Just Abolish The FCC

[The T]

If you believe we shouldn't have a government...May I suggest Haiti or Somalia?

Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. ~Thomas Paine
​

Matt? Learn it, Live it, KNOW it.​

Sooner or later ideas have to be discussed in the context of 21st century reality and not just 18th century thought, no matter how noble and enduring it may be. Progress my friend.

Tell us how human needs, wants and desires have changed through history especially when it comes to the liberty of the individual? Does that change because the calendar has advanced? Does truth?

*I* think NOT. Be careful in your answer because History will NOT be kind to you.

Your turn.

 

[JoeB131]

[

What...we have the FCC and a myriad of other government agencies meddling in media, just as you desire, yet we end up with the 'horrors' of 90% of the media owned by "about five companies"?

How is that possible?

Further, your statement is bullshit. There are THOUSANDS of media outlets. Care to demonstrate with specificity exactly how "90% of the media is owned by about five companies"? The floor is yours...

Educating you is a waste of time, dude.

 

[JoeB131]

And of course O has surpassed bush debt by magnitudes and made all of that money disappear into his buddies pockets while the rest of us continued to get fleeced.

Um, not really, but I know you need to believe that.

Not really HOW Joe?

Oh, sorry, is this another "Because you say so" argument?

How foolish of me to question...

Guy, If I wasted my time explaining it to you, you STILL wouldn't understand.

 

[KNB]

Are you people serious with this? "Abolish the FCC"?

The FCC has been a compliant puppet of media corporations since the 1980s. FCC Deregulation after deregulation has allowed the overwhelming majority of American media to become owned and operated by only 7 corporations, two of which aren't even American. All the while those corporate media outlets are feeding the public total bullshit as "news" instead of focusing on unconstitutional US spying, unconstitutional US torture, unconstitutional US war, illegal gerrymandering, illegal corporate tax evasion, the inherent failure of "trickle down" theory, or any real solutions on how to solve the Greenhouse Effect. So now that corporations safely control 80% of everything that Americans see, hear, and read on a daily basis, and the head of the FCC is a powerless tool of corporations, this means that the 1% have made the FCC so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.

Good idea, America. Corporations don't have enough legal free rein already, so it's time to abolish EVERY government oversight agency.

 

[SmedlyButler]

I said I believed the em spectrum was "public property" (in the domain of public trust). And therefore the public needs some mechanism to protect that trust. That's a clear statement of principle. You didn't respond in agreement or disagreement. Instead you morphed it into some kind assault on freedom of speech and communication.

If you want to discuss my point fine. If not, fine.
If you want to discuss speech and communication we could do that if the angle is interesting enough.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. ~Thomas Paine
​

Matt? Learn it, Live it, KNOW it.​

Sooner or later ideas have to be discussed in the context of 21st century reality and not just 18th century thought, no matter how noble and enduring it may be. Progress my friend.

Tell us how human needs, wants and desires have changed through history especially when it comes to the liberty of the individual? Does that change because the calendar has advanced? Does truth?

*I* think NOT. Be careful in your answer because History will NOT be kind to you.

Your turn.

The EM spectrum was not an issue in the 18th century.

 

[SmedlyButler]

See Above

 

[The T]

Sooner or later ideas have to be discussed in the context of 21st century reality and not just 18th century thought, no matter how noble and enduring it may be. Progress my friend.

Tell us how human needs, wants and desires have changed through history especially when it comes to the liberty of the individual? Does that change because the calendar has advanced? Does truth?

*I* think NOT. Be careful in your answer because History will NOT be kind to you.

Your turn.

The EM spectrum was not an issue in the 18th century.

No shit. I am a licensed Radio Technician...NEXT.

 

[eflatminor]

Um, not really, but I know you need to believe that.

Not really HOW Joe?

Oh, sorry, is this another "Because you say so" argument?

How foolish of me to question...

Guy, If I wasted my time explaining it to you, you STILL wouldn't understand.

