The Journalism and other ministries posts requests for television program for the public, and educational videos for schools and businesses. The Television Ministry has the option of rejecting the requests. When they approve a request, they create a "media business" to produce the program, and they hire one person to be the executive of the media business. This concept is the same as described for the Economic Division, in which the ministers create businesses to manufacture products.

The media executive does not have the freedom to create whatever program he pleases. Instead, as with the executives in the Economic Division, the media executives must fulfill the task that their business was created for, such as creating an educational video for young children, or a documentary for the public.

The Television Ministry does not micromanage the media business, but they work with the executives to determine the equipment, time, resources, and employees that they need to complete their task. For short or simplistic videos, or to edit an existing documentary, an executive might be the only person in his business, and he might need only one week and one computer to complete the task, but the more complicated documentaries might need several years to complete, and dozens of employees and a lot of cameras, drones, and specialized equipment or software.

The media businesses are as unimportant as the businesses created by the Economic Division. For example, the media businesses do not necessarily have names, and they cannot have logos. When they produce a video, the names of the people involved with its production are listed, not the business, and those people are responsible for it.

If a media business has been created to produce a specific documentary or video, it is terminated when they have completed their task, and their equipment is put back into storage, and the executive and the employees find another project to work on.

If the media business has been created to routinely produce videos, such as news reports, then it will exist as long as the executive is in control of it. If he quits, retires, or is fired, that business becomes a new business. The employees can remain in the business if they want to, but it will be considered a new business. This concept is the same as described for the Economic Division.

The economic ministers are required to put most businesses into competition in order to inspire one another, and to determine which people are more talented, and the Television Ministry can do the same for media businesses. For example, when the Television Ministry has to make a documentary, they are allowed to create two media businesses to create the documentary. This will allow them to pass judgment on which business is making the best documentary. Since there are no copyrights, the material in both of their documentaries can then be used to create a superior documentary. If the Television Ministry is unhappy with both of their documentaries, he can have them learn from one another, and then repeat the process of creating the documentary.

Neither the Television Ministry, nor its media businesses, can manufacture any of the cameras, microphones, or other equipment that they want. The media businesses can create only "simplistic" items, such as fixtures for microphones, or attaching a camera to a robot. When they want "complex" equipment or software, they must request it from the Economic Division, which allows the Economic Division to reject requests that they regard as wasteful or unnecessary.

It also allows the Economic Division to make suggestions on how to improve the design or reduce labor and resources, such as changing the design of a camera to use a lens that is already in production rather than create a special lens.

There is no dividing line between what is a "simplistic" item, so everybody is encouraged to pass judgment on whether the Television Ministry and the media executives are making sensible decisions.

The Journalism Ministry determines what type of news, documentaries, and other television programs to produce, but they cannot produce the television programs. Instead, they post requests for programs, and the Television Ministry can refuse a request if they don't believe that it is useful, or if it requires excessive resources.

Other ministries and the executives of businesses are also permitted to post requests for television programs. For example, the Medical Ministry might request a documentary about some medical issue; the executive of a factory might request a training video for his employees; the executive of a business that manufactures a DNA sequencer might request a video to teach his customers on how to use the equipment; and the Schools Ministry might request a particular educational video for preteen girls.

Citizens are also encouraged to post requests, although they post them in the Suggestions category instead of the Requests category. For example, a citizen might be curious about how CT scanners work, and so he conceives of a documentary to explain how those machines are built, how they work, and how the images they produce are interpreted.

He would post a document in the Suggestions category that has an outline of what the documentary would be, and if the Journalism or Television Ministry approves of it, the Journalism Ministry would get involved to design the documentary. Since copyrights are prohibited, the Journalism Ministry can make whatever changes they want.

The Television Ministry might reject the request, thereby forcing the Journalism Ministry to redesign it, in which case the final documentary could be significantly different from what the citizen had suggested.

If the documentary turns out to be beneficial, the citizen and the minister who approved it will get credit for conceiving of a successful documentary.

In a free enterprise system, television programs are judged according to their popularity, but this constitution requires all videos to be judged according to the effect they have on people and society.

Since documentaries, educational, and training videos are supposed to be provide people with honest and useful information, they are judged according to how well they educate their particular audience.

A television program that is intended for entertainment is judged according to its effect on people's attitudes and behavior. This will enable the government to prevent programs that encourage detrimental behavior, such as dangerous activities and obnoxious pranks, or which encourage bad attitudes, such as videos that glorify pirates, gamblers, or drunks, and videos that encourage a feel-sorry-for-me attitude.

The Television and Journalism Ministries must ensure that the videos are beneficial. They must prevent videos from promoting stupid concepts, such as growling dinosaurs, ghosts, witches, a flat earth, crop circles, UFOs, time travel, reincarnation, and religion. Those subjects can be used as comedy, and they can be discussed in historical documentaries, but they cannot be treated as realistic concepts.

To provide checks and balances on the Television and Journalism Ministries, all of the citizens are encouraged to pass judgment on the value of the videos, and post complaints in the Suggestions category.

Giving the government the ability to prohibit popular television programs is allowing the government to "oppress" us, but with proper leadership, the oppression is as beneficial as when parents refuse to let their children engage in dangerous or idiotic activities.

Our preferred activity is titillating ourselves, not learning or thinking. We have an especially strong resistance to learning about information that is critical of, or different from, what we are accustomed to. Our crude, animal characteristics cause us to to prefer programs that entertain us rather than educate us.

