Atrios on the necessity of HR 1606 - vs. the shutdown of DU and FR

[swag]

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_atrios_archive.html#114261862094704348

Kos has more on the stupid goo-gooers who don't understand what they're dealing with. I'm struck by the number of people at Kos and elsewhere who just really do not understand the issues at play. It has nothing to do with how much advertising revenue Markos gets. Unless the internet is exempted from the legal definition of "public communication" or other similarly strong safeguards are put into place then sites like Democratic Underground and the Free Republic would have to shut down or reform as political committees. If, as reformers want, state party committees have to start putting a value on posting up a link to a federal canddiate sites then links to candidates or republications of campaign materials would have to be assigned a specific value (how I have no idea). It wouldn't just impact the ability of Markos to make money, it would make it literally impossible for him to run the site as he currently does. It wouldn't just impact "big bloggers" it would potentially impact everyone.

edited to clear up my misunderstanding, for which I now apologize

HR 4900 bad. HR 1606 good.

The first {bill} is called HR 1606, and it keeps the internet unregulated. This is what us bloggers want. We think the internet's pretty great, and we want to see proof that more participation in the political system is a bad thing before deciding to regulate speech online. The 'reformers' are fighting this bill tooth and nail.

The second bill is HR 4900. This is from the reform camp, and it could possibly put blogs like DailyKos and MyDD out of business. We simply can't afford to submit forms to the FEC on every candidate that we link to, for instance, and there's no guarantee that HR 4900 won't force us to do exactly that. It's also absurdly illogical. Newspapers and TV stations with clear partisan affiliations are considered media under the media exemption and can endorse candidates and talk politics without coming under campaign finance regulations, but not blogs.

[MADem]

1. The comments are worth reading, as well

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=atrios&comment=114261862094704348

[Sammy Pepys]

2. What's happening with this bill?

I pulled it up, and apparently the House voted it down in November. Is someone trying to resurrect it?

[swag]

3. Some updates, with some interesting opinions from all over the spectrum.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=hr+1606&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d

[flyingfysh]

4. what if DU were hosted in Canada?

Would American law then apply?

[RazzleDazzle]

5. That's it in a nutshell

It's also absurdly illogical. Newspapers and TV stations with clear partisan affiliations are considered media under the media exemption and can endorse candidates and talk politics without coming under campaign finance regulations, but not blogs.

Blogs are MEDIA, period.

[rpgamerd00d]

6. Blogs are MEDIA, period.

QFT