Yes Joe, once again, we see you've got nothing. It's a recurring theme with you. Getting rather old to be honest.

 

[eflatminor]

[

What...we have the FCC and a myriad of other government agencies meddling in media, just as you desire, yet we end up with the 'horrors' of 90% of the media owned by "about five companies"?

How is that possible?

Further, your statement is bullshit. There are THOUSANDS of media outlets. Care to demonstrate with specificity exactly how "90% of the media is owned by about five companies"? The floor is yours...

Educating you is a waste of time, dude.

When you actually respond to the point at hand, which would be to show how "90% of the media is owned by five companies", then we can talk about your educational abilities. Your little chart shows what 5 companies own...it in now way shows they own "90% of media". Want to try again?

 

[eflatminor]

Are you people serious with this? "Abolish the FCC"?

Yes, quite serious.

The FCC has been a compliant puppet of media corporations since the 1980s. FCC Deregulation after deregulation has allowed the overwhelming majority of American media to become owned and operated by only 7 corporations, two of which aren't even American. All the while those corporate media outlets are feeding the public total bullshit as "news" instead of focusing on unconstitutional US spying, unconstitutional US torture, unconstitutional US war, illegal gerrymandering, illegal corporate tax evasion, the inherent failure of "trickle down" theory, or any real solutions on how to solve the Greenhouse Effect. So now that corporations safely control 80% of everything that Americans see, hear, and read on a daily basis, and the head of the FCC is a powerless tool of corporations, this means that the 1% have made the FCC so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.

So let me get this straight. The FCC has been a "puppet" of these evil companies, resulting in this intolerable situation where the rich control all our minds...and your solution is to keep the FCC?

Really?

Sounds like your asking for more of what you claim to abhor. I find that odd.

Did you ever think for a moment that without the FCC working in concert with those evil corporations, they would not be able to gain the control they have? After all, without politicians and bureaucrats backing up companies, cronyism and legally-backed control would be impossible. The people have voluntary choice you see...that is, until government and their crony capitalist partners diminish that choice.

But you keep arguing for more laws, agencies and bureaucrats while lamenting what they do, what they have ALWAYS done. Very strange indeed.

Good idea, America. Corporations don't have enough legal free rein already, so it's time to abolish EVERY government oversight agency.

Calling Captain Hyperbole!

 

[eflatminor]

I said I believed the em spectrum was "public property" (in the domain of public trust). And therefore the public needs some mechanism to protect that trust.

Yes, we got that.

That's a clear statement of principle. You didn't respond in agreement or disagreement.

Actually, I did. Allow me to restate: Disagree. Strongly.

Instead you morphed it into some kind assault on freedom of speech and communication.

What exactly is happening over those EM waves? Anything different than is happening on sheets of newspaper? Anything different than a guy on a soapbox? No, it's no different. It's speech. It's communications. It's the conveyance of ideas, products, services, or whatever they hell else the owner of said conveyance wishes to convey!

And sorry, but government has no place regulating communication, no matter the medium.

If you want to discuss my point fine. If not, fine.
If you want to discuss speech and communication we could do that if the angle is interesting enough.

Your point was considered and rejected. You've failed to make a reasonable case. All we've gotten from you is it's a public resource "because you say so".

Pass.

 

[eflatminor]

Are you people serious with this? "Abolish the FCC"?

The FCC has been a compliant puppet of media corporations since the 1980s. FCC Deregulation after deregulation has allowed the overwhelming majority of American media to become owned and operated by only 7 corporations, two of which aren't even American. All the while those corporate media outlets are feeding the public total bullshit as "news" instead of focusing on unconstitutional US spying, unconstitutional US torture, unconstitutional US war, illegal gerrymandering, illegal corporate tax evasion, the inherent failure of "trickle down" theory, or any real solutions on how to solve the Greenhouse Effect. So now that corporations safely control 80% of everything that Americans see, hear, and read on a daily basis, and the head of the FCC is a powerless tool of corporations, this means that the 1% have made the FCC so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.