We must be put under pressure in order to learn, think, and be critical of ourselves, but we do not need any pressure to do something that we regard as entertaining. Rather, we need to be under pressure to prevent ourselves from getting carried away with entertainment, especially in regards with to food and status, but also with television, sex, cosmetics, jewelry, and playing with babies.

In a free enterprise system, television programs, including the educational programs, are designed primarily to make profit rather than be beneficial. The competition for money results in most educational videos being designed to appease as many people as possible, which results in most being designed to titillate the "ordinary" adults and children who want entertainment, rather than educate the minority of adults who have an above-average interest in learning about the world.

For example, the narrators frequently exaggerate and dramatize events in order to titillate the audience. That type of narration is exploiting and deceiving the audience rather than educating them.

Another example of how the narrators try to titillate the audience is when they describe the weight of something as "heavy as 28 elephants" or "heavier than a Boeing 747", or when they describe a quantity of water as "enough to fill 10 Olympic swimming pools".

The narrators describe the weight in elephants in order to create images in our mind that they hope will titillate us, but that is as idiotic as describing an elephant as "heavy as 16 obese women".

This constitution requires the Journalism Ministry to design educational information to be serious, such as describing weight in kilograms and quantities of water in liters. Also, the narrators are prohibited from dramatizing events.

Another trick that the narrators use to attract people is to jump from one issue to another every few minutes to prevent people from getting bored. For example, a documentary about animals might spend three minutes discussing a chameleon in Brazil, and then spend three minutes discussing sharks at a coral reef, and then spend three minutes discussing a hummingbird in Alabama, and then repeat the cycle.

This constitution prohibits that technique. The educational videos must be designed for people who have an above-average interest in learning. The videos cannot be judged according to their popularity. Rather, they must be judged according to how well they educate their particular audience.

The Television Ministry is also prohibited from producing educational videos with music playing in the background because music distracts us from the information.

The Television Ministry is also prohibited from trying to impress the audience with entertaining but unnecessary video editing or camera techniques, and the narrators are prohibited from trying to titillate the audience with emotional tones of voice and emotionally stimulating adjectives.

The educational videos are also prohibited from using the shaky camera technique, in which the camera moves around rapidly, and zooms in and out every few seconds. That technique seems to be useful for attracting the attention of people with ADHD, or some other type of mental disorder, but it is irritating to people with a healthy mind.

The educational videos must also avoid deceiving people on how the videos are created. For example, PBS created the Spy in the Wild series in which cameras are installed in robotic animals. The narrator makes it appear as if there is one robotic animal with a camera, but there is obviously another camera somewhere because we frequently see the robotic animal.

When I watch one of those documentaries, I find myself thinking, "Why are they bothering to create and control those expensive robots when the camera that is producing the documentary is providing us with much better video?"

The people who create documentaries rarely provide information on how they produced the video. For example, a documentary might show a cheetah capturing an antelope, but the narrator is not likely to provide any information on how the camera crew produced that video.

By ignoring how the video was created, the audience gets a distorted view of those animals, and that section of the earth. Those deceptive documentaries are one of the reasons that many people have developed fantasies of traveling around the world. Those documentaries fool us into believing that if we take a trip to Africa, we will be able to take a short trip from our hotel room to see cheetahs capturing antelope.

The businesses that produce documentaries hide a lot of the information about how they create the documentaries, such as how the camera crew had to spend days or weeks hiding and waiting in the bushes for a few seconds of video. They also hide the information about the camera crew suffering from heat, cold, rain, snow, insect bites, ticks, boredom, and uncomfortable sleeping conditions.

Most people also try to hide the microphones, such as by hiding the wire from the microphone and transmitter under their clothing. That type of deception does not improve the video. Rather, it wastes the time of the people who are creating the video. It would be simpler and quicker to attach the microphone to the outside of the person's clothing, and leave the transmitter and wires exposed. The audience will not suffer in any way if they see the microphone, wire, and transmitter.

Scientists do not hide the techniques they use to conduct experiments because they want to educate other scientists, but the competition for money in a free enterprise system causes businesses to titillate us rather than educate us.

In order to improve the educational videos, the government officials must judge a video according to the effect it has on us. The educational videos should educate us, and the entertainment videos should be pleasurable, and all types of video should encourage beneficial attitudes and behavior.

Instead of designing television programs and educational materials to fit the people with inferior mental characteristics, it is better to restrict reproduction to the people with higher quality minds.

The businesses in a free enterprise system that profit from tourism are deceiving, exploiting, and manipulating us with unrealistic travel documentaries, photos, and advertising brochures. The deceptive travel documentaries have caused a lot of people to become convinced that the more traveling we do, the more exciting our life will be.

It is more enjoyable to watch a video about fire ants than to travel to the area to see them.

This constitution promotes the theory that we will get more satisfaction from life when we can avoid traveling around the world and can watch high resolution video in a comfortable video room that has a giant, curved monitor with high-quality audio.

Those videos would show us a lot more about the world than if we were to travel around it. For example, we would be able to see inside the nest of ants, observe fish that are deep in the ocean, and fly alongside of birds.

Those video rooms would allow us to avoid the dangers of traveling, such as the dangerous fumes of the blue, sulfur fires, or the heat and fumes of a volcano, or the insects and diseases of the tropics.

The Television Ministry is required to give people a realistic view of travel. Their goal is to educate people about the world, not to promote tourism or traveling.

