This is weird, because don't both parties loathe the fairness doctrine because its repeal enabled their requisite propaganda outlets? Could this be that rare bird of a principled take from a politician? (However misguided as you mention.) Can't be.
-
-
-
it’s the authoritarian position tbh. though yes, technically a principle. really scraping the bottom of the barrel here...
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
No opinions outside the establishment allowed!
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
It was created to suppress talk radio shows, will they expand it to podcasts?
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Doubt it could be applied to cable anyway. The constitutional justification for it was that the broadcasters were using the public airways so could be regulated in the public interest.
-
agree this would have a hard time holding up in court
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Let's steelman this though. Duverger's Law says that an FPTP system always stabilizes around two roughly equally sized coalitions. A rule like "no excommunicating the other coalition" might have pragmatic value.
-
(FWIW though I'm uncomfortable giving the govt the power to enforce that, for the obvious reasons)
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
The crazy thing is, if voters voted on issues not party/politician- it would be so much more productive. So much dumbassery in wanting to win rather than actually govern
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Also important to remember there aren't any other sources of information other than those regulated by the FCC.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
