To encourage transparency, accuracy, and accountability in journalism while safeguarding First Amendment rights. This proposal focuses on fostering public media literacy, promoting voluntary standards for transparency, and enhancing the public’s ability to distinguish between news and opinion.
Policy Provisions
Voluntary Transparency Standards
Labeling of News, Opinion, and Analysis: News organizations are encouraged to adopt voluntary guidelines for clearly labeling news, opinion, and analysis content across platforms to improve transparency for audiences.
Disclosure of Source and Funding Information: News sources are encouraged to disclose their primary sources for major stories and significant funding sources, especially when reporting on sensitive or polarizing topics. These disclosures would help audiences identify potential biases while upholding editorial independence.
Independent Fact-Checking and Accountability Partnership
Partnership with Third-Party Fact-Checkers: News organizations are encouraged to voluntarily partner with third-party fact-checking entities (e.g., independent journalism schools or non-profit organizations) to review content. This partnership remains voluntary and aims to maintain journalistic autonomy while promoting accountability.
Public Correction Logs: To encourage trust, media outlets are recommended to maintain accessible public logs of corrections to keep audiences informed of updates or retractions in previously published stories. This voluntary standard would allow outlets to retain control over their content while supporting transparency.
Public Media Literacy and Education Initiatives
Media Literacy Programs: The government will support media literacy programs in schools and community centers, focusing on critical analysis skills and distinguishing between fact-based news and opinion. These initiatives aim to empower citizens to better navigate modern media.
Public Awareness Campaigns: Federal grants will fund public awareness campaigns that educate individuals on how to identify credible news sources, recognize opinion content, and verify information independently.
Encouraging Industry Self-Regulation
Support for Ethical Journalism Standards: News outlets are encouraged to follow ethical journalism standards, such as those recommended by the Society of Professional Journalists, which emphasize accuracy, transparency, and public accountability.
Professional Peer Review: Organizations are urged to create peer review panels within the industry to assess transparency and ethical standards in reporting. These panels, made up of journalists and media ethicists, will provide an industry-driven approach to accountability, free from government intervention.
Independent Public Watchdog and Media Transparency Database
Non-Governmental Media Watchdog: The government will support the formation of an independent, non-profit watchdog that provides a publicly accessible database of transparency ratings for news organizations. This watchdog will serve as a resource for consumers, helping them assess the reliability of news sources.
Voluntary Transparency Ratings: News organizations may choose to participate in a transparency rating system managed by the independent watchdog, which rates outlets based on transparency in labeling, source disclosure, and correction practices.
Expected Outcomes
This proposal aims to create a media environment where transparency and ethical practices are encouraged without government mandates that could infringe on the First Amendment. By empowering individuals with media literacy skills and promoting voluntary standards, the public can make more informed decisions about news sources, distinguishing fact from opinion and reducing the impact of misinformation.
Advantages of This Approach
Preserves Press Freedom: The proposal respects First Amendment rights by focusing on voluntary standards and education rather than mandatory requirements or penalties.
Supports Informed Citizenship: Media literacy and transparency measures empower individuals to critically evaluate information, which can lead to a more informed and less polarized public.
Encourages Self-Regulation: By promoting industry-driven accountability, this proposal minimizes government interference while still fostering transparency and ethical practices in journalism.
100% agree. Looking at the demographics, a large amount of older generations do not have access to independent news sources, have any idea that they can look up entire speeches to get the truth and are only able to get info from MSM. They have no idea alternative sources of information exist and honestly they shouldn’t have to! They shouldn’t have to question what they are being told.
Whenever a video clip is shown by media, including social media, it should be required to reference or display a link to the entire speech or event so that people can see the context in which it was said.
YES. A resounding YES. The media shouldn’t be where we source primary opinions to regurgitate ad infinitum. Especially when those opinions are led by partisan politics.
That’s how I got my 68 year old dad on TikTok. That, and classic cars I love what this proposal COULD do. It’ll be nice to finally have government officials who want to help us.
