NBC Admitted: No ‘Assault Rifle’ Used in Newtown Shooting

[mugsy]

Nope - no fines for being wrong that would be a very bad attack on the 1st Amendment soemthing that 2nd Amendment supported should not want to see. The amendments don't oppose each other they are all part of the same package of key rights singled out for special recognition by the Founding Fathers.

The only punishment should be for deliberate destruction of a person's reputation and the standard for proff has to be fairly high.

The "truth" issue is that who defines what is truthful "enough". Are we really wanting to turn the news outlets into nothing more than relayers of fact sheets? Will all supposition or inference or educated guessing be suppressed? I guarantee you that any power to punish news agencies handed to the government (or frankly to you or I) will eventually be used in an arbitrary and capricious manner.

 

[amadera]

Just remember as Human beings we act NOT in accordance with the truth necessarily , we act in accordance with the truth as WE PERCEIVE IT TO BE.

 

[ignerntbend]

'What is truth?"

---Pontious Pilate

 

[ripnbst]

looks like a garand to me

Looks like an M1 Abrams to me.

 

[HMFIC]

'What is truth?"

---Pontious Pilate

Pilate knew not, just as many others who stare it in the face and fail to recognize it...

 

[ignerntbend]

Pilate was exhausted, longing for home where people were sane. He wanted to be on the right side of the Mediterranean just one more time. You wash your hands or you go crazy.

 

[HMFIC]

Pilate was exhausted, longing for home where people were sane. He wanted to be on the right side of the Mediterainian just one more time. You wash your hands or you go crazy.

The parallels are uncanny...

 

[Tyson C.]

Nope - no fines for being wrong that would be a very bad attack on the 1st Amendment soemthing that 2nd Amendment supported should not want to see. The amendments don't oppose each other they are all part of the same package of key rights singled out for special recognition by the Founding Fathers.

The only punishment should be for deliberate destruction of a person's reputation and the standard for proff has to be fairly high.

The "truth" issue is that who defines what is truthful "enough". Are we really wanting to turn the news outlets into nothing more than relayers of fact sheets? Will all supposition or inference or educated guessing be suppressed? I guarantee you that any power to punish news agencies handed to the government (or frankly to you or I) will eventually be used in an arbitrary and capricious manner.

i can see the A1 coming into play and that snowballing Amendment effect. But its the hiding behind the A1 is what eats me up i guess.

i was kinda looking at it in a way of the big news corps saying to their employers "if you want to report what you hear than go ahead...just make sure its right or we will get fined"...figure out a way to make them work for their report, i mean jeez god forbid that you be the only news reporting what might be the truth?....not get on Facebook and see what everyone is right about, because if its on the internet it has to be true.....right?

i just look at things like my job for example. my job is trouble shooting stereo installs etc with our product in a vehicle. if i told you my opinion on how a part goes into a vehicle i'm not familiar with, but i assume nothing has changed for that year of vehicle and tell you how it goes in and you install the part and your vehicle burns to the ground and you or someone else is injured or worse; who's reliable? or should i ask who do YOU want to be liable? me, or the part YOU installed because you did not hear things i said correctly. maybe its because your not a MECP certified installer....... or did you take the words i said a true fact?

I'm just fishing to see a way to make the news..THE NEWS! where is Ron Burgundy at when you need him!

 

[donner]

i can see the A1 coming into play and that snowballing Amendment effect. But its the hiding behind the A1 is what eats me up i guess.

i was kinda looking at it in a way of the big news corps saying to their employers "if you want to report what you hear than go ahead...just make sure its right or we will get fined"...figure out a way to make them work for their report, i mean jeez god forbid that you be the only news reporting what might be the truth?....not get on Facebook and see what everyone is right about, because if its on the internet it has to be true.....right?

i just look at things like my job for example. my job is trouble shooting stereo installs etc with our product in a vehicle. if i told you my opinion on how a part goes into a vehicle i'm not familiar with, but i assume nothing has changed for that year of vehicle and tell you how it goes in and you install the part and your vehicle burns to the ground and you or someone else is injured or worse; who's reliable? or should i ask who do YOU want to be liable? me, or the part YOU installed because you did not hear things i said correctly. maybe its because your not a MECP certified installer....... or did you take the words i said a true fact?

I'm just fishing to see a way to make the news..THE NEWS! where is Ron Burgundy at when you need him!

Two big flaws. First, as others have said, there seldom is just a single 'truth' to anything.

Second, you're on the scene of some big event and a cop says 'the person's name was John smith'. Another cop standing there verifies it. You report it but his name turns out to be John smyth. Should you be fined? They told you the wrong information, you merely reported what you were told. How can you, as a reporter who can't legally enter the scene to find the guys ID prove that they were wrong? The most you can do is check the facts but if you keep being told the wrong information then what else can you do?

Now, I personally am glad I'm no longer a reporter. Mostly because I'd hate to deal with twitter and the rush to be first. Between twitter and the 24 hour news cycle things move to fast and mistakes happen with more frequency and it sucks. However, fining a news organization wouldn't work.

 

[Tyson C.]

^ get the facts straight before you report. thats all i would ask. if news 3 reports john smith and you work for news 4 and report john smyth at least you took the time to report it correct and looked like you did your homework, not over heard two cops talking and ran to the camera man. i know that in news its "you gotta be first" but at some point in time the buggy is going to be ahead of the horse. and i can understand what i say is a double edge sword...should we fine the weatherman...probaly not. but what about big time stories is my reasoning....

i'm just saying in general is there a solution to slow the media ball? can something be done...probably not...if people stood up for the for other reasons in just normal life like they do for when their "rights" are about to be effected the world would probably be different...?

you are right about social media...