Skip to main content

View Diary: ENOUGH (189 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That whole "Broadcasting in the Public Interest".. (8+ / 0-)

    ...is so 1970's...

    •  It's also a crock. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sparhawk

      Regulation of speech by airwaves or printed word isn't the business the government should be in.

      I'm not much of a libertarian (small L) but this is one that you'd hope liberals would want to avoid.  Regulation of speech.

      The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10

      by Rick Aucoin on Mon Apr 18, 2011 at 11:51:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There's a difference. (6+ / 0-)

        They say money is speech. The result is that he with millions to spend can amplify his one voice to be louder than the combined voices of a million people who have no cash to spare. The point to note is that the money is the amplifier, it takes one opinion and amplifies it unnaturally.

        Public airwaves, broadcasting, does the same thing. Anyone can use the 1st amendment with their own voice, their own throat. But there is limited airwaves, and one person who has a powerful antenna can amplify their one lone opinion louder than the million who have no antenna at all.

        Money is not speech, it is an amplifier of a person's individual speech.
        The radio is not speech, it is an amplifier of a person's individual speech.

        And amplifiers need to be regulated in order to prevent one person from using that money/radio as a lever against the public interest.

        After all, that dollar bill in your pocket holds value because of the mass of american people standing behind it, and using it against the population is a form of betrayal, sort of like biting the hand that feeds you. Well, same thing with the public airwaves, they belong to all of us and using them to deceive us into self-destructive actions is also a betrayal of flesh and blood americans bordering on treason, imho.

        •  Same with printing presses. (0+ / 0-)

          The guy who can afford to buy all the printing presses should be regulated too, by the same logic.

          Sorry, I don't buy that just because I loathe the sorts of crap these guys use the cable channels, the airwaves, and the press to say that they should be regulated by the government therefore.

          Content should not be the business of the government.  Regulate the broadcast airwaves to make sure those with licenses to that frequency can utilize them, yes, that's like playing traffic cop, no problem.

          But getting into the business of what content is allowed at all?  Infringement.

          The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. - Kos 8/31/10

          by Rick Aucoin on Mon Apr 18, 2011 at 07:13:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  airwaves belong to US (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        foucaultspendulum, blueoasis

        FCC enforces a monopoly.

        it's a very different kettle of fish than the printed word.

        An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

        by mightymouse on Mon Apr 18, 2011 at 06:00:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site