by Tommy Hayfield

Created on: September 30, 2010   Last Updated: October 01, 2010

What could be more important than free speech in America or indeed anywhere?  The ability of individuals to organize to protest a government policy, to protest an unfair treatment of a group, or to correct an unfairly implemented policy (that perhaps was enacted due to a lack of broad citizen input.)  The press is just a place where individuals bundle their opinions together with the goal of promoting a free flow of information.  How can you argue that at its root the press - the individuals that make up the press - have a desire to see information flow.  The flow is a part of a sense of humans to relate their concerns and certainly when the human race began speaking by  letting each other know the status of their life, good or bad.  This was one of the projectiles the caveman were delivering, a weapon of words if you will. But you might wonder why would cavemen attack each other with words when they as individuals in a group faced such mortal enemies as sabertooth tigers and other large predators?  Perhaps the Fox News viewer in me realizes the value of repeating myths in the hopes it takes on a truthful air.   Of course cavemen were known to throw projectiles (spears) as well. Fox News WASN'T there to report it though we've been indoctrinated on that subject by other sources namely our ability to discern important from non-important trivia.

You could say Fox News is the "cavemen network" of our time because they seem able to use words as weapons in a battle of information flow - or maybe their goal is correctly described as information no-flow.  Whatever word you use to describe it, freedom of the press is stretched to its broadest possible limit in the hands of Fox News.  They have put together a group of individuals who have lost their appeal as aggrieved individuals with a beef at the "government."  They are in fact not grieving for lack of rights but are pushing the false belief they are an aggrieved party.  They want the power to control the dialogue -any dialogue- in any political discussion they choose.  And they as a group -Fox News- are merely a group of individuals who can't possibly have a need to relate a generally neurotic anger at whoever is sitting in front of the television when they're talking.  They don't have a real grievance and their (video and audio) output translates to the television viewers as neurotic anger. Their  freedom of the press or right to express

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>