Type to search


Of course Andrew Yang’s ‘fix’ for selective media outlets involves more government control

Democrat Andrew Yang has a plan to ‘fix’ selective media outlets and it involves the federal government. While it is obvious that the media needs to change because it is pretty much nothing but false stories and propaganda these days, involving the government never ends well.

Yang took to Twitter to lay it all out for us: “There are 3 problems with our media that are fueling polarization: 1. The closing of 2,000 local papers, which are typically not very partisan; 2. Cable news maximizing audience share by adopting political stances (Fox); and 3. Social media’s supercharging of conspiracy theories.”

The first problem with 2,000 local papers closing down is due to the fact that no one reads them anymore. Everyone turns to the Internet for their news. Yang wants the government to own the newspapers and federally subsidize them. The government would also dictate what the press can say and do. That means it’s no longer a free press. Bad idea number one.

His second point has to do with censoring media news outlets that he doesn’t agree with such as Fox News. All cable news has a political bias these days. Yang only wants to ‘fix’ Fox News because it does not parrot everything the other media outlets say supporting the left.

As for social media supercharging conspiracy theories, that works on both the left and the right. The minute you let the government control social media and impose censorship for good or bad is the day you lose free speech on the web forever.

Yang went after the newspapers as the softest target.

“The easiest one to address is reopening local papers. There is a bill in Congress – the Local Journalism Sustainability Act from @davidcicilline and others – that would help support thousands of local publications. Congress should pass it immediately.”

Not so long ago, the press operated as a check against politicians, not as an enabler of political bias. Now, they are mostly propaganda outlets. Many, for financial security, would gladly welcome the government as their overseer. But again, doing so squelches free speech and keeps the press from doing their most important job… exposing the truth. Something in very short supply these days.

Who’s going to pay for all this? Taxpayers will in higher taxes. Just as they will for every other progressive wishlist item such as student loans, climate change, universal basic income, etc.

Then Yang wants to reinstitute the dreaded Fairness Doctrine: “For Cable News we should revive the Fairness Doctrine which the FCC had on the books until 1985 that required that you show both sides of a political issue. It was repealed by Reagan. If there was ever a time to bring it back it’s now.” That doctrine is meant to shut down outlets such as Fox News who at times reports conservative news. It’s also meant to take out radio rockstars such as Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck.

Yang really wants the feds to control social media.

“The most difficult and important is to overhaul social media. We need federal data ownership legislation mirrored after the CPRA in California. There should be ad-free versions of every platform. Section 230 should be amended to not include content that is amplified by algorithm.”

No, Section 230 should be amended to reflect whether or not a social media platform censors free speech, not to actually ‘censor’ free speech. And the government should not be allowed anywhere near social media period.

Yang goes on: “The basic problem is that social media creators and companies are rewarded for having more extreme and untrue content. The goal should be to change or balance the incentives. Tech, government, media and NGOs need to collaborate on this to support fact-supported journalism.”

Whose facts exactly? These are private companies, why should the government have any say at all? They should be bound by the law, not by the government. And Yang is probably only referring to social media creators on the Right.

Yang spouts progressive rhetoric and contradicts himself endlessly here. He calls Big Tech mini-governments that need to be controlled by the federal government. He doesn’t want more freedom of speech… Yang wants regulated and stifled speech. It’s the Democratic way.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter
There are a million ways to get your news.
We want to be your one in a million.
Stay Updated
Give it a try, you can unsubscribe anytime.
Send this to a friend