Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Does the FCC's failure to fine Limbaugh represent regulatory capture? [View all]onenote
(42,700 posts)81. I think its prudent to be scared of undefined "regulation" of speech
I'm still waiting to see a description of what form of regulation you think is appropriate: who and what is regulated? And where does it stop. Limpy has influence that goes beyond the size of his audience. But then again, so did Breitbart. Does that justify regulating speech on the Internet?
The devil is in the details. Without any details, signing of for "regulation" of speech is not a route that I would choose to go down.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
87 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Does the FCC's failure to fine Limbaugh represent regulatory capture? [View all]
shcrane71
Mar 2012
OP
I believe all broadcasting either through airwaves, digital, or satalite should be tiered regulated.
Great Caesars Ghost
Mar 2012
#63
Why not work on both? It would be difficult for AFN to justify keeping Rush's show if the FCC
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#8
Yeah, the AFN thing is a stronger case from the perspective of disrespect for the CIC.
HopeHoops
Mar 2012
#19
My post says nothing about support for disbanding the FCC. I just want the FCC to work,
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#10
Of course you want the FCC to work. Which is why you've used the latest meme.....
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#12
lol...wtf??? I have no idea where you're coming from, but have a good day (after you reread the OP)
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#13
I am coming from the place where I question why-a low count poster might bring up the latest
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#14
Thanks for the vetting rather than responding to the post. Why not place me on your ignore list?
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#15
So you're saying that it's NOT regulatory capture that the FCC is failing to enforce the
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#30
If the Fairness Doctrine doesn't exist anymore, why did lawmakers try to get rid of it in 2011?
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#36
Rhandi Rhodes is a false equivalency. She wouldn't be if you could name a non-subscription station
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#25
K, I'll go back and tell the community stations that said they started out as LPFM
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#32
What is considered obscene is not static. Women vote. Women can be appointed to the FCC.
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#37
You're correct. It has been static, but these are unprecedented times, and precedents have been
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#44
There are not many times that I long for the "good-ol' days" of the 50s or 60s, but
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#45
The Left has ceded a monopolization of public airwaves to the Right for decades, and we see
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#65
Thanks for the long, meandering justification for the Left handing the public airwaves to the Right.
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#69
huh??? AM radio carries jazz?? Where you from?!?! And, you're missing the point.
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#71
Oh, you lucky dawg... 1. It's beautiful up there. 2. Canadians are really nice aren't they???
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#73
Take me with you!!! I want to live amongst the Canadians and their good AM radio
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#76
If ever Americans resolve the issue of regulatory capture (the FCC rolling over while giving the AM
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#80
I know you want to compare of very different media outlets, but those comparisons don't
shcrane71
Mar 2012
#82
I'm not ducking the question: What will this "regulation" you are advocating entail?
onenote
Mar 2012
#83