Documentaries can also allow us to "travel" to different time periods. For example, the BBC historic farm series re-creates life at several different times in England's history. Those documentaries give us a better understanding of the lives, technology, and work of some of our ancestors, compared to drawings and text descriptions.

For example, the Tudor Monastery Farm series do a better job of helping us understand the phenomenal differences in the lives of the people of that era compared to those of us in 2024.

The free enterprise system allows businesses and citizens to be secretive and deceptive about jobs, so there is no database to search to find out how many people are working for television and radio stations to provide news and weather reports. There is also no information about what those jobs are like.

This constitution changes the situation dramatically by requiring the Database Ministry to maintain a Jobs database, and all of the ministries, businesses, and other organizations are required to add their current and upcoming jobs to that database, and provide honest descriptions of the job, including it unpleasant aspects.

All of the people who create jobs are also required to pass judgment on whether the job is providing enough benefit to society to justify it, and whether people enjoy and get satisfaction from it. They are also required to reduce the number of jobs that require people to work during the night, evening, holidays, or weekends, which not many people enjoy.

One poll of American adults showed that 70% of them want daily weather reports, but they did not care so much about other types of news reports. However, providing televised weather reports throughout the day and evening, seven days a week, requires a lot of people to work at different times and days, and some of them will have to get up early in the morning, work late in the evening, or work during the holidays or weekends. For example, Amy Sweezey gets up at 1:50 AM in the morning five days a week to do the morning weather forecasts. That would be inappropriate if she had young children to deal with.

Do the people in a city benefit enough from the televised news and weather reports to justify all of the labor and undesirable working hours?

There is no right or wrong answer to that type of question. The ministers are required to make a decision according to what is best for society, mainly the City Elders. In a free enterprise system, people are treated as animals, but the ministers must regard people as their friends. Therefore, the way we should phrase this question as: do we want to make our friends get up early in the morning simply, more work during the evenings or weekends, to provide us with the weather report?

With modern technology, it is a waste of our labor and resources to have people giving televised reports about weather. It is more sensible for the government to maintain an Internet site that has information about the city's weather, similar to windy.com, except that it would specific to the city.

Anybody who is interested in that type of news can access it from their phone or computer. With computer software becoming increasingly useful, we will soon be able to ask our phone or computer to provide us with whatever information we want, such as a weather report for the evening, as in the image below.

The same concept applies to televised news reports. Specifically, there is no need to have people providing live news reports throughout the day and evening, seven days a week. It is more sensible for the Television Ministry to maintain a site with local news, and people can ask their phone or computer for whatever news events they are interested in.

A person would also be able to specify what type of news he is most interested in. For example, a person could request to be informed about upcoming city festivals, new products, and the closures of foot paths and bicycle paths for maintenance. In such a case, when he asks his phone for "news", the computer will let him know about the festivals, products, and path closures.

With facial and voice recognition software, the city computer will know who is asking for information, regardless of which phone or computer he is using. That makes it easy for the computer to give the person the news he is interested in, and not waste his time on other news.

This constitution prohibits live news reports because it is an inefficient method of providing people with information about the city. Everybody expects live news reports at different times of the day and evening, and the only way to provide people with live news reports is to repeat the reports over and over throughout the day and evening. This makes the job monotonous, and it is a waste of labor and resources.

In a free enterprise system, the media businesses compete for profit, so they don't care about wasting resources or making employees do monotonous jobs. However, this Constitution puts the ministers in competition to find improvements to our lives, so the Television and Journalism Ministries are under pressure to keep labor and expenses to a minimum, and eliminate as many monotonous, unpleasant, and unskilled jobs as possible.

It is much more efficient for the Television Ministry to maintain an Internet site that has up-to-date information about the city, and people can use their phone, computer, or a public video room to find whatever information they are interested in. Therefore, the Television Ministry is prohibited from providing live news reports.

In a free enterprise system, the businesses are producing fictional materials without any regard for the effect it has on our attitudes or behavior, but the Television and Journalism Ministries must observe the effect that the their policies have on us. They must be especially concerned with how they affect children.

Does fiction improve our lives?

The most popular television programs, movies, and books are fiction, such as Harry Potter, Star Trek, sitcoms, romance novels, and soap operas.

Many people spend many hours every day watching or reading about fictional people, but does that improve our lives? Or is it wasting our leisure time, and filling our mind with nonsensical information?

Are children benefiting from cartoons in which animals speak and behave like humans? Our emotions are so stupid that we can become emotionally attached to the fictional characters in cartoons, television programs, books, and movies, but do we benefit by having fictional friendships with fictional creatures? Or is it causing us to waste our life on nonsensical and worthless relationships? When we become elderly, will we enjoy reminiscing about our imaginary relationships with Mickey Mouse or Harry Potter?

I suspect that the unrealistic fiction is popular because there are so many people who are unhappy, bored, or lonely. The fictional characters allow them to form pleasant friendships and marriages, and to imagine that they are doing something with those characters.

I also suspect that unrealistic fiction is detrimental because it can give us, especially children, inaccurate information about human behavior, life, and activities. For example, the women in many of the movies and television programs are almost as sexually promiscuous as men, and that can fool boys into expecting real women to be similar.

The ministers are also required to investigate whether it is beneficial to give human emotions to fictional computers and robots. Before we fill a child's mind with idiotic information about robots that have emotions, we should investigate whether some of the people who are afraid of robots and AI software were deceived by movies, books, and cartoons in which the robots have temper tantrums and selfish desires.

