121–130 of 278 posts
[flagged]
Not always the case with Section 315, and late night and talk shows have been exempted in the past. The problem here is that this is on a case-by-case basis, and we have a particularly politically-charged executive agency.
It is a great illustration of how transition to the authoritarianism happens (I've seen it happen in Russia in 2000s). At first you don't even need censorship, you just need to scare owners of channels/newspapers enough, so that they self-censor.
Fear is the enforcement mechanism because it can't be challenged in court. It is long past time for everyone in tech to take a long hard look at the current situation and stop doing anything that financially benefits Musk, Ellison, or Thiel.
Weird how Larry Ellison manages to do this to everything he touches
Maybe a cynic will say "this was the plan", but if it was, its not a very good plan? If anything, tech executives benefited enormously from their opponents being overly attached to legacy media communication strategies. When Bezos kills the Post or Ellison kills CBS, the talent doesnt magically disappear.
It is a great illustration of how transition to the authoritarianism happens (I've seen it happen in Russia in 2000s). At first you don't even need censorship, you just need to scare owners of channels/newspapers enough, so that they self-censor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Already in 2026, Colbert has hosted Senator Jon Ossoff and Governor Josh Shapiro who are both up for re-election this year. Why no probe in those cases?
Like you said: re -election. Re-election just maintains the status quo. The concern here is Talarico specifically, and that he might flip Texas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Free speech goes as far as the people who defend it. CBS and its parent company are greedy cowards. If they won't defend free speech they're the ones causing its downfall. Governments rule only with the consent of the people. If you lay down and give away your freedoms you aren't the victim, you're the perpetrator.
Victim blaming? Greedy for trying to stay in business. If you didn’t fight hard enough it’s your fault? You let the government of the hook to easily. By your logic you‘re a perpetrator too because he don’t blame the real bad guy
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah the fault lies with the American public for talking the freedom/exceptionalism talk, social projection of grit and ruggedness while the reality is learned helplessness and codependency
democracies past, present, and future inevitably crumble as the need to cater to the demos grows greater and greater with every generation of voters. i know this is a contrivance but nevertheless: we don't consult the entire hospital how to treat my heart condition yet we accept on face value that obeying the vagaries of the hoi polloi is the best way to decide who controls the levers of power in civil society.
[flagged]
They also cite that they have elected to not enforce the rule against conservative radio hosts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uh, why exactly are we inventing a completely speculative alternate possibility when this is perfectly in line with Brendan Carr's multiple public statements and recent examples wielding FCC regulatory power to strong arm media organizations that he claims have a pattern of liberal bias, as well as the recent actions of CBS.
We could also speculate that the poster throwing out speculations is itself an account controlled by a foreign state actor (or a domestic one) trying to muddy the waters of discussion. We shouldn't do that, but we could. A strong piece of evidence against the FSA theory is that the posts are pretty ham-handed and unsubtle. But maybe that's part of the plan.
It is a great illustration of how transition to the authoritarianism happens (I've seen it happen in Russia in 2000s). At first you don't even need censorship, you just need to scare owners of channels/newspapers enough, so that they self-censor.