• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

NERW: The FCC in Authoritarian Times

Status
Not open for further replies.
DavidEduardo said:
I can tell you from my own experience that I see nothing in the United States today that even remotely resembles the situation I lived under in Ecuador.
Click to expand...

The situation here is not going to be like anything you experienced in other countries, and the people here aren't going to respond to it the way people responded to it there. Why? Because all of the circumstances are different. The laws are different, the history is different. and the people involved are different. They're not using Ecuador as a model. Some are using 19th century US as a model. It won't be the same. That doesn't mean it's not textbook authoritarianism.

DavidEduardo said:
I just see sore losers.
Click to expand...

I'm seeing a sore winner, who's not happy with the fact that he won. But the real problem for us here isn't the president. It's all the people in his administration who are using the power of the government to weaponize things like the FCC against the media. That's what this thread is about. Just because you see it differently doesn't mean it's not happening. Just that it hasn't affected you yet. The things you dislike about your state are now being used by the new authoritarians.
 
I have my disagreements with BigA, but I think he's exactly correct here.

One thing that I perhaps failed to make clear a week ago in my commentary was that I think I am coming at this issue from a small-c conservative point of view. We have been blessed with many decades of relative stability in our government and its systems, in a way few other countries have enjoyed.

Are some things about that government and its systems ripe for improvement? Of course. But the US system of laws provides pathways to democratically bring that change about. I don't think it's "far left" to be arguing against breaking all those systems, and I think it's become very clear over the last week that those precedents and systems - and laws - are being tested in ways none of us have seen in this country in any of our lifetimes.

It's not happening in the same way it did in South America in the 60s or 70s, but that doesn't mean it's not happening.
 
fybush said:
It's not happening in the same way it did in South America in the 60s or 70s, but that doesn't mean it's not happening.
Click to expand...
This sentence says it all. It is happening. It need not happen literally in the exact same way. And being on the other end of the equation does not mean it’s not happening just the same.

None of this can be separated from the rest. It is all part of a systematic effort. Fire everyone who might stand in the way. Threaten (and in a modern twist, dox) the judges who rule unfavorably. The government needn’t send people to judges’ doors when the public will do the job, for free.

Whether one forces the media into submission by literal force and firearm, or by coercion and economic threats, the result is the same: forced compliance. Whether that comes from a leftist philosophy or a far right philosophy, or merely an authoritarian philosophy that finds a willing ally on one side, it also makes no appreciable difference in the result.

What is happening at one agency is interconnected to the others. We are barely out of the proverbial starting gates, but there is no mistaking the direction. It has a uniquely 21st century twist on the old playbook, but it’s all right there.
 
fybush said:
I think it's become very clear over the last week that those precedents and systems - and laws - are being tested in ways none of us have seen in this country in any of our lifetimes.
Click to expand...

My only difference in what you're saying is I don't believe they're being tested, but being purposely broken. These actions at the FCC were premeditated and intentional. They were warned about by Carr in Project 2025, and he's now carrying them out. The date on my calendar is Feb 27th when the FCC holds its first public meeting. None of the investigations are on the agenda. It will be interesting if any come up. That may be the first opportunity to challenge what is going on.
 
fybush said:
I generally expect very little from FCC public meetings. Whatever is or isn't happening, it's more likely to be taking place behind the scenes right now.
Click to expand...

The thing is that the two dems on the commission have been very public in their objections to what the chairman is doing. While none of the investigations have been posted on the FCC site, all of the objections to them have. They call these actions by the chairman unprecedented. So perhaps what happens at this first public meeting will also be without precedent.
 
I find it ironic that the arguments that this is "fine" and that there's not a serious crisis here often come from the same people who have asserted that acts on the part of private actors (Meta, Twitter, CBS, ABC) are suppression of speech or have a "chilling effect." Yet the 1st Amendment is clearly concerned with government suppression of speech, which is exactly what Carr's attempting to do.
 
Andy Travis said:
I find it ironic that the arguments that this is "fine" and that there's not a serious crisis here often come from the same people who have asserted that acts on the part of private actors (Meta, Twitter, CBS, ABC) are suppression of speech or have a "chilling effect." Yet the 1st Amendment is clearly concerned with government suppression of speech, which is exactly what Carr's attempting to do.
Click to expand...

