Free speech is DEAD - F.E.C. will Kill BLOGS next year

[AnIndependentTexan]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/08/politics/main659955.shtml

Beginning next year, the F.E.C. will institute new rules on the restricted uses of the Internet as it relates to political speech.

“I think those questions are going to have to be asked and answered,” said Lillian BeVier, a First Amendment expert at the University of Virginia. “It’s going to be an issue and it should be an issue.”

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. Someone go to Free Republic and be a fly on the wall.

What do they think about this new restriction?

[Dying Eagle]

2. this is bullshit

whats next shutting down DU! Fucking Fascists.

[itzamirakul]

3. The knife cuts both ways...

if they kill blogs, they will necessarily kill the ability of the rightwing to propagandize also. If we got the FCC to stop trying to give away our air waves to big corporations with a massive email campaign, I think we can do the same with the FEC. They work for us, dammit, not the other way round. We have to keep remembering where the power really lies. MANDATE MY ASS! 49% of Americans don't want this administration, so that is a lot of people for them to rule agaisnt.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. they don't need blogs anymore. They control the media.

[Mandate My Ass]

8. You called?

:7


If they're so worried about political attacks, why not outlaw political attack ads? What actually has their panties in a bunch is that blogs don't follow the pre-approved script and are effective at disseminating real information quickly. I hope the ACLU jumps all over this one.

[Straight Shooter]

4. Federal Election Commission -- bah!

"People are pretty smart in assuming that if a blog is making a case on one side that it’s partisan. The problem is when a blog pretends to hold neutrality but is actually partisan."

Dem Underground is clearly partisan, clearly represents itself. That's not what they're trying to regulate, they can't regulate that or 99.99 percent of blogs would go down.

Good effin' luck to them, because they start with the premise that newspapers are supposed to regulate themselves.

"Hello, FEC? I'd like to report the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post."

This is going nowhere. They're just giving us something to keep us off track and take our eye off the ball.

edit: a bit more info

[HamdenRice]

5. This is financial source regulation, not content regulation

This article does not mean blogs will nned to be regulated -- it means closer scrutiny for campaign budgets. If a campaign pays a blog, then the blog has to have a disclaimer and be regulated as campaign material. It does not mean that the regulation needs to be on blogs in general. This is all about tracing campaign funds.

[ClintonTyree]

6. Why don't they start.................

with Right Wing hate Radio first? Clean up the freakin' air waves before delving into cyberspace. Make the Limbaughs, Savages and O'Reillys accountable for THEIR libelous sewage before attacking Blogs.

[Call me Deacon Blues]

9. Seems to me that this won't happen

It is a WORLD wide web, right? No matter what they do, they can't regulate servers in other countries. Of course, after C-Plus conquers the world, it might be a different story.

[Liberal Classic]

10. Thank you McCain/Feingold

How on earth would this be enforced?

[MatrixEscape]

12. China is setting an example ...

But it has not been easy for them. This is an older article, but there is much information on China's Net control:

http://www.glo.org/article1072.html

SHANGHAI, China has the most extensive Internet censorship in the world, regularly denying local users access to 19,000 Web sites that the government deems threatening, a study by Harvard Law School researchers finds.

The study, which tested access from multiple points in China over six months, found that Beijing blocked thousands of the most popular news, political and religious sites, along with selected entertainment and educational destinations. The researchers said censors sometimes punished people who sought forbidden information by temporarily making it hard for them to gain any access to the Internet.

Defying predictions that the Internet was inherently too diverse and malleable for state control, China has denied a vast majority of its 46 million Internet users access to information that it feels could weaken its authoritarian power. Beijing does so even as it allows Internet use for commercial, cultural, educational and entertainment purposes, which it views as essential in a globalized era.

Only the most determined and technologically savvy users can evade the filtering, and they do so at some personal risk, the study says. "If the purpose of such filtering is to influence what the average Chinese Internet user sees, success could be within grasp," said Jonathan Zittrain, a professor at the law school and a co-author of the study.

[Liberal Classic]

13. Ah yes, the Great Firewall of China

I've always thought it noteworthy that the Chinese government censored political opinion but doesn't censor pornography. Gives a sense of what they really fear.

[borlis]

11. somehow if you are a republican it will be ok

Remember there are 2 sets of rules in shrubs America.

[cheezus]

14. all I can say is.......... GOOD LUCK!

if the RIAA can't beat the nerds, there's no way the feds are going to be able to