This Constitution prohibits the animals and robots that behave like humans until we have evidence that such fiction is beneficial.

Another aspect of television that can cause trouble, especially for children, is that slow motion video can make some obnoxious and dangerous pranks look like fun entertainment. Examples are when people throw food, spray one another with water, or push their friend into a swimming pool.

The Television Ministry is required to determine what type of television programs are truly improving our lives. They cannot design the programs according to what people like or want. They must judge the programs by the effect they have on our attitudes and lives.

Their goal is to provide television programs that allow us to form pleasant relationships, develop a better understanding of ourselves and the world, encourage beneficial attitudes, and have a life that we enjoy reminiscing about when we become older.

If the Television Ministry determines that fictional television is detrimental to children, and that television should be limited to two hours in the evening for both adults and children, then they have the authority to prohibit fictional television, and to restrict access to television to two hours in the evening.

No culture has standards for information, and this allows people and businesses to produce television programs, educational materials, cartoons, and advertisements that deliberately or accidentally manipulate children.

For example, PBS created this cartoon in which a mother and daughter complain that men ignore the achievements of women. That cartoon should be classified as "feminist propaganda". It may be true that men have a tendency to ignore women, as mentioned here, but that cartoon is encouraging anger, bitterness, and hatred by making idiotic accusations that men are sexist and cruel.

There are also cartoons that display pedophile symbols, and there are businesses producing T-shirts for children in China that have rude English phrases.

This constitution requires every ministry to watch for and stop the deliberate and inadvertent manipulation of children.

In a free enterprise system, the news agencies compete with one another to attract as many people as possible. This results in news reports that are designed to titillate us rather than educate us.

To improve this situation, the Journalism Ministry is required to ignore what the public wants and design news to be beneficial. The Journalism Ministry is in the role of a father who is trying to educate his children, as opposed to free enterprise businesses that are trying to exploit people.

Since live television reports are prohibited, the news reports must be designed to be posted on the Internet, and to make it easy for software to give reports about it. This will allow people to get reports whenever they want to, anywhere they are in the city, and at any time, as in the image below.

The Journalism Ministry is responsible for producing all of the news reports, and all of the journalists work for this ministry. The journalists are judged by the Journalism Minister, and he must judge the journalists according to how they are affecting the lives and attitudes of people, not according to the popularity of their documents and videos.

The Journalism Minister is selected by the President of the Health Division,
so if the Health President selects an honest and responsible Journalism Minister, then all of the journalists will compete to produce the most beneficial and honest news reports.

In a free enterprise system, anybody who can make money selling information can describe himself as a "journalist", regardless of the value or honesty of his information. A person does not have to qualify to be a journalist, or meet any standards, or be held accountable for the effect he has on people.

In order to improve upon the situation, the Journalism Ministry must have at least two categories for journalists; specifically:

1)		Reporters. These are people with a better-than-average ability to express thoughts. As in the world today, they describe what is going on around us, rather than give us analyses of what is happening. For example, they will provide reports about city festivals, the closure of a restaurant for repairs, or a description of a new model of cell phone.
2)		Journalists. The journalists are zoologists who are studying the city and its people. They investigate situations and provide analyses of them. Examples of their investigations are: How the people are interacting with each other; what sort of problems the citizens are having; whether some of the recreational facilities are unused or overcrowded; whether a particular minister is showing signs of incompetence; and how to improve the swimming areas, the plazas, the holiday celebrations, and the work environments. They should be the type of reports that a zoologist would provide when he is studying a group of prairie dogs.

For the sake of simplicity, most of the time this document will use the word "journalists" to refer to both journalists and reporters.

The journalists will produce reports that are very serious and informative, rather than entertaining, and that will result in some reports that have remarks that are critical of people, customs, or some aspect of the city.

It is likely that some people will occasionally become upset with some of their analyses, and all of us will have so little interest in some of their analyses that we ignore them, but the Journalism Ministry cannot care. They are not trying to create popular analyses.

We prefer entertainment rather than education, so most people ignore all of the useful information that is available to us on the Internet. We learn something only when we are under pressure to do so. This is most obvious when we are in school. Specifically, most students do the minimum amount of learning and thinking that is necessary.

Most people believe that they enjoy being informed about what is going on in the world, but in reality they only want news reports that makes them feel good. They are not truly interested in learning about the world. They become especially upset with news reports that are critical of their opinions.

It would be idiotic for scientists to write their scientific reports in a manner that appeals to the majority of people, and it is just as idiotic for journalists to provide analyses that appeal to the majority of people.

It is possible that most people will ignore the investigative news reports, but they don't need them, so it doesn't matter if they ignore them.

Our emotions are stimulated by suffering, death, dead bodies, and skeletons. The free enterprise systems allow businesses to exploit our emotions by stimulating us with fake suffering and deaths, such as in horror movies, Halloween props, and children stories.

However, real suffering and real deaths upset us, and since we do not like being upset, every society has reacted by censoring most photos and video of real suffering and deaths. Every culture also regards a death as a sad event. For example, when the police discover a dead body, they must inform the relatives about it, and they tend to describe that part of their job as the most difficult task of a police officer.

Another example is that when a patient dies in a hospital, the hospital employees have to inform them family members about it, and that is difficult for them, also.

We have no trouble discussing the phony deaths of a Hollywood movie, so why do we have trouble telling somebody about a real death?

