1. Post
  2. Post
  3. Post

    I hat would help his would be to bring back the fairness doctrine it prevented this type of pseudo news. Thanks republicans for killing that rule.

  4. Post
  5. Post
    William Merrick

    At the end, the counter-point was not communicated effectively. The important issue is not only that the limitation could lead to unintended consequences, it's that we can't rely on people to make the determination of what entities are legitimately passing the test, no matter how sophisticated they are or how many letters come after their names.

    You could easily see a corporation creating a journalism outlet with the express purpose to subvert the regulators. Enter a "whack-a-mole" kind of game that would be played; hence Citizens United saying, "we're going to do this and see what happens" – they could have been more nuanced by starting out spending a year doing "journalism" and then publishing the documentary. Would they pass the test then? Hmm… so the solution to the problem is to allow people to be free to create content. The viewing person can then decide whether they believe it to be unbiased, or truthful in any way, and have access to more information.

    If you are cynical, thinking that "people will be duped into believing the Hillary documentary", then everything is going to hell anyway – so just get out of the conversation, because no amount of power will ever solve that madness. If you're on the fence, maintain liberty and watch things evolve. Look for the more obvious consequences, like the lobbying that was mentioned.

    Everyone else can see this clearly. It's not a matter that we should leave up to the government to decide. Period.

  6. Post

    There's a debate whether corporations benefit from donations? No, there is no debate. There are the people stating facts that they obviously do and have, and those who represent corporations just childishly denying it. That's not a debate.

    If I pick up a basketball and say "This is a basketball," and someone says "No, that's a fire truck," that's not called a debate.

  7. Post

    Everyone has a right to free speech, even if it's through a megaphone so loud it drowns out any other voice.

  8. Post

    I still want big money out of politics. Im sure theres a correlation between climate change denting politicians and being backed by fossil fuel industries.

  9. Post
  10. Post

    Corporations really don't have worry about the backlash effect anymore, because they can secretly finance the campaigns. They no longer even need to disclose that they gave money to 501cs. So they can funnel money into a group like Citizens United, but no one will ever know about it. So, there is no accountability via consumer behavior like Smith suggests towards the end.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *