The Coming End of Free Speech on the Internet: FEC Censorship

[bripat9643]

Where is the evidence that Verizon threatened to cut Drudge's bandwidth? What stops drudge from switching to another provider?

They have already cut Netflix's bandwidth. I'm trying to frame it in a way that you dummies will care about. I could've put FoxNews.com instead.

You didn't answer the question. I use Netflix all the time, and their bandwidth is perfectly adequate.

Yea because Netflix is paying them to let people access them on the internet now. Suppose Verizon didn't like USMB? I wonder if USMB could afford to pay them.

Then they could switch to another provider. Most big corporations don't give a damn about your political views so long as your money is green.

Except most people can't. I live in Fairfax County VA. Top 5 in the richest counties in America every single year and I have just 2 options for fast internet. Cox and Verizon. If one of those doesn't like your little internet business then SUCKS, your entire Northern Virginia market is gone! Not to mention the rest of the country that uses that ISP!

So if I, right next to the capital of the free world, have only 2 ISP options, imagine the rest of the country.

Any big website like The Drudge Report can easily relocate his servers to any area served by another provided. In fact, most such websites are hosted in corporate data centers. The contract for their bandwidth with the data center, not with some service provider like Verizon. The service provider can only control how much band with their customers have available. They can't control the bandwidth to any of the websites they visit. At least, they don't even attempt it at this point.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Of course Stat doesn't care if free speech is censored as he has nothing of import to say on any serious topic.

Go play with your Inane Clown Posse, hun.

Silly, the bigger threat to free speech is voter suppression. Everyone knows that.

Should do away with voting altogether for how much good it does us when idiots and dicksucks keep getting into office because they gobbled more dick than their competition. How often do lawmakers call you up and ask your opinion about a law being discussed? How often do they just do whatever their campaign donors sday to do?

 

[Camp]

Can pass all the laws they like. Murder's illegal too . How it being illegal working as a deterrent?

How are you going to prosecute someone for murder if it isn't illegal?

How are you are you going to force people to pay the fine/tax of Obamacare if one does not/can not afford to have health insurance?

The far fight robot response that as usual, makes no sense.

 

[TheOldSchool]

They have already cut Netflix's bandwidth. I'm trying to frame it in a way that you dummies will care about. I could've put FoxNews.com instead.

You didn't answer the question. I use Netflix all the time, and their bandwidth is perfectly adequate.

Yea because Netflix is paying them to let people access them on the internet now. Suppose Verizon didn't like USMB? I wonder if USMB could afford to pay them.

Then they could switch to another provider. Most big corporations don't give a damn about your political views so long as your money is green.

Except most people can't. I live in Fairfax County VA. Top 5 in the richest counties in America every single year and I have just 2 options for fast internet. Cox and Verizon. If one of those doesn't like your little internet business then SUCKS, your entire Northern Virginia market is gone! Not to mention the rest of the country that uses that ISP!

So if I, right next to the capital of the free world, have only 2 ISP options, imagine the rest of the country.

Any big website like The Drudge Report can easily relocate his servers to any area served by another provided. In fact, most such websites are hosted in corporate data centers. The contract for their bandwidth with the data center, not with some service provider like Verizon.

Omg you have no idea how the internet works.

 

[Kosh]

Let's get this topic back on track. The OP has nothing to do with net neutrality.

Basically, some liberals want to expand the definition of "electioneering" to include a wider range of public airing of political opinions, and therefore subject them to campaign finance regulations.

THAT is the insanity in play here.

Yes the far left wants to get FOX NEWS to be setup to a 527 and the far left wanted to be one the ones to decide how would be labeled as a 527..

 

[g5000]

I don't see this as a threat only to online journals. It is also a threat to any newspaper or other printed journals.

If a newspaper endorses a candidate, is the FEC going to demand a list of their subscribers?

That's where this is headed.

 

[Kosh]

Can pass all the laws they like. Murder's illegal too . How it being illegal working as a deterrent?

How are you going to prosecute someone for murder if it isn't illegal?

How are you are you going to force people to pay the fine/tax of Obamacare if one does not/can not afford to have health insurance?

The far fight robot response that as usual, makes no sense.

Says the far left drone that supports Obama illegal wars.

 

[Statistikhengst]

For those who are slow on the uptake (uh, that would pretty much be all Conservatives), the write-up in the OP is from the Washington Examiner, an extreme-reactionary RW rag.

Furthermore, it gives no details. It only says:

"Claiming that thousands of public comments condemning “dark money” in politics can’t be ignored, the Democrat-chaired Federal Election Commission on Wednesday appeared ready to open the door to new regulations on donors, bloggers and others who use the Internet to influence policy and campaigns."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, the word "appeared" is enough to cause Righties to go apoplectic.

BTW, the Federal Elections Commision is NON-PARTISAN.

That should tell you right there how off the article is.

And finally, it has NOTHING to do with net neutrality, as OLD already pointed out.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

You didn't answer the question. I use Netflix all the time, and their bandwidth is perfectly adequate.

Yea because Netflix is paying them to let people access them on the internet now. Suppose Verizon didn't like USMB? I wonder if USMB could afford to pay them.