The current Legacy Media is the single and most prominent influencer of human society. Most of us are aware of the constant, psychological water boarding of the American public. Especially for the last 8+ years. The list of debunked Media Lies, Untruths and Propaganda is several pages long. These ‘Lies’ are never publicly challenged. And as long as there is political bias due to the political leanings of ownership of said media companies, there never will be.
Although I am leery of Artificial Intelligence, I believe it could b useful to keep the MSM honest.
This type of AI would essentially be a very High Tech information aggregator. It could crawl an almost infinite amount of data and facts from nearly every source of human information in mere moments.
In doing so, it could correct statements made by journalists in real time.
For example, when President Biden, in his speech, referenced the Trump ‘Suckers and Losers’ Lie, A.I. could correct this immediately with verified witness statements or other facts.
A.I. could fact check without human political bias.
Also the Smith Mundt Act that others have referenced needs to be addressed.
The MSM, as it currently exists, is just a propaganda arm for the Deep State.
I admit that I’m not a genius. However, I’m open to criticism as well as learning new information in order to evolve my perspective and understanding. So, I invite others to share information that might assist in a better understanding.
With this in mind, I have concerns about the fact checkers portion. My experience up to this point has been that third party fact checkers are biased. One must only follow the money to find out why.
Who would be fact checking the fact checkers? Often, most of us have known the fact checker has been deceptive, but when we objected, we were silenced by those same fact checkers. The fact checkers have only further eroded the publics trust.
It is my opinion that a journalist should be reporting the facts and data without their personal spin, view, or feelings coloring it. This allows the consumer to make their own conclusions minus the intentional emotional triggers and themes.
I think journalists and news networks have a responsibility to deliver factual information to the public. As it stands, they deliver twisted versions of things while omitting important factors that they know affects the consumers understanding, and feelings about the event.
I take serious issue with what the media and influencers have been pulling. It’s been going on for a very long time. I have a problem with public media figures and their networks, using their platform for the advancement of their politics and or political party. The people trusted them. They violated that trust with a game that affected our lives. As it stands freedom of speech means they can lie omit and decieve all they want. I assure you that a very large portion of the population intend to see to it that this stops and never happens again.
To be honest, I don’t see anything in your proposal that gives confidence in that.
It is my opinion that if an individual is being paid to report to the public, they be required to only report facts. Laws should be in place to safeguard the people from the deceptive and exploitive practices that are currently used. I think it should be a crime to report events and alter the details, omit important details, and to lie. I think these networks should be required to keep detailed records of what they report, and the supporting data that is enforced by the law. These records should be available to the public for transparency and an audit of sorts should occur regularly.
When you are getting paid to report, it is a profession. It is a profession that carries great responsibility, and should be held to a very high standard. The deceptive practices, the uses of framing, carefully chosen trigger words etc, have proven to cause great harm to this country. It’s criminal in my opinion. The media have played a key role in the division, unrest, and turmoil of this country. It has fueled dangerous individuals with radical ideas who have taken tragic steps as a result.
The media should not be allowed to continue these practices using freedom of speech and press as their excuse to do so.
A citizen can freely express their opinions, views and lie if they so choose, but the moment that citizen decides to accept payment for their activities, they should be acting within certain boundaries as set by the law.
I am not interested in creative expression in the news. Especially when that creative expression is manipulating, lying, framing, and brain washing those that trust you.
Furthermore, I’m sure we are all well aware of marketing companies not only using influencers, but troll farms and bot farms designed to push narratives thru social media platforms. They create an illusion to manipulate and modify behavior of the public thru assorted tactics including cyber bullying.
I will discuss this portion more in depth on an applicable thread that addresses this issue with a task force possibly. I only bring it up because the people paying the media networks are often the same people paying for the black hat tactics on social media.
I apologize, but I don’t have much faith in your proposition. It looks like more of what we have already been getting with Band-Aids placed that won’t fix anything, but only create another illusion to saciate the public.
The media are a serious problem and I am positive they will be dealt with in the coming months.
M.
I love what this proposal COULD do. It’ll be nice to finally have government officials who want to help us.