Furthermore, when a patient dies, the narrator or hospital employee will often describe the death as "he sadly passed away", or "he tragically died". However, whether a death is "sad" depends upon our attitude. For example, I do not consider the death of an elderly person to be sad. Rather, I regard him as being a success at surviving the dangers of life, and having genetic characteristics that allowed him to survive so long. When I see an elderly person die, I hope that I can live as long as he did, rather than die much earlier from a heart attack, automobile accident, falling off of a ladder, or a stroke.

Most of the deaths at the hospitals are of elderly people, so I do not consider those particular deaths to be sad or tragic. I regarded death as sad only if it is premature, such as when a child dies. We should expect elderly people to die, rather than be surprised or hysterical. His family members should react by hoping that they inherited his genetic characteristics for a long life.

There is no right or wrong culture, so there is nothing wrong with treating phony deaths as entertainment and becoming hysterical about real deaths. We simply have to make decisions about what we want our culture to be, and we need to restrict reproduction to the people who enjoy that culture.

Since we disagree on what to do, this Constitution requires the ministers to make decisions according to what seems to provide the City Elders with the most pleasant attitudes and the most satisfying life.

My suspicion is that we will have a more pleasant life when we discourage people from treating phony deaths as entertainment, and when we stop encouraging pouting, hysteria, and censorship of real deaths. We should treat deaths as a part of life.

We must also treat cancer, heart attacks, and other medical problems as a part of life, especially among the elderly. A doctor should be able to inform a person that he has cancer without worrying that the person will become hysterical, or start crying.

The people who react to information about medical problems or death with hysteria or pouting are often referred to as emotional, loving, or caring, but they should be described as behaving like an animal, and that they are degrading the job of medical personnel and police officers.

I suspect that our lives will be more pleasant when we stop treating fictional murders, tortures, rapes, chainsaw massacres, and serial killers as family entertainment, and we stop treating real medical problems and deaths as dangerous information that should be censored. The Journalism Ministry should make serious and educational documentaries about medical procedures, surgeries, autopsies, childbirth, and other medical issues.

This requires changing Halloween to become more pleasant, and prohibiting the fictional stories about murderers and rapes. Although that gives the government the authority to censor our customs and leisure activities, censorship is not necessarily bad. Everybody wants to censor slander, for example, and everybody also wants to censor art. The fictional murderers could be described as a type of art that we want censored because of its unpleasant effect on our lives.

The US culture allows the entertainment businesses to give themselves hundreds of awards, such as the Academy Awards and the Oscars. This constitution prohibits award ceremonies. The reason is to stop treating some people as special. Everybody is regarded as a team member.

The people who excel at some activity inherited their talent. Giving somebody praise for being talented is as detrimental as giving him praise for having eyes with a particular shade of brown or green.

Some of the talented people will respond that they deserve praise because they became talented by putting a lot of their time and effort into developing their talent, but they were willing and able to put time and effort into it because they inherited the desire and ability to do so. It is their genetics that made them talented.

The people who do not excel in anything are lacking in talent simply because they did not inherit any particular talent, and/or they did not inherit the desire to put effort into developing their talents. It is not their fault that they are lacking in talent. It is their genetics.

This concept applies to all of our other characteristics. For example, the people who become alcoholics have something inferior about their genetics. Some of those alcoholics have the ability to overcome their problem and quit alcohol, and the reason they can do that is because they had the genetic ability to acknowledge that they have a problem with alcohol, and they had the genetic ability to do something to improve their life.

The alcoholics who cannot stop drinking are so inferior in their genetic characteristics that they either cannot acknowledge that they have a problem, or they cannot control themselves enough to stop the alcoholism.

Likewise, the obese people did not choose to be obese. Rather, they have something inferior about their genetic characteristics. Some of the obese people eventually figure out how to lose weight, and the reason they can do that is because they are not as inferior as the obese people who cannot lose weight.

It is detrimental to insult the obese people, the alcoholics, and the people with no talent, just as it is idiotic to insult the people who have freckles or who are left-handed. We must accept the unpleasant fact that half the population is below-average in their genetic characteristics. We must accept people for what they are, and try to help everybody develop their talents to whatever extent they are capable of.

We cannot fix the inferior people with lectures, rehabilitation programs, or punishments. The only way to reduce this problem is to restrict reproduction to the people in better genetic health. Half the population will always be below-average, but the difference between the best and worst people will be reduced, thereby creating less of a problem.

Everybody is just a haphazard collection of genes, and it is detrimental to our social environment to torment the people who got a less desirable set. It is also detrimental to give praise to the people with superior characteristics because that encourages their arrogance. We will create a more pleasant social environment when we treat everybody as a team member of equal status.

Nobody can be glorified.

Everybody is prohibited from treating some people as special or as inferior. The schools cannot treat the intelligent students as special, or torment the stupid people.

Likewise, nobody can designate a sidewalk in the city to have stars inserted for "special people", and they cannot arrange for social events in which they glorify themselves, such as the Hollywood events in which a red carpet is laid on the ground for them to walk on while photographers take their picture, and journalists promote the event as "news".

This constitution prohibits all types of awards, such as the Hollywood Walk of Fame, the Academy Awards, and the Nobel Prizes.

The only people allowed to become journalists and officials in the Journalism Ministry are those that show an above-average ability to differentiate between deception and news.

An example of what is considered unacceptable journalism are the news reports in December 2023 about a Tesla employee who was injured by a robot in 2021. All of the news reports described the incident in a very similar manner. For example, the DailyMail gave their report the title:


The journalist wrote that:

The ScienceTimes was so impressed by the DailyMail article that they put a link to it in their article about the attack.

