With so much drama, hype, and propaganda, the media machine drowns society. No longer seeming like the source to get information, the news simply presents what advances its corporate agenda. Stories don’t have to be meaningful or important, the intention is to excite the masses and drive ratings.
Topics are covered to exaggerate the drama which captivates the nation and world. For the media, the boring truth is often less important than the market shares that determine profits for stakeholders. And from that business perspective, regardless of how (in)significant news ultimately is, the news presented can simply be the information that has the best financial impact for a company. Data can be found to support pretty much anything.
If people base their idea of what is important from what seems to capture attention, then they actually don’t know what is important -- they only know what is trending. This has been the true story. Compared to real news, and as the weekend approaches, many passionately hooked fans are more entertained by next week’s exciting episode.
Read Ascendents.net News and stay updated on what to know.
The music industry rejoiced as different sides united. Even opposing politicians seemed to find agreement. Countless sources ran articles to help celebrate that after many rounds of hard work and addressing concerns, the Music Modernization Act finally passed Congress and is on its way to the president.
Originally introduced in April 2018 to the House of Representatives by Rep. Goodlatte, Bob (R-VA), was bill H.R.5447, which seemingly earned full representative support with 415-0 votes. The act had a harder time before eventually on September 18 passing lobbied senators, likely because as it affects many aspects of the music business, the possibility of the bill becoming law and changing the marketplace landscape got realer. As of September 25, there have been links reported by Copyright Alliance and stories from several other sources that Senator Orrin Hatch's revised Music Modernization Act successfully made its final pass through the House of Representatives and is indeed ready for presidential approval.
THIS WEEK -- Democratic senators expressed increased dissatisfaction with the Trump administration. As backlogged courts and immigration debates drag on, thousands of lives are re-thrown into the balance. Many of them seem to believe it is a waste of taxpayer efforts, “to carry out a cold partisan vendetta,” and that it, “goes too far,” as on Twitter, Senior Oregon Senator Ron Wyden claimed, “Trump's ICE now plans to deport 350,000 people whose cases were already CLOSED.”
He tweeted another emotional and heartfelt message, “the Trump administration wants to deport unaccompanied children that judges have found to have been abused, abandoned, or neglected. Deporting them now is cruelty for the sake of cruelty,” followed by him also saying, “My @SenateDems colleagues and I are pushing back.”
For what is really happening to America’s media fairness, compiled by the international non-profit third-party organization Reporters Without Borders - RSF (Reporters Sans Frontières)’ team based out of Paris, France, are annual reports and statistics about the freedom of press in different countries. According to their data, out of 53 journalists killed this year so far, six have been American. For the most part, the reason(s) for the U.S. killings don’t seem to be politically motivated. One instance as reported by the Baltimore Sun on July 29 was because a long-time reader who, the previous day, was still angry about an article written about him in 2011, tried to shoot everyone in the Capital Gazette Annapolis newsroom.
The American RSF Press Freedom Ranking is currently in 45th place with an index score of 23.73, compared to other countries such as first place Norway with 7.63, and Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland, and Jamaica all have scores under 12 -- more than twice as favorable of index rating for press freedom. The ranking of 45, is a negligible two-places worse from last year’s score; the best recorded rank for the United States was 32nd place in 2013.
While complicated methodologies and index scores said one thing, a write-up next to the U.S. country profile described another picture, “US press freedom, enshrined in the First Amendment to the 1787 constitution, has been under increasing attack over the past few years, and the first year of President Donald J. Trump's presidency has fostered further decline in journalists' right to report."
As the U.S. President was blamed for trying to silence the press, the write-up continued, pointing out, “He (Trump) has declared the press an enemy of the American people in a series of verbal attacks toward journalists, attempted to block White House access to multiple media outlets, and routinely uses the term “fake news” in retaliation for critical reporting. He has even called for revoking certain media outlets’ broadcasting licenses.” Further into the report suggests that the highest level of the US government, giving “violent anti-press rhetoric” has actually worked against the real news and free press, which who can partially be determined by the Media Bias/Fact Check website, that says it’s the most comprehensive media bias resource on the internet with over 2500+ sources documented and actively updated. Not only are MBFC sources compared with various degrees of left-right wing bias, they also mention the factuality of sources' writing. The description for their “least bias” category said, “these sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources.”
This isn't official advice from a lawyer, but after reading articles/reports about varying court decisions, it doesn't take a lawyer to see that loosely-enforced copyright laws regarding "fair use" are clear as mud. Supposedly, it is legal to photograph and film people without their permission, but only as long as they aren't the sole focus of the content. Ultimately, legality becomes an issue when the intentions and effects/results of content use cause damages or losses to the rightsholder(s). Someone else's copyright image(s) or exhibits are not the main part of this article. The factual captions below the images attempt to demonstrate various ways to (without needing permission) fairly use copyright images and other content for your articles.
In report writing, it is generally understood that each sentence, paragraph, and/or claim should be looked at individually and written credibly as a fact. For example, explicit permission is not required to fairly and simply state the fact that author Jane Friedman, and creator of article, A Writer’s Guide to Permissions and Fair Use, said, “you have to consider, for each use, whether or not it’s necessary to seek explicit, legal permission from the work’s creator or owner,” however; the writer’s guide and author, were still referenced/stated in "good faith" and credited. An italicized note said, “Remember that crediting the source does not remove the obligation to seek permission.” When something might not fall into the fair-use category, then experts agree to seek permission(s).
Is the content being stated as a fact? Titles, names, companies, and places are facts. When presented, interpreted, and credited, things other people said and their images also become stated facts for others to include and further analyze. Scribbling your name on someone else's work (claiming it’s yours) is lying, illegal, and unfair. Legal fair use is to identify/reference someone else and their work (attribution) and then (with your name) add more/do extra work to interpret it (commentary/criticism and/or parody of copyright material for a limited and transformative purpose).
Try to find examples of how others widely use the same content or same type of content. Businesses have different stances, however; since it can be difficult and expensive to follow up every case, as long as an instance doesn't become the company's biggest problem, there probably won’t be a lawsuit filed, however; by fairly crediting sources, and being a team player, it is easier to earn industry respect. The Associated Press said, "You are solely responsible for determining whether or not "fair use" or similar doctrines apply in various jurisdictions and/or whether any permissions, licenses, clearances and/or releases are required in connection with any proposed use of the Content. If You are unsure, You are responsible for contacting competent legal counsel." Do not source from uncredited photos/media or steal paid stock photo content. Some free stock photos that usually do not require attribution are available on sites such as Pexels and MorgueFile. Also visit the Creative Commons search page for seemingly limitless amounts of more free content, often with no attribution requirements from CC image sites like Pixabay, ClipSafari, and Flickr.