Senate committee shuts down Storms' bill to kill newspaper notices
A bill that would remove the requirement that local governments publish their official notices in printed newspapers was halted by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on Tuesday when the chairman, Sen. Mike Bennett, said he was ordering a staff study over the summer instead.
The measure, SB 2292, being pushed by Sen. Ronda Storms, would have allowed local governments to replace the printed notice with an Internet notice and a direct mailer to citizens who signed up to receive them. Storms said she had no idea how much the shift in practice would cost but noted that cities and counties "loved it.''
By contrast, killing the bill was the top priority of the Florida Press Association, and was opposed by AARP and Associated Industries of Florida.
Storms predicted that the death of printed newspapers in Florida was inevitable. "Members of the media may not want to acknowledge it but, in our lifetime, it's going to take care of itself,'' she said. "All we're doing is propping up the media. I think that print media is going to go away."
Bennett replied: "I look at the whole idea of a nonprinted media as terrifying. I realize the federal government can shut down a satellite and we lose all our unprinted media. Maybe you have more faith in government than I do."
*

Storms is an idiot.
I'm sure the local yokals were loving it. That way a lot more people won't find out about scheduled meetings and there will be fewer pesky citizens/gadflys to put up with since many of the old geezers aren't signed up for the internet messages and get their news for traditional newspapers.
So much for transparency in government!
Posted by: terminator | March 31, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Rhonda Storms rocks! She's one public representative that really respects her constituents. Think of the money that could be saved! Bravo, Rhonda. By the way, whippernator at 11:17, I'm a 60-year-old geezer and I'm also a certified webmaster. How bout you?
Posted by: Buzzard | March 31, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Buzztard aced the on-line web design program at U Phoenix - and now he can post his anti-government blather in a very attractive style.
Posted by: Hi-tech Tard | March 31, 2009 at 11:41 AM
buzzard:
that's great and more power to you but many people still rely upon their traditional newspaper.
I would say you are the exception not the norm.
How many folks over at Sun City Center or Century Village can you see whizzing away at their computers reading online newspapers?
Plus the internet version is always much smaller than the printed version and meeting notices would be easy to miss.
I see this as a cloak to remove sunshine from the government by shutting those out who are not internet savvy.
Bad move. I'm sure Bennet caught lots of crap from all the retirees around Manatee.
No, I'm not a webmaster, you got me there.
Posted by: terminator | March 31, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Regardless of anyone's opinions, newspaper subscriptions are plummeting. That is fact. Whether that is due to the internet or distrust in the media's ability to be un-biased(my reason) is up to question.
Posted by: T.R | March 31, 2009 at 12:19 PM
hey, RHODA!!
"public notice" means exactly that...."PUBLIC NOTICE", not only folks with access to the internet or folks who choose to sign on to a mailing list...it means "PUBLIC"!
gotta wonder what bags of slimeandskumm she was doing this for, so people would be kept in the dark about "PUBLIC BUSINESS"??!!??
wouldnt trust this whackjob any more than i would a drydrunk president!!
Posted by: mike | March 31, 2009 at 12:29 PM
all the proof you need and they are bankrupt and dishonest people. debate the facts yall!
http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/Stephanopoulos/welcome.asp
Posted by: Do it---bankrupt the liberal papers. | March 31, 2009 at 12:30 PM
The critics of Sen. Storms' proposal are missing the point, I think. The Information Age has changed how people communicate and the printed newspaper dates back to the 16th century in style and mode. It doesn't cut it anymore. Some of the conspiracy-minded may look at this as an attack on the left-leaning press by the party in power, but I don't think the right could do any more damage to newspapers than they have already done to themselves by losing their credibility with errors of omission and commission in news coverage. Killing this bill by "Big Media" would be no different than "Big Oil" or "Big Insurance" lobbying to kill something that made sense. Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays virtue, and the hypocrisy of the press and their lobbyists is telling.
Posted by: BGS | March 31, 2009 at 12:41 PM
12:30 Spoken like a true fascist, McToady.
Posted by: McToady and his fascist masters hate free speech. | March 31, 2009 at 12:46 PM
Let's pass a law making buggy whips a required posession.
Posted by: Angry Old Man | March 31, 2009 at 12:58 PM
T.R. You're right that the media is biased, in terms of tilting strongly to the left, and that some people have dropped their subscriptions as a result. Nobody wants the news CONSTANTLY delivered with an agenda.
And to anyone who's in denial about this, try this experiment. Call 10 reporters at medium-size or large newspapers at random. Ask them to tell you their party affiliation, and who they voted for in the pres election. IF they're honest, I guarantee you that 9 or all of them will have responded this way -- Democrat, Obama.
But beyond the bias issue are MUCH larger issues.
First, newspapers historically have been mismanaged, by people who figured the huge margins of profit would last forever, so newspapers could go on spending at will (one example: the million or so the Times spent for the naming rights of the Ice Palace. How's that working out for them?).
Secondly, newspapers as a rule haven't known how to respond to the advent of digital communication, so they've made some pretty bad decisions, starting with giving away their content for free.
And then the economy tanked ... and that, sadly, means the end of newspapers as we now know them.
Posted by: yaya | March 31, 2009 at 01:04 PM
actually, the socialists soon to be fascists are the Washington politicians who are using the broken economy as an excuse to seize control of private businesses.
Those who think this is a good thing are blind, ignorant of history, or left-wing ideologues, willing to remake America by any means necessary.
Posted by: harvey | March 31, 2009 at 01:06 PM
I second terminators point; Storms is an idiot.
Posted by: American not on drugs | March 31, 2009 at 01:33 PM
yet another example of government policy encumbering long-term tax payer dollars without proper foresight.
When sunshine laws mandated the publication of notices, they also mandated taxpayers pay for such notices.
At least Storms seems to want to ease some of the costs while still finding a compromise.
Posted by: Omega83 | March 31, 2009 at 01:35 PM
Sticks and stones, etc. etc. etc.
Truth is, the only people who read most legal notices in the paper are lawyers and developers. How many of you reading this drivel here even know where the notices are in today's paper?
It's a waste of tax money propping up a private enterprise. If you don't like the internet, find some other way of publicizing this stuff. Print newspapers are on the way out and will soon be available only on the internet anyway.
Rhonda Storms is ahead of the pack yet again!!!! Go Rhonda! Storms for President!
Posted by: Buzzard | March 31, 2009 at 01:42 PM
BGS:
while much of what you say makes sense, what does that say about the American public's ability to discern propaganda when they see it.
I get my information from a broad spectrum but dammit....I still want my newspaper in the morning with my coffee!
this skews across age, I suspect most older folks are like me (like their newspaper and things the old fashioned way).
how about a compromise? require it be printed in newspapers and through the internet? bet they would hate the cr*p out of that!
Posted by: terminator | March 31, 2009 at 02:03 PM
Not everyone has a computer or Internet access. This would be a major step backward for fair access to government information for all citizens as only the wealthy elite with computers and Internet access can be privileged to know what government is doing. And before you argue that public libraries offer Internet - yes, you can sign up for a 35 minute turn at the computer, but that's hardly enough time to read all the government news and notices.
Posted by: Digital Divide | March 31, 2009 at 02:14 PM
we love free speech and debate. you never hear anyong say "the debate is over" on the right, only on the fascist left (Hilter was a socialist bro). so let's debate--as you will soon learn--we don't denigrate the other side with ad hominem attacks.
Posted by: 12:46 | March 31, 2009 at 02:30 PM
2:14 - And everybody has a newspaper subscription??????
Posted by: Buzzard | March 31, 2009 at 02:55 PM
Now if we can just shut down Ronda Storms, period. This is what happens when we elect ignorant people. It's called the first amendment, Senator. Look it up.
Posted by: Roger DeVry | March 31, 2009 at 03:10 PM
This is simply laying the groundwork for a newsprint industry bailout, courtesy of we taxpayers and controlled by our government going forward.
Combined with the “completely unexplained” urgency to implement the digital conversion that eliminates free and open TV airwaves, and toss in the inevitable fairness doctrine and the subsequent and calculated fallout thereof… and one has to wonder what the grand design is.
If memory and historical study serves… and I believe it does… the first order of business when a government makes its move toward totalitarianism and monocracy is… wait for it… wait for it… take control of public information dissemination (i.e.: TV, Radio, and print media).
Laugh at it, mock it, and attack it if you choose… but write it down for retrospection sake.
But what do I know; “Mongo only pawn in game of life.”
Posted by: Blazin | March 31, 2009 at 04:02 PM
"Not everyone has a computer or Internet access"
Everyone has access to public libraries and public transportation to get there.
Must we destroy legitimate taxpayer savings for the needs of a tiny few...most of whom i would venture to guess could care less about the subject at hand.
Posted by: Jimbo | March 31, 2009 at 05:31 PM
More people go on the internet than read newspapers.
In Miami-Dade County many legal notices are published in the Daily Business Review. And most people do not read that.
Look at businesses. They are advertising less and less in newspapers. Why? Because it is not cost-effective to reach the intended audience.
Government is always behind the curve when it comes to making good use of taxpayer dollars -- because of silly policits like this.
This reminds me of all the local chamber of commerce claiming the military needs the local military base -- even though the Army and Navy want to shut it down.
Posted by: John Paul Jones | March 31, 2009 at 07:04 PM
I'll take 3 Ronda Storms over one Mike Bennett any day.
That man is a mean and demented psycho
Posted by: Hot Tubs Kill Brain Cells | March 31, 2009 at 08:23 PM
I would bet pennys to pounds that more people in my neighborhood have internet than get a daily newspaper.
And it is the same in yours.
Posted by: Internet | March 31, 2009 at 09:05 PM
And what single day was the ad, I mean notice published? Do not call the newsroom for answers, call the advertising section. Oh, and get a buck to go buy the paper to look it up. They may tell you the wrong day just to sell you another paper. Then again they may not tell you at all since you didn't place the ad/notice.
What day was the notice published for the new roof on the student union? Bet you can't find it.
Posted by: two bucked chuck | March 31, 2009 at 09:22 PM
Electronic technology is awesome… until the power goes out. Cyber terrorism that impacts our computers and power grids is on the rise in a big way. And in case you hadn’t noticed, we’ve become extremely dependent of computers powered by electricity.
If they’re ever successful at crashing either or both for an indefinite period of time… you’ll wish you had a newspaper to read.
“We we’re so consumed with whether or not we could; we failed to consider whether or not we should.”
But what do I know; “Mongo only pawn in game of life.”
Posted by: Blazin | April 01, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Hey, all you local papers: You've gone and ticked off Rhonda by covering her idiot antics. Now she's looking for a soft spot to push you, so you'll lay off.
A surely bigot in power is a scary thing to see.
Posted by: Gotanopinion | April 01, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Without newspaper ink, what will Rotund Rhonda use for eye shadow?
Posted by: -- | April 01, 2009 at 02:07 PM