In this television news report, the journalist wondered if the employee was attacked because the robot wanted revenge for his disabling of two nearby robots. She wonders if the robot:

The journalists tried to deceive us into visualizing a scenario like the one above.

Some journalists and websites, such as Drudge and BoredPanda, showed this photo of Tesla's humanoid style robots to deliberately or inadvertently deceive us into visualizing a humanoid robot attacking an employee.

Media companies from foreign nations were also providing this type of deception. An example is this television report from WION, an English language news agency in India.

Those news reports are as deceptive and unacceptable as a journalist writing:

The Journalism Ministry is required to investigate journalists who produce inaccurate or worthless news reports or other documents. They must pass judgment on whether a journalist is making an honest mistake, in which case they should consider firing the journalist and giving somebody else a chance to become a journalist, or whether the journalist is deliberately trying to deceive the audience.

If the Journalism Ministry determines that a journalist is deliberately deceptive, they must post a request for an intellectual trial of the journalist. The Courts Ministry must then investigate and decide whether he is indeed behaving in a criminal manner, and if so, he must be evicted.

The Courts Ministry is required to maintain high standards for information, and be intolerant of people who try to manipulate us with false or deceptive information. People who provide deceptive information are more destructive than people who provide contaminated foods.

Every culture prohibits citizens from describing their opinions as medical advice, legal advice, and financial advice. Everybody is also prohibited from describing himself as a doctor, policeman, dentist, and lawyer unless we have qualified for those jobs. However, no society stops people from claiming that their opinions are news, history, or the truth, and everybody is free to describe himself as a myth buster, fact checker, expert, learned scholar, truth seeker, investigator, and analyst.

For example, Henry Ajder boasts that he is a "world-leading expert on AI, deepfakes, and the generative revolution." However, he is one of the people who is promoting the theory that AI images of naked women are causing a lot of women to suffer. He is the main author of this PDF document written in 2020 that claims that "Approximately 104,852 women have been targeted and had their personal “stripped” images shared publicly as of the end of July 2020".

As discussed here, women are not suffering from those images. Henry Ajder is another example of people who believe that they are super geniuses, but who are encouraging hysteria of nudity and AI software, rather than providing us with intelligent analyses of AI software, nudity, or our culture.

This Constitution changes that situation by setting high standards for people who provide us with information. Nobody has the right to describe himself as a World Leading Expert, Truth Seeker, Myth Buster, or any similar title. If we are going to give people such titles, they must qualify for it, and they must occasionally renew that title by proving they still deserve it, just like people have to renew a driver's license.

Everybody is held accountable for the information they provide, and the government can conduct information trials to determine whether information is acceptable.

The Journalist Ministry hires people to be journalists, and those journalists are the only people who are authorized to describe their documents as "news". The citizens and organizations are allowed to post their opinions about events, but they cannot describe their documents as "news". The citizens are prohibited from giving themselves such titles as fact checkers, experts, myth busters, and investigators.

The reason for these prohibitions is to prevent one of the problems that is occurring in the democracies; specifically, criminals who claim to be news reporters, journalists, or crime investigators, but who produce deceptive news reports. Examples are the documents about how the US government destroyed the World Trade Center towers with miniature hydrogen bombs, and interviews with "whistleblowers" who have seen an alien from another solar system in a freezer at a military base.

This policy is bizarre for democracies, but it is common for most other organizations. For example, businesses don't give their employees the freedom to start their own company newsletter, write whatever they please, and to refer to their opinions as "news".

Furthermore, businesses don't allow their employees to give themselves whatever titles they please. For example, an employee who has the job title of "engineer" cannot tell the other employees that he is the Fact Checker or Crime Investigator for the business.

The city provides lots of lounges for people to get together for discussions, and people are encouraged to get together to discuss their opinions, but the citizens cannot describe any of their discussions as "educational".

This is intended to prevent dishonest, neurotic, and mentally ill citizens from arranging meetings that claim to be investigating global warming, white supremacy, or some other issue, when in reality they are trying to manipulate and deceive people about those issues.

An example of a dishonest discussion of citizens is the TED conferences. The people who arrange for those conferences promote only certain information and people because their goal is to manipulate our culture, not educate us.

There are also lots of think tanks, businesses, charities, and religions arranging for dishonest discussions. For example, the organization Axios arranged for a meeting in Washington DC in November 2023 to discuss AI software, but that meeting was not a discussion of AI software. Rather, the people who were chosen to speak at the meeting were selected to promote the attitude that AI software has potential dangers, and that we need to create "guardrails" for it.

That meeting was not intended to be a discussion of AI software. Rather, it was an attempt to convince us that "everybody knows" that AI is dangerous, and the only issue to discuss is what sort of "guardrails" we need to protect ourselves.

That type of meeting is as deceptive as some Jews arranging a meeting to discuss what type of "guardrails" we need to protect Jews from Holocaust deniers, or a group of people arranging a meeting to discuss the guardrails we need to protect the Earth from global warming.

Three men created Axios, but the Wikipedia does not have an entry for one of those men, Roy Schwartz, who is the president of the company. Ray Schwartz was born in Israel, so I suspect that Wikipedia is trying to hide his connections to Israel.

The Wikipedia is another example of a group of citizens claiming to be educating the public, but who are in reality trying to manipulate and deceive us. This constitution prohibits citizens from claiming that their documents are encyclopedias, dictionaries, or other educational materials.

