• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should you need a license to be a journalist?

Should you need a license to be a journalist?

  • Total voters
    62

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Should you need a license to be a journalist?
Yes
no
maybe/other


I wonder how many of these reporters spoke out against requiring a permit/license for 2nd amendment rights?I guess if they can require a permit/license in other words permission from the government to exercise one constitutional right then they can do the same for other constitutional rights too.

FOXNews.com - Michigan Considers Law to License Journalists
A Michigan lawmaker wants to license reporters to ensure they’re credible and vet them for “good moral character.”

Senator Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate reporters much like the state does with hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers. Patterson, who also practices constitutional law, says that the general public is being overwhelmed by an increasing number of media outlets--traditional, online and citizen generated--and an even greater amount misinformation.

“Legitimate media sources are critically important to our government,” he said.

He told FoxNews.com that some reporters covering state politics don’t know what they’re talking about and they’re working for publications he’s never heard of, so he wants to install a process that’ll help him and the general public figure out which reporters to trust.

“We have to be able to get good information,” he said. “We have to be able to rely on the source and to understand the credentials of the source.”

Critics say the proposed law will stem press freedoms and is bound to be politicized with disgruntles politicians going after reporters who don’t paint them in a positive light. They say that adding members of the so-called fourth estate to the list of government regulated occupations would likely be found unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:
No.

We live in a free speech country, and this is part of living in a free speech country.
 
I'm uncomfortable with the “good moral character” bit as its quite vague.

I'm not in favor of the law to begin with, but I dislike vagaries in the law that can be exploited
 
jamesrage said:
Should you need a license to be a journalist?
Yes
no
maybe/other
Click to expand...

Years ago, when I was naive, I would have said yes, but the press is largely a propaganda arm. Below Howard Fineman explains how it happened that the Press became Democrat Propagandists.

Journalism is not rocket science.
Dig up facts, look for info from both or all sides, and report it fairly.

If you can do that, you are practicing journalism.

Were those that broke CBS News/NY Times attempt to use forged documents to swing a Presidential election journalists? I would say so. They should have gotten a Pulitzer or numerous Pulitzers.

Drudge? Broke TWO stories: Newsweek tried to bury Clinton-Lewinsky. He revealed Clinton lied under oath.
It got Clinton impeached.
Not an accredited journalist, but Pulitzer(s) worthy reporting.


.
 
Last edited:
well, it would violate the 1st amendment, as it could be used to inhibit free speech, and i doubt it would work anyway, the reporters holding the licenses would probably get a massive influx of 'un-named sources'
 
Definitely no. Such a system would be very prone to exploitation by politicians and their puppet-masters.
 
No, but when I majored in Journalism in college, we were required to take an Ethics class. It seems pretty stupid now because even in class, we knew we'd report certain stories as we saw them.
 
I voted maybe. It seems people should at least know the basics of journalist ethics. In my state, if you want to work in a restaurant you are required to take a one day seminar on food handling. If you want to serve liquor, there is a one day certification for that.

It seems to me that journalists should at least know the legal and ethical basics with perhaps something like the above.
 
Should the governement be able to decide who can publish information? That would certainly be a good way to let the govenment control criticisim. It would also raise some amount of funds from licensing fees.

Should those already in a buisiness be able to keep others out? Professional licensing in the USA is almost always supported by those already in the business because it limits the competition.

.
 
I voted No, but a brain and practicing to keep their own political beliefs out of the reporting would be nice.
 


The difference between those things that you mentioned is that freedom of the press and speech are in the constitution, there are no constititonal rights to sell liquore or serve food.
 
Yes, but only if we have people who can write the necessary ethical standards..Of this, I am not impressed with what I have seen.
So, before this can be written into legislation, we must reduce the illiteracy and the poor English in our nation.
There must be a law against :
small print
second languages
poor English
Now, imagine how difficult this is.
Forgive the mis-spelled word, please.
 
I'd go as far as advocating that our Constitution be re-written.
It is no longer the 1600, the 1700s.
Do we have the people capable of doing this today?
Read the blogs, the internet reponses, the forums, and from that I'd say no.
 
Last edited:
I had to vote no. Not based on 1st amendment or free speech or anything like that.... something more basic. Do I want a law, to be passed by the Federal or State government which then dictates what type of journalist they will license? Really? I'm going to give government --- that ability by making it a law. Hells no.
 
uuhhhh, nope. Some" poll questions" are more challenging than others. This one was pretty easy.....



.
 
StandUpChuck said:
No, but when I majored in Journalism in college, we were required to take an Ethics class. It seems pretty stupid now because even in class, we knew we'd report certain stories as we saw them.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that ethics is situational? I am shocked !!!
 
Patterson further exposed himself as a statist RINO with this proposal.
 

The nature of guilds is to keep people out, narrow the market and raise fees.
Obama tried that already.
Told R's not to listen to Rush.
Tried to sideline FOXNEWS from the White House Press pool.
Tried to tell folks what a news network is.

Then we have the one sordid bit of legislation the left is dying to reinstitute; The Fairness Doctrine.
Pretty soon that won't matter; folks will be able to get their shows from the internet or satellite (would be a boom for satellite radio) and should they institute the Fairness Doctrine for radio, it will die just like Air Amerika.

The more open the better. The AMMP, the Socialists of Amerika Party (SAPs) need competition, and they lose in the free market.
Just look at radio, FOXNEWS and WSJ.

Their saviour, the AMMP's saviour is to go back to reporting news, but even then they are so far gone that may not help.

I enjoy watching their demise. Others more responsible will fill the void.

.
 
Last edited:
No. But a degree in journalism should be mandatory for all those who want to call themselves 'journalists'. Otherwise they're just loudmouths.
 
Hatuey said:
No. But a degree in journalism should be mandatory for all those who want to call themselves 'journalists'. Otherwise they're just loudmouths.
Click to expand...
Thats the same thing as requiring people to have a license.
 
Hatuey said:
No. But a degree in journalism should be mandatory for all those who want to call themselves 'journalists'. Otherwise they're just loudmouths.
Click to expand...

You mean it should be mandatory that they be indoctrinated ... because that is what the journalism schools are... institutes of socialist indoctrination.

 
Last edited:
Re: the OP question - No absolutely not.

But that doesn't mean you get access. Private events can certainly screen journalists and issue press passes.

Palin won't even speak with a non-fox journalist present. As is her right as a private citizen.

With public buildings, the safety of the officials and their staff comes first, then ensuring their ability to conduct business in reasonable manner.
 
No way in hell...

The problem is not the journalists, it's the people who listen to them.
 
I voted yes BUT because I have certain ideas in mind.

Of course i dont want to hinder free speech in anyway what so ever but there are places i have concerns.

Anybody that wants to write their opinion should be free to do so I have no problem with that. The opinion may be accurate it may not be they might not have a clue what they are talking about and thats fine. Smart people understand the difference ad yes unfortunately there will always be sheep out there that believe what ever and drink the koolaid. So be it im not going to sacrifice free speech for those tools.

anyway on to my point and correct me if im wrong some journalist are given access to information and locations that others arent allowed now of course some of the info they still cant use cause it is protected one way or another BUT they are still given access to this info and certain locations. Based on that alone YES a certain type of licenses should be needed to those types of journalist. Now if you just sit behind a desk and wite say something like cooking reviews then no of course not but I do think some should need those license or NOT be granted special privileges a normal citizen wouldn't have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…