Good idea, America. Corporations don't have enough legal free rein already, so it's time to abolish EVERY government oversight agency.

One other thought: Are you, or is anyone, being forced to consume the news from those companies. Surely you'll not deny that there are THOUSANDS of media outlets NOT owned by those few corporations. And I assure you, I can easily reference those that have focused on the points you raised. What's preventing you from simply choosing those outlets over the big corporation's offerings?

And, are we to believe that you think you know better than other people who might make a different choice?

 

[SmedlyButler]

You say; "Your point was considered and rejected. You've failed to make a reasonable case. All we've gotten from you is it's a public resource "because you say so"."

Various acts and laws passed by Congress have also said so. The 1927 Act establishes public ownership most unequivocably so I guess you'll have to disagree with the U.S Government, (that's We the People). And of course 1st amendment rights are protected as guaranteed by the Constitution.

United States Radio Act of 1927, Public Law 632, 69th Congress, February 23, 1927.

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act is intended to regulate all forms of interstate and foreign radio transmissions and communications within the United States, its Territories and possessions; to maintain the control of the United States over all the channels of interstate and foreign radio transmission; and to provide for the use of such channels, but not the ownership thereof, by individuals, firms, or corporations, for limited periods of time, under licenses granted by Federal authority, and no such license shall be construed to create any right, beyond the terms, conditions, and periods of the license."

Full Text Here

 

[hazlnut]

I completely agree. I was just thinking this myself the other day. There is absolutely no reason why we need the FCC. It's just another bunch of useless bureaucrats looking to grab power where they can.

Careful with that thinking...

 

[candycorn]

I completely agree. I was just thinking this myself the other day. There is absolutely no reason why we need the FCC. It's just another bunch of useless bureaucrats looking to grab power where they can.

With Its Mission Gone And Its Record Of Mischief, It's Time To Shut Down The FCC - Investors.com

Not sure about abolishing the mission but it does seem as though their duties could be folded into another agency. It seems the only thing they do is charge fines to risque TV acts. As if nobody ever saw a boob before...

 

[Brn2bfree]

The Regime has the federalies studying WE the people.
They consist of the IRS, FCC, DOJ, ATF, OSHA, EPA, NLRB

 

[FA_Q2]

Bandwidth allocation is still an essential part of our national security, the article is wrong about that.

Of course since whenever my private ISP doesn't "allocate" sufficient "bandwidth" I feel completely insecure, nothing personal but do you even think about the fact that you can actually not only survive but PROSPER without the state making every decision for you (for our own "safety" of course) ? I know it's scary but the serfs of Middle Ages Europe were able to do it and I am confident that you have the wherewithal to pull it off too.

"Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind. " -- The Matrix

Take the RED PILL...

Huh?

What are you talking about? I don’t think his reference to bandwidth has anything to do with ISP’s at all. The statement about national security should have given that away. I know you’re smarter than that fox I believe he is referring to the airwave bandwidth that each entity can use to broadcast their signal.

He is correct in his statement (though I think that national security is kind of a senseless way to go about arguing the point). There IS a clear need to have something manage bandwidth. If not, I could create a random radio station in the middle of New York to broadcast my anti-government conspiracy theories. That is just fine BUT after doing so (and sinking my savings creating my new company) someone could come along with a more powerful antenna and override my signal or cross it and make anything I broadcast complete static. Likely my competition silencing me because they are established and have more funds to buy more powerful equipment/jammers. That is NOT alright. The same goes for communications such as aircraft to airport towers. Those bands are regulated so that no one else is allowed to use them making landing much safer than if someone could interfere with that signal even accidentally and then the military specific bands that I think he was referring to by bringing up national security.