Eric Schmidt was one of the speakers at the Axios meeting about AI software, and afterwards Axios posted this document to let us know that Schmidt believes that AI could "endanger" humanity within 5 to 10 years.

Why was Eric Schmidt given so much publicity by Axios? I suspect it is because Eric Schmidt is one of the blackmailed puppets of the Israeli crime network. Evidence for that accusation is that in 2019 the American Intelligence Media published this audio and transcript in which an anonymous man interviews an anonymous woman who "exposes" some of the embarrassing behavior of Eric Schmidt.

I think that interview is fraudulent, and that it was posted on the Internet to intimidate Schmidt because he was becoming rebellious. The woman that he got involved with was probably an Israeli agent who was trying to set him up for blackmail, or get information about him for Israel.

If my suspicions are correct, Axios and the American Intelligence Media are members of an Israeli crime network that is blackmailing influential people and trying to manipulate the opinions of the public. That would make them criminals, not news reporters or investigative journalists.

In a democracy, the voters are supposed to eliminate crime and corruption by telling their submissive representatives how to manage the nation, but the voters are too incompetent, irresponsible, selfish, and ignorant to take care of the nation.

In order to improve upon the situation, this constitution prohibits the citizens and organizations from claiming that they are providing educational materials or meetings. The Journalism Minister has total control of all types of news and historical reports, and he cannot operate in secrecy.

He is responsible for passing judgment on the news reports that the journalists create, and the non-fiction material from citizens and organizations. He can demand that the inaccuracies be corrected, and if there is dispute over what should be done, he can request the Courts Ministry to have an Intellectual Trial.

No society has any standards for the people who make documentaries, and this allows religious fanatics, Freudian psychologist, and lunatics to create documentaries that promote religion, popular legends, myths, and idiotic concepts about animal and human behavior.

The Television Ministry is required to ensure that the documentaries are scientifically correct. For example, the PBS documentaries tend to make idiotic remarks about the animals that they are describing, such as describing them as "their lives hang in the balance", or by pointing out that "the babies are in constant danger from predators".

Their remarks are accurate, except that they apply to all living creatures, not just the animals that they are describing the documentary. Every animal is in a deadly battle for life. It is idiotic for a documentary to describe one particular animal as facing dangers when they all face dangers.

The narrators are dramatizing everything in order to titillate the viewers, but the Television Ministry is required to design documentaries to be serious, informative, accurate, and educational. If the majority of people do not like the serious documentaries, that is their problem. Instead of designing documentaries to appease the people who have little or no interest in learning about the world, it is better to restrict reproduction to the people who are more interested in learning about the world. Then every generation will be more interested in serious documentaries.

This attitude of titillating people with false or dramatized information in order to entice them into learning about something is deceiving the people. This was mentioned here in regards to the manner in which some adults are trying to deceive children into learning a skill. Instead of deceiving children into desiring a skill or a particular job, the schools should be designed to be honest and useful, and we should restrict reproduction to the people who are more interested in learning a skill. Then every generation will have a greater interest in learning a skill.

When television was first developed, it was necessary for the businesses to broadcast the television programs through radio antennas, but today that technique is a waste of resources and radio frequencies. Furthermore, the antennas make the city look ugly, and the antennas on hilltops make the hills look ugly.

Eventually the technology developed to distribute television through cable networks, but today it's more practical to use the Internet. That will allow the city to distribute television programs and the Internet with only one cable.

When television was first developed, video recording and editing equipment was crude, so a lot of the television shows were broadcast live, and the public had to watch one of the shows that were being broadcast at the time they wanted to watch television.

Today, however, it is more practical to create video files, put them on the Internet, and allow people to watch whichever they want, and whenever they want. There is no longer a need for live television.

If the Journalism or Television Ministry decides that some event should be broadcast live, such as information about an earthquake or tornado, it can be put on the Internet live, as we do with a WebCam, and people can watch it on their phone, computer, or a public video room, and eventually from the monitors on the chest of a robot.

The live news reports should identify the date of the video at the beginning of the video, or within the video, as is typical for security camera video, so that we know when it was created. The reason is that some of those videos are likely to be saved, and it is irritating and confusing to listen to a person talk about "today" or "last week" and not knowing which day he is referring to.

With YouTube videos, that is usually not a problem because the date of the video is usually within a few days that it was posted, and the posting date is identified.

This is also a problem with documentaries, such as the Time Team series from Britain. The people in those documentaries often refer to some previous archaeological event as being conducted "last year", or in 2007, but they never identify the date that they are recording that part of the video. The reason is because most TV programs are created to broadcast as soon as they have been completed, and the people producing the programs don't consider the possibility that people might want to watch the programs years or decades later. It is possible that people centuries from now will want to watch some of our documentaries.

The copyright date is not necessarily the date that the video was recorded because some documentaries contain video that was created over a span of years. Furthermore, the copyright date usually doesn't show until the end of the program, so if a person wants to know the copyright date, he has to skip to the end of the video, search for the copyright date, and then go back to the beginning.

In order to improve this situation, the Journalism and Television Ministries can require people to identify the date of the recording at the beginning of the video. If the program contains video from a previous year, then that should be identified, also.

The free enterprise systems and the democracies allow individual citizens and organizations to produce whatever video they please, and distribute it through the Internet. Millions of videos are uploaded to YouTube every day, and there are other sites accepting videos.

