# Should the term "News" be licensed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 21, 2016, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667 "2016-11-21T18:24:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/1 "2016-11-21T18:24:16Z")
Should the term “News” be licensed? There has been lots of discusssion recently about ‘fake news’. Should using the term “News” require a license of some sort (Federal, State, Local, I don’t know.) Using the term would require that the information you publish is factual. That does not mean that you can’t be selective in what you report. It does mean the items you report did, in fact, occur. So, you could still publish fiction, but you could not call your site/publication/program XXX News. You could still publish/broadcast opinions, but again, you could not label the vehicle a “News” vehicle. I remember when radio stations would periodically give a statement saying they they were licensed as a public trust. This meant that if it could be shown that the station was not operating in the interest of the public, they could have their license revoked. I don’t recall hearing that recently, maybe the still do it. I think this would just be an extension of that principle. If people cannot trust that a “News” station provides factual information, that station should be sanctioned, somehow. Thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/2 "2016-11-21T18:30:19Z")
Unfortunately, any licensing scheme will end up limited to the country mandating it - it’ll have no effect on, say, a website based in Belarus that purports to be an American news agency. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/3 "2016-11-21T18:35:57Z")
Hell no. Too easily politicized. Lots of wiggle room to make something look acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![GulfTiger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e79b87/32.png) [@GulfTiger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GulfTiger)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/4 "2016-11-21T18:39:23Z")
Or, how about set up an official government Ministry of Information that would be a clearinghouse for news stories. Prior to publication, information would be checked to see if it is real or fake and only the real stuff would be allowed to be published. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/5 "2016-11-21T18:40:41Z")
People who don’t believe the mainstream media would have even less confidence in government approved media. Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/6 "2016-11-21T18:41:27Z")
> [@dataguy](#): > > Should the term “News” be licensed? Look how well that worked in the Soviet Union. Freedom of speech is better. Besides, didn’t the American news organisations just massively fail America by failing to report the political truth? By putting their liberal bias on what they did report? No, you want the upstarts, the Drudges, the Breitbarts, the gadflies. And let the people sort out fact from fiction. The public is too used to the mainstream press covering up its failures (q.v. Jayson Blair, Johann Hari, Stephen Glass, etc). ---
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/7 "2016-11-21T18:53:15Z")
General response to a couple of common posts: The intent would not be to have “Government Approved News”. It would just license the use of the term “News” to describe your outlet. I think of it more like the French Appelation Controlee for wine. You are free to make sparkling wine or red wine, but to call it Champagne, or Burgundy, the grapes have to originate from those regions. I am not suggesting censoring any outlets. Sure, Breitbart, Limbaugh, etc. could still spew fiction, but they could not label it “News”. I’ve found that people place undue confidence in information presented in the guise of “News”. I constantly hear things like: “You didn’t hear about it? It was all over the news.” ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/8 "2016-11-21T18:54:57Z")
> [@dataguy](#): > > The intent would not be to have “Government Approved News”. It would just license the use of the term “News” to describe your outlet. …which the government would approve the usage of. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/9 "2016-11-21T18:55:01Z")
Thoughts? I think rewriting the constitution to limit rights because the side you’re on lost the election is a really bad idea. And that goes for whichever side you happen to be on. ---
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/10 "2016-11-21T19:09:38Z")
I think everyone is missing the intent here. The FDA has the authority to prosecute anyone marketing a product that claims to “diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease” that has not received FDA approval through the clinical trial process. The FDA does not prevent you from marketing something as a “dietary supplement”, but you are not allowed to use any of the above words in your claims. I see this as similar. You can say/publish anything you want. But you cannot call it “News” unless it can be shown to contain factual content. This does not eliminate bias of any kind. The far right can publish far right, factual information. The left can publish left-leaning, factual information. The left/right pundits can still spin/distort he facts as they see fit. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/11 "2016-11-21T19:13:45Z")
Or instead of having a Ministry of Propaganda try to have a more appealing candidate? And when so much news relies on anonymous sources what happens with that? ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/12 "2016-11-21T19:17:31Z")
Funny, [I just wrote something along those lines in another thread.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19798641&postcount=30) Expanding on what I wrote there, there’s already a method through which we separate the wheat from the chaff, it’s called science; perhaps journalism should become more scientific in its methodology. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/13 "2016-11-21T19:21:27Z")
> [@dataguy](#): > > I think everyone is missing the intent here. > > The FDA has the authority to prosecute anyone marketing a product that claims to “diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease” that has not received FDA approval through the clinical trial process. > > The FDA does not prevent you from marketing something as a “dietary supplement”, but you are not allowed to use any of the above words in your claims. > > I see this as similar. You can say/publish anything you want. But you cannot call it “News” unless it can be shown to contain factual content. > > This does not eliminate bias of any kind. The far right can publish far right, factual information. > The left can publish left-leaning, factual information. > > The left/right pundits can still spin/distort he facts as they see fit. Just to be clear, you want Trump to be in charge of licensing news sources. Is that correct? Because Obama is not going to be in office past January of next year. ---
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/14 "2016-11-21T19:23:32Z")
> [@Ale](#): > > Funny, [I just wrote something along those lines in another thread.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19798641&postcount=30) > > Expanding on what I wrote there, there’s already a method through which we separate the wheat from the chaff, it’s called science; perhaps journalism should become more scientific in its methodology. Journalism! I remember that. We used to have that when I was young: Walter Cronkite, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Edward R. Murrow. Yeah, Journalists. Sadly, that is an endangered species. If we had more of them today, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Back then, there were limited sources of “News”: The three major networks, newspapers, and radio stations. Each of these required significant capital to establish. Now, anyone can start a blog or web site and call it News. And it is asking too much of people to develop the required critical analysis skills to “separate the wheat from the chaff”. So we end up with a large number of misinformed people making misinformed decisions. ---
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/15 "2016-11-21T19:32:14Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Just to be clear, you want Trump to be in charge of licensing news sources. Is that correct? Because Obama is not going to be in office past January of next year. As stated in the original post, I don’t know at what level this would be implemented/enforced. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/16 "2016-11-21T19:36:25Z")
The proposed cure here seems significantly worse and more dangerous than the illness it’s trying to fix. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/17 "2016-11-21T19:39:29Z")
> [@dataguy](#): > > As stated in the original post, I don’t know at what level this would be implemented/enforced. How many levels do we have to choose from? You either get one central authority doing it, or 50 (or more) doing it. But not seeing how that makes any difference. There are lots of crappy/corrupt governors and mayors out there, too. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/18 "2016-11-21T19:46:07Z")
> [@GulfTiger](#): > > Or, how about set up an official government Ministry of Information that would be a clearinghouse > for news stories. > > Prior to publication, information would be checked to see if it is real or fake and only the real stuff would be allowed to be published. > > I mean, what could possibly go wrong?:rolleyes: Ministry of Information would not be good enough. Since all of the information would have to be true we should call it the Ministry of Truth. ---
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/19 "2016-11-21T20:06:03Z")
> [@GulfTiger](#): > > Or, how about set up an official government Ministry of Information that would be a clearinghouse > for news stories. > > Prior to publication, information would be checked to see if it is real or fake and only the real stuff would be allowed to be published. > > I mean, what could possibly go wrong?:rolleyes: Again, this is not the idea. I’m not suggesting that every single piece of information be approved by some authority. I’m suggesting that outlet for that information need a license if they want to describe themselves as a “News” outlet. This license could be renewed annually, for example. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2016, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667/20 "2016-11-21T20:09:46Z")
Regulating speech is not a good idea. I forget who said that, but somebody important. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-term-news-be-licensed/772667.md?page=2)