• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

USDA spends millions of dollars on 'News'

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Thanks for that post Reader.
Transparency becomes translucent before turning completely opaque.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
reader (the Second) said:
As I said, the Clinton administration did this too, so I'm not all that excited by the Democrats using this to sling mud at the current administration, although I support the legislation. Pot calling the kettle black.
****************************************************
Lawmakers Introduce Legislation to Stop Covert Propaganda by the Administration
Lautenberg-Kerry Bill Subject of Hearing and Will be Marked-Up After the Recess

WASHINGTON, DC -- Today, United States Senators Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and John F. Kerry (D-MA) introduced legislation to protect the American people from covert propaganda produced by the government. The legislation would require that "prepackaged news stories" produced by the Administration contain a disclosure of the source of the material. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has ruled that the Administration's use of "prepackaged news stories" was illegal "covert propaganda" because the government's role was not disclosed to viewers. On March 11th 2005, the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Justice issued memos to all executive branch agencies ordering them to ignore the GAO ruling and gave the green light to further use of fake news stories that hide the government's role in their production.

The Lautenberg-Kerry Truth in Broadcasting Act would follow the legal ruling of the GAO and establish permanent federal law that prepackaged news stories by the government must disclose the government's role with a disclaimer. The disclaimer would run continuously throughout the "news story." Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens has committed to holding a hearing and a markup on the bill in early May. "Our government should not be in the business of fooling the public with fake news stories," said Lautenberg. "If President Bush wants to promote his views, he can do that, but he should not hide behind fake reporters to get his message out. The President already has the 'Bully Pulpit' -- he shouldn't need to use puppets pretending to be reporters."

"I am really looking forward to the hearing on our bill. The American people deserve to know that they're not just watching the administration's spin on their local newscasts -- they're paying for it, too. It's one thing to watch Jon Stewart on television. It's another to imitate him with Americans' hard-earned tax dollars. In a time of record-budget deficits, we need to address this abuse of the public trust and waste of money," said Kerry.

Lautenberg and Kerry introduced similar legislation as an amendment to a bill before the Senate Commerce Committee on April 14th. The Senators withdrew their amendment in exchange for Chairman Ted Stevens' (R-AK) commitment to hold a hearing and mark-up on the legislation.

These fake news stories have run -- undisclosed -- on several television news stations on a number of topics including the Medicare prescription drug law and to promote the President's "No Child Left Behind Act". At least 20 federal agencies have made and distributed hundreds of television news segments over the past four years.

So, reader, second, what is a government agency to do when people, organizations, or other government agencies run as "news" things that are not true of them?

Also, do you believe it is not possible for a government agency to do an honest news story about something under their jurisdiction?

Doesn't John Kerry's name on this give you a chill? The man was so dishonest about so many things. His party promoted the "527's" and still depends upon George Soros and his multiple billions of dollars to do their dirty work for them. Isn't it interesting how the liberals blame the Republicans for being the "party of the wealthy", when in fact, tje Dems have many, many such "Sugar Daddies", raising more than the Republicans from such individuals?

MRJ
 

Latest posts

Top