Basically, there is little difference managing the bandwidth than there is to creating basic laws for driving. SOMETHING needs to keep the system generally working so that we can communicate and to be quite frank, the free market is unlikely to do so as it is in larger entities interests to BLOCK communication of their competitors.

NOW, the important question here is whether or not the FCC should continue to exist even if there are vital functions that need to be accomplished that the FCC currently takes care of. That also touches on this post as well:

Even the most committed Randian (You come across as a poorly read Randian) cannot dismiss the public trust doctrine without dismissing history itself. It has been accepted in economic and legal theory since Roman Code. Public ownership of resources to one degree or another has not been negated by any rational economic thinker from Smith to Rand to Friedman. In English and U.S. common law it is a well established principle. So your facile retort insinuating an embrace of the concept as "socialism" or "communism" is childishly simplistic and demonstrates which one of us is arguing from subjective dogma without reference to reality.

I will reject the ‘Randian’ at the outset as the label itself is rather misunderstood and normally used as a slander rather than an actual doctrine. I am a libertarian though as I believe eflat is as well.

With that said, the question I made above is the real issue then:

NOW, the important question here is whether or not the FCC should continue to exist even if there are vital functions that need to be accomplished that the FCC currently takes care of.

I will agree with you that there is a real governmental purpose in ensuring that we can actually use the airwaves I will reject the idea that the FCC, in its current form, is necessary for that purpose. The fact is that what we need is an enforcement agency and the FCC is a bureaucratic and legislative agency. I even question why this is accomplished on a national scale rather than a state scale. Beyond identifying the bandwidth associated with specific communications (military, aircraft, emergency etc.) the federal government really has no purview here. Each state can create the rules it sees necessary to ensure that the airwave are not only open but also usable. Federal oversight is a blatant overstep IMHO.

Further, congress write law, not bloated bureaucratic entities looking to justify their existence. The very idea that congress has willfully and blatantly ‘legislated’ their constitutional duties to bureaucratic entities is unacceptable. If there needs to be a law passed in relation to the airwaves then congress can get off their asses and pass the law. Just because I, and others, support the elimination of the FCC do3es not mean that I want to see chaos on the airwaves or even the complete control of such by private enterprise. There are governmental process that exist that are the CORRECT way of governing public resources. That does not include allowing bureaucratic entities write laws, enforce standards that they create out of thin air or enforcing standards that are not under their purview. The core problem with ALL bureaucracies is that they will grow without need and justify themselves even when they are no longer justified. This is almost universal within a bureaucratic agency. I see it all the time myself being a part of the largest bureaucratic agency on the face of the planet – the DoD.

[MENTION=30139]eflatminor[/MENTION] [MENTION=44607]NightFox[/MENTION] I would also like to know what you guys think. Eflat seems dead set against any governmental control over the airwaves (which is NOT control over communication within them) but I kind of want to break it out of the FCC. The existence of the FCC and basic law governing the use of the airwaves are not mutually exclusive. IMHO, the problems with the FCC have almost nothing to do with what they were established to regulate. The problem, for me, is the entire concept of regulatory agencies in general.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yay, we can watch people fucking each other on t.v 24 hours a day for free!

Yup, that is EXACTLY how it should work. Of course, there is the new invention called a button. You can find it on every single TV and TV remote on the market. This nifty thing actually lets you CHANGE THE CHANNEL!!

I know, crazy right.

With this amazing invention, you can actually TURN OFF THE TV or even watch something else entirely. Never again will you be ‘forced’ to view people fucking ever again. I notice that you didn’t complain about people brutally murdering each other so that must be A-OK in your book – just the natural act of fucking is soooo terrible that it must be censored but let’s not go there.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Just came across this post and it's almost 1 am here and I'm too tired to read it the 3 or 4 more times it deserves. First scan looks like it's thought out and not knee jerk. The only comment off the getgo is I don't think giving responsibility to states could work, the national ramifications are just too vast, if anything can be called interstate commerce surely this industry must be. I might think more than any other-I'll have to mull.