HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
 By Ken Hughes Apr. 9, 2007 This question is like a fine line running down a 12 lane highway, hardly distinguishable. My interpretation of a blogger has always been someone who has their own web page that consistently produces a product geared to a particular subject or subjects. Or a web site that’s geared to accommodating others who wish to express themselves,[i.e.] the Web Magazine format. A columnist is one, who contributes to the Blog [Web Magazine] but doesn’t have their own web page. I read on the web there were a million registered blogs and that number is slowly working its way down to thirty thousand, that’s quite a drop. The page I read didn’t say if contributors were included in that number or not. I assume they’re not. [I could be wrong.] Is it fair to call a contributor to a web magazine a columnist, the word columnist has previously been associated with major news originations. News reporters for the mass media [pre-internet] stayed within the parameters established by their trade. Columnist for the same mass media were allowed more freedom to express opinion rather than fact, thus the term Op-Ed became the defining factor between opinions and reporting the news. Now we have the citizen columnist and no one has yet to determine if these people can claim the title of journalist. Is the average citizen who voices an opinion in print protected by the first amendment or not? Is a contribution to an Internet Blog journalism or just a letter to the editor? Many countries around the world are pondering this question with some shutting down blogs until decisions have been reached. There are backroom discussions in our own congress considering governmental standards being applied to internet postings. Congress is never willing to clean up their act so the bloggers have nothing to expose instead they’re willing to restrict the voice of those who expose them. The internet is undoubtedly the most powerful information provider in history. When the telephone first became popular it was regulated and taxed nearly into oblivion can this happen to the internet, will this happen to the internet? Is it the government’s prerogative to determine what we say write and read [no] and the founding fathers didn’t think so either? Politicians claim regulations are necessary for the sake of the children but shouldn’t the sake of the children be left for the parents to decide. I may be mistaken but I don’t think I’ve ever read “For the sake of the Children in the constitution.” The government is charges with protecting us from invaders both foreign and domestic not from freedom of speech. There are some steps that can be taken to at least detour government intervention into regulating the internet. For those of us who wish to assume the persona of a journalist we can clean up our postings and act more like the professional journalist we’re emulating. Profanity and hostility has no purpose in informing the readers on any subject. In fact it’s been my experience most readers avoid such postings. If we can’t make our point without using such language then perhaps we don’t have a point to make. Most web sites have software that guards against such postings others could care less, it’s the “care less” we need to be concerned with, it’s those web sites who allow profanity and hostility that will eventually bring the heavy hand of the government down on us. Is there a way to determine who should and who shouldn’t be permitted to post on the internet? There are two way of accomplishing this one is called editing the other and perhaps more effective is called logging-on, what isn’t read can’t be harmful and usually disappears from the net. I see a hostility building between the executive branch of government and the congress. And in my opinion sets the tone for much of what we read on the internet. It’s obvious since congress can’t come up with a reason to impeach President Bush they are doing the next best thing with the assistance of the media making the final days of his administration irrelevant. The internet is equally divided on the subject. This wasn’t what we the voters ask of the new congress we wanted less government waste, not only financial waste but intellectual waste. It seems we’ve been hoodwinked by congress yet another time, when will we ever learn? The answer is a constitutional amendment limiting service in both houses congress to two terms of four years each! ------------ About the author: Ken Hughes is a retired businessman, who’s traveled extensively, observed much and learned much. His interests are writing and politics. Mr. Hughes is a conservative Republican who’s willing to share views from both sides of the political spectrum. At age 75 he feels he still has something to contribute. Email: ken-hughes@comcast.net Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