However, the lack of standards is allowing the Zionist organizations, pedophile networks, charities, businesses, and citizens, including mentally ill people, to produce videos that promote propaganda, deception, and nonsense.

Furthermore, many citizens post copies of television programs and other people's videos, which makes searching for a video more time-consuming because the same videos are scattered throughout the search results.

The Journalism Ministry is responsible for setting standards for all of the videos that are put on the Internet from citizens and organizations. The Journalism Ministry is required to prevent citizens from posting copies of videos, and they can request intellectual trials for the people that they suspect of producing propaganda or deception.

If people continue posting videos on the Internet at the rate they are doing today, there will eventually be a point at which the computers that hold the videos will need more land and energy than we can provide.

This is another example of how a free enterprise system is impractical today. Nobody can provide leadership to the free enterprise system.

Another example is that the people creating crypto currencies are consuming enormous amounts of energy and computers, but there is no benefit to society for what they are doing. They are wasting resources and their labor on a worthless activity.

This constitution puts the government in control of the economy, and their goal is to improve life for everybody, so they will be under pressure to reduce the labor and resources involved with everything we do, and they will be under pressure to ensure that our activities are beneficial.

Three of the ways that the government will be able to reduce the desire of people to create videos are:

1)		A lot of citizens are posting videos on the Internet because they are trying to make money, but this economic system does not have money, so that eliminates that reason for making videos.
2)		Many citizens produce videos because they are lonely, and they are trying to attract a friend or spouse, but the Social Division must continuously experiment with a variety of leisure and social activities, including courtship activities, to help people find friends and activities. The lonely people have a much better chance of finding friends at those social activities compared to making videos, so the Television Ministry is authorized to prohibit people from making those type of videos.
3)		A lot of businesses and other organizations are post videos on the Internet in order to promote themselves or their products, but this Constitution prohibits businesses from advertising themselves, so that eliminates the main reason that organizations produce videos.

In a free enterprise system, businesses encourage people to purchase WebCams, video editing software, and video cameras, and to post videos on the Internet, because businesses have no concern for whether the videos have any value, or whether we are wasting our time producing or watching the videos. The businesses look for ways to exploit us.

However, the ministers are in competition to bring improvements to our lives, so they are under pressure to find ways to reduce the worthless activities and wasted resources and labor. Therefore, instead of encouraging us to put videos on the Internet, or try to set a world record, or try to win a beauty contest, or get a pet dog, they will analyze what we do and the reasons we do it, and try to find ways of improving our lives and activities. They will observe us in the same manner that a farmer observes his pigs and chickens, or that the manager of a zoo is observing the animals, and they will try to improve our lives.

The videos that are watched the most often are the music videos, but in a free enterprise system, there is no concern for who is watching those videos, whether they benefit from them, or whether they are only listening to the music.

The Television and Journalism Ministries must investigate and experiment with the concept of music videos. For example:

•		If the people accessing a particular music video are only listening to the music, then it would be better to create an audio file of the music in order to reduce computer storage and Internet bandwidth.
•		The music videos for children are extremely popular, but do children benefit from sitting alone in front of a phone or computer and watching music videos? Or would children have a better life if they spent their leisure time at the recreational facilities for children? For example, the children could get together to arrange for robot musicians to play music, and they could listen to the music, or sing with the robots. That would give them an activity that they can do with other children, or their mother. In addition it gets them into the habit of working with robots and computer software.

The Leisure and Social Clubs Ministries must experiment with activities, and it is conceivable that provide people with so many activities that nobody wants to sit at home alone to watch a music video on their phone or computer. The adults might also prefer to get together in one of the social facilities to listen to music or watch music videos with their friends or family members.

In a free enterprise system, the organizations and citizens try to exploit us for profit, but when we are living in a city in which the government officials and the citizens are competing to bring improvements to our culture, we are certain to discover that the leisure activities that are popular today are enjoyable only because we don't have any better alternatives yet.

Once we begin competing to improve our culture, we are certain to discover that there are lots of more pleasant ways to spend our life compared to playing games on a cell phone, solving crossword puzzles, practicing the game of golf, and taking a walk with a pet dog. The future generations will have a completely different set of leisure activities, holiday celebrations, and social affairs.

The free enterprise system gives everybody 24-hour access to television and Internet videos, but the Journalism Ministry has the authority to determine when television and Internet videos are available. This allows the ministry to conduct such experiments as restricting television programs and Internet videos for children to certain hours of the day, or only certain hours during the weekends. That type of restriction allows the ministry to put pressure on children to find something to do during the day besides watching videos.

The Journalism Ministry can also put restrictions on what the adults have access to. For example, since almost everybody would be working during the daytime, there would be no need to provide access to videos during the day. Therefore, the Journalism Ministry could disable the videos during the daytime, and provide access to them only during the evenings and weekends. In such a case, if somebody tried to access an Internet video during the daytime, he would get an error message.

By giving computers the ability to identify a person, the Journalism Ministry could allow people who work the night shift to have access to television during the daytime.

By identifying the person, the computer would also know what job he has, or training courses he is going through, and the computer could let him see educational videos that were appropriate for his job or education.

As of 2024, the Internet videos require a tremendous amount of electricity, labor, and other resources to store and distribute. How many of those videos are worth saving for the future generations? After several centuries, there will be a phenomenal number of those videos. Will people in the future eventually come to the conclusion that the majority are worthless burdens, and discard them?

The Journalism Ministry has to make a decision about which videos to save for the future, and how long to save them.