea' as well and waxes fondly for a 'journalistic authority that no longer exists.' Then when he catches Jonathan Zasloff's call for FCC involvement, he gets cold feet.
  
• Jonathan Zasloff of UCLA is the most Orwellian and flatly calls for the FCC to 'pull Fox's permit' when it expires. Lovely, academia always proves to be home to the most radical leftist-communists among us.
• New Republic senior editor John Judis doesn't even argue the merit of government censorship of Fox, he considers the 'smart tactical approach' in which the Obama administration would give a favorable approach to the NYT, etc. Screen cap below:
  

And they call the Tea Party movement fascist? Cross posted to Left Coast Rebel.