Bush's FCC makes it easy to control viewpoints

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (53 of them)

pakistan is a touch further away.

― dyson (dyson), Monday, 2 June 2003 21:52 (twenty years ago) link

Well, ok then: Cuba. The principle is still the same.

The "Foreigners: Obey Our Laws, Even In Your Own Land" attitude here is revealing. I guess some countries are just better (more intent, more brutal) at enforcing it than others.

― chester (synkro), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:27 (twenty years ago) link

that is true but the victims of having that law broken are still going to be in the country of origin.

― dyson (dyson), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:33 (twenty years ago) link

as with Cuba

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:51 (twenty years ago) link

There's nothing wroing with my typing. My keyboard is possesed. I'm glad the NY times website said this to me
"The Member ID fghfgh is not available. We suggest fghfgh5 instead. "

Maybe I am being too condescending. I hope so.

― Mike Hanle y (mike), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 04:04 (twenty years ago) link

The "Foreigners: Obey Our Laws, Even In Your Own Land" attitude here is revealing.

Its closer to foreigners please don't come to our country with the intent of breaking our laws and spitting into our diplomatic faces. Otherwise I guess we could pull the American solution and just stop them at the border and not anyone we remotely feel weary about it.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 13:08 (twenty years ago) link

I dont even want to get into the debate over news... my initial liberal knee-jerk reaction is that this is all tragic, but I would like to know more before I say anything...
I wonder what effect this will have on radio.. goodness knows, NPR can barely even keep classical or jazz programming these days (and there was a n article a few months ago in the Times saying that, Nationwide, they are being outbid for their "public" frequencies by religious organizations), and I wonder if increased centralization in the private market will force them to compete by dropping music programming altoghether (anyone who is aware of what has been going on with them in the last year knows I am not overreacting completely).

― Aaron Grossman (aajjgg), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 13:35 (twenty years ago) link

Let's try this one last time.

American reporters aren't "breaking [your] laws". They are - as I have repeated 234985798234890578934 times already - AMERICAN REPORTERS, PUBLISHING STORIES IN AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS, IN AMERICA, WHERE AMERICAN LAWS ARE THE ONLY LAWS. The laws of the country where they obtain their story don't matter; ONLY THE LAWS OF THE COUNTRY WHERE THEY PUBLISH THEIR STORY MATTERS; if it was the other way around foreign news bureaus would cease to be.

As for "spitting in [your] diplomatic faces", once again, see above: the BC government asked the Seattle Times, through diplomatic channels, to not publish the story. The ST willingly complied. No spit was involved.

― chester (synkro), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 13:59 (twenty years ago) link

They still put it on the website in that case didn't they?

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 14:04 (twenty years ago) link

Fuck you, Canada!

― chester (synkro), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 14:12 (twenty years ago) link

Bite me, yank!

― Dominion of Canada, Tuesday, 3 June 2003 14:16 (twenty years ago) link

you bark, I bite

― Michael Imperioli (James Blount), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 16:06 (twenty years ago) link

okay, guys. relax. we're all buddies here. lets just settle this over a friendly game of hockey.

― dyson (dyson), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 16:10 (twenty years ago) link

if you want real news, do what i do ... read the wall street journal's news page (the editorial page is my all-time favorite sick joke, though sometimes it's akin to the schoolboy laughter of the retarded kid dancing around the lunchroom) or read/listen to non-american news sources (which have their biases, to be sure, but at least the BBC isn't typing GOP/White House blast-faxes verbatim and calling it "news").

― Tad (llamasfur), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 16:21 (twenty years ago) link

the gap between the wall street journal's news page and it's editorial page is astounding (though we do have the editorial page to thank for 'lucky ducky')

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 16:26 (twenty years ago) link

Yes, I love the news page of the wsj (and some of their features are pretty interesting too), but the editorial section is beyond contempt.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 16:29 (twenty years ago) link

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.