Then they could switch to another provider. Most big corporations don't give a damn about your political views so long as your money is green.

Except most people can't. I live in Fairfax County VA. Top 5 in the richest counties in America every single year and I have just 2 options for fast internet. Cox and Verizon. If one of those doesn't like your little internet business then SUCKS, your entire Northern Virginia market is gone! Not to mention the rest of the country that uses that ISP!

So if I, right next to the capital of the free world, have only 2 ISP options, imagine the rest of the country.

Any big website like The Drudge Report can easily relocate his servers to any area served by another provided. In fact, most such websites are hosted in corporate data centers. The contract for their bandwidth with the data center, not with some service provider like Verizon.

Omg you have no idea how the internet works.

Few do. If more did they'd quit trying to pass laws to govern it.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Let's get this topic back on track. The OP has nothing to do with net neutrality.

Basically, some liberals want to expand the definition of "electioneering" to include a wider range of public airing of political opinions, and therefore subject them to campaign finance regulations.

THAT is the insanity in play here.

Ah shoot I kneejerked. Well that's not so cool. I doubt it'll happen. The internet is too big.

 

[g5000]

Those of you who think this FEC proposal is a good idea, ask yourselves if you are really okay with the federal government collecting lists of subscribers to political journals.

 

[regent]

Speech as most of our rights have limits.

 

[Kosh]

For those who are slow on the uptake (uh, that would pretty much be all Conservatives), the write-up in the OP is from the Washington Examiner, an extreme-reactionary RW rag.

Furthermore, it gives no details. It only says:

"Claiming that thousands of public comments condemning “dark money” in politics can’t be ignored, the Democrat-chaired Federal Election Commission on Wednesday appeared ready to open the door to new regulations on donors, bloggers and others who use the Internet to influence policy and campaigns."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, the word "appeared" is enough to cause Righties to go apoplectic.

BTW, the Federal Elections Commision is NON-PARTISAN.

That should tell you right there how off the article is.

And finally, it has NOTHING to do with net neutrality, as OLD already pointed out.

Says the far left drone that links to far left hyper partisan blog sites for their "facts" and even sites that do not fact check their own bloggers..

 

[bripat9643]

You didn't answer the question. I use Netflix all the time, and their bandwidth is perfectly adequate.

Yea because Netflix is paying them to let people access them on the internet now. Suppose Verizon didn't like USMB? I wonder if USMB could afford to pay them.

Then they could switch to another provider. Most big corporations don't give a damn about your political views so long as your money is green.

Except most people can't. I live in Fairfax County VA. Top 5 in the richest counties in America every single year and I have just 2 options for fast internet. Cox and Verizon. If one of those doesn't like your little internet business then SUCKS, your entire Northern Virginia market is gone! Not to mention the rest of the country that uses that ISP!

So if I, right next to the capital of the free world, have only 2 ISP options, imagine the rest of the country.

Any big website like The Drudge Report can easily relocate his servers to any area served by another provided. In fact, most such websites are hosted in corporate data centers. The contract for their bandwidth with the data center, not with some service provider like Verizon.

Omg you have no idea how the internet works.

ROFL! I was going to say that about you. You posted an idiocy by claiming that Verizon could lock the Drudge website out of a given geographical area.

 

[bripat9643]

Speech as most of our rights have limits.

Nope, but government always seeks to impose limits on them.

 

[Camp]

Can pass all the laws they like. Murder's illegal too . How it being illegal working as a deterrent?

How are you going to prosecute someone for murder if it isn't illegal?

How are you are you going to force people to pay the fine/tax of Obamacare if one does not/can not afford to have health insurance?

The far fight robot response that as usual, makes no sense.

Says the far left drone that supports Obama illegal wars.

There have been no illegal wars. That right wing robotic talking point is a right wing robot lie. Why don't you start a thread about Obama's illegal wars and quit droning this one with your robotic talking points. If we want to hear them we can tune in conservative talk radio and FOX and hear them endlessly all morning, day and night.

 

[Ernie S.]

Of course Stat doesn't care if free speech is censored as he has nothing of import to say on any serious topic.

Go play with your Inane Clown Posse, hun.

He lives in Germany. He can say whatever he wants..... err no he can't, can he?
But he has abdicated his rights even though he still feels free to comment on our politics while far removed from the fallout of policy he supports.

 

[Kosh]

Speech as most of our rights have limits.

Freedom of Speech is not "Free"..

 

[Kosh]

Can pass all the laws they like. Murder's illegal too . How it being illegal working as a deterrent?

How are you going to prosecute someone for murder if it isn't illegal?

How are you are you going to force people to pay the fine/tax of Obamacare if one does not/can not afford to have health insurance?

The far fight robot response that as usual, makes no sense.

Says the far left drone that supports Obama illegal wars.

There have been no illegal wars. That right wing robotic talking point is a right wing robot lie. Why don't you start a thread about Obama's illegal wars and quit droning this one with your robotic talking points. If we want to hear them we can tune in conservative talk radio and FOX and hear them endlessly all morning, day and night.

And thus proving once again the far left drones will support illegal wars of Obama as they continue to post their religious propaganda.

 

[g5000]

Speech as most of our rights have limits.

So does government.