I said earlier that Carr's interpretation of the 1st amendment is that it was meant to protect individual free speech, not that of media or tech companies. That's why he feels it's proper and legal to attack the companies you list. The problem with that is the supreme court, led by Alito, ruled that corporations are people too, and have the same rights as individuals. It'll be interesting to see how that is argued in court.

www.pbs.org

The 'corporations are people' doctrine is a real legal concept

"Corporate personhood" is a principle has been lurking in U.S. law for more than a century, and the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, gave it more oomph this week when it ruled that certain businesses are entitled to exercise religious rights, just as do people.
www.pbs.org www.pbs.org

www.alternet.org

10 Supreme Court Rulings That Turned Corporations Into People

Last week's decision is the latest in a 200-year-long line of rulings giving businesses the same rights as humans.
www.alternet.org www.alternet.org
 
fybush said:
I generally expect very little from FCC public meetings. Whatever is or isn't happening, it's more likely to be taking place behind the scenes right now.
Click to expand...
The public can see this in all kinds of government and quasi-government bodies all the time, left, right or otherwise, when “executive sessions” do the nitty gritty while public meetings are mostly perfunctory. Yes, there may be loud objections from the minority party, and/or public comment that becomes heated. It’s nothing new in template, it’s something new in the execution at that level and with this kind of action.

But there’s also the deliberate “flood the zone” and misdirection going on. Concerned citizens are going to understandably focus heavily on the things that hurt them the most directly without necessarily having the bandwidth to look at the entire picture. If you have family members whose lives will be upended and their futures potentially decimated by the threats to dismantle the department of education, what happens over at the FCC may not register until it’s too late. Or if you’re realizing vital medical research into conditions you or your loved ones are suffering from has been halted, what happens when the national parks don’t have staff to open may not be on your radar now, and on and on it goes.
 
AbrahamJSimpson said:
The public can see this in all kinds of government and quasi-government bodies all the time, left, right or otherwise, when “executive sessions” do the nitty gritty while public meetings are mostly perfunctory. Yes, there may be loud objections from the minority party, and/or public comment that becomes heated. It’s nothing new in template, it’s something new in the execution at that level and with this kind of action.

But there’s also the deliberate “flood the zone” and misdirection going on. Concerned citizens are going to understandably focus heavily on the things that hurt them the most directly without necessarily having the bandwidth to look at the entire picture. If you have family members whose lives will be upended and their futures potentially decimated by the threats to dismantle the department of education, what happens over at the FCC may not register until it’s too late. Or if you’re realizing vital medical research into conditions you or your loved ones are suffering from has been halted, what happens when the national parks don’t have staff to open may not be on your radar now, and on and on it goes.
Click to expand...
I live near the most visited National Park in the country, and we will see. It is the economic lifeblood of the area.
 
gr8oldies said:
I live near the most visited National Park in the country, and we will see. It is the economic lifeblood of the area.
Click to expand...
If you are a small-market station owner in a rural area, this should scare you (gift link):

www.nytimes.com

Trump’s Funding Freezes Bruise a Core Constituency: Farmers

A rapid-fire array of directives by the Trump administration have left farmers and businesses in rural America reeling.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

The degree to which rural economies depend upon government support is something not widely understood outside those areas.
 
I just heard this morning on KCJJ that they won't be allowing Facebook comments regarding ICE raids, because they're concerned about their license renewal possibly being jeopardized (despite the fact that their license isn't up for renewal until 2029).
 
Mark Roberts said:
If you are a small-market station owner in a rural area, this should scare you (gift link):

www.nytimes.com

Trump’s Funding Freezes Bruise a Core Constituency: Farmers

A rapid-fire array of directives by the Trump administration have left farmers and businesses in rural America reeling.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

The degree to which rural economies depend upon government support is something not widely understood outside those areas.
Click to expand...

and the places that most oppose CPB funding NPR need it the most.. like the state owned NPR stations in MS and GA
 
vw86 said:
Or Year One of Trump 3.0
Click to expand...
I am already seeing a number of news articles, including from outlets outside the U.S., examining the possibility of the constitutional crisis that would ensue if Trump decides to ignore the 22nd Amendment and run again in 2028.
 
Mediafrog+ said:
I am already seeing a number of news articles, including from outlets outside the U.S., examining the possibility of the constitutional crisis that would ensue if Trump decides to ignore the 22nd Amendment and run again in 2028.
Click to expand...
Links or citations, please. Where did you see those articles?

Stories like that are generally “click bait” because they are not based on any real facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom