[ExI] sugar industry corruption
danust2012 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 16 18:16:15 UTC 2016
On Sep 16, 2016, at 10:47 AM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we.
> Let's get our issue straight here. Take the Freedom of Information Act Lyndon Johnson signed. I see big problems with it re the press. If the public, including the press, cannot access gov. actions then what good is the freedom of the press?
> Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem: the Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on sensitive information by declaring it a secret (just researching secrecy would take all my time for weeks, likely). The press howled about the abuse but I never saw anything further about it (following such things is not exactly a hobby of mine, and some of you may know about it).
> Clearly, subsequent administrations of different political party, could reclassify such things as would embarrass former gov. officials, and maybe that has been done.
> What other freedoms is the press missing? What can we do about it?
So you basically view everything in this area as fine, maybe with a few exceptions -- minor ones that can easily be seen as sort of accounting errors? Reporters being threatened, fined, or jailed is a tiny problem for freedom of the press? The fact that tv stations can lose their license is a minor matter, too, I guess. When one reporter is punished, what do think happens to the rest? Will they all be eager to go to court (you ever been to court? not a fun way to spend your day, is it?), pay a fine, or end up in a cage? Unlikely. It can have a chilling effect on others, especially when much of the public might side with the government.
And government control of information -- not only classified stuff, but the press pooling* done with the first Persian Gulf War (under Bush the Elder) -- is nothing, right?
It could be that RSF's evaluation method is questionable, that maybe the US doesn't rank as low as they believe. I like to believe some of this stuff overreports US malfeasance and underreports foreign ditto. That still wouldn't erase the very real issues -- issues actual libertarians should care about.
Also, government classifying stuff as national security started long before Bush. It's a means of avoiding scrutiny. And this stuff goes on in similar fashion in other parts of government. I recall a municipal council meeting where the council went into 'executive session' to clear the public and reporter from the room. Who knows what they discussed, but the point seemed clear: they didn't want the public or the press to know about it.
Sample my Kindle books via:
* The Pentagon learned one lesson from the Vietnam War: Don't give the press a free hand to report on a conflict or you lose the ability to shape the narrative.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat