5 ms·

Wow... That seems reasonable and exactly the way a government agency should work.

nerdponx 10y ago
It sounds like Obama put some really competent people at the FCC. Just look at what happened with net neutrality, the head of the FCC is now one of its big champions. Politics aside, it's not every day that you get to appreciate what a government agency is doing like this.
- deelowe 10y ago
  While the net neutrality comment is valid, the FCC was a good agency well before his tenure. The amateur radio community can attest to this.
coldpie 10y ago
The government is staffed by people and the vast majority of it does work well and has real flexibility on a case-by-case basis. What you hear about are the problem cases: the NSA, the FBI, abusive police, mandatory minimums. What you don't hear about is everything else.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  It's actually kind of a problem: Why would you hear about the government doing their job correctly? There's no news in that. Only the horror stories make the news
  - colechristensen 10y ago
    The news _should_ be about informing and educating people about the current state of the world, including the parts that are working well. Why does obsessing over crime and inflating the importance of celebrity and politician have to dominate the news?
    - Analemma_ 10y ago
      Because it's what people pay for. Unless a news outlet is publicly-funded (NPR, the BBC), they all eventually face a choice: give the people what they want, or go out of business.
      - colechristensen 10y ago
        This is the wrong way to think about it. It's not what you pay for because almost nobody is actually making a choice to pay for it. It's what they think you want. They're all trying to sell what they believe has the broadest appeal which happens to be vapid, emotionally charged shit. The thing is, when everyone is selling the most broadly appealing product, the whole market consumes less.[1] I personally consume very little because it has such little value to me. There are quite a few like me for various reasons. [1] https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauc...
      - ac29 10y ago
        NPR isn't publicly funded, only 5% comes from the government [1]. The majority is from individual and corporate donations. [1]http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances
        kqr 10y ago
        Which is by design, because otherwise the national, supposedly independent radio would be sockpuppets of the current government.

It sounds like Obama put some really competent people at the FCC. Just look at what happened with net neutrality, the head of the FCC is now one of its big champions. Politics aside, it's not every day that you get to appreciate what a government agency is doing like this.

deelowe 10y ago
While the net neutrality comment is valid, the FCC was a good agency well before his tenure. The amateur radio community can attest to this.

coldpie 10y ago

The government is staffed by people and the vast majority of it does work well and has real flexibility on a case-by-case basis. What you hear about are the problem cases: the NSA, the FBI, abusive police, mandatory minimums. What you don't hear about is everything else.

CaptSpify 10y ago
It's actually kind of a problem: Why would you hear about the government doing their job correctly? There's no news in that. Only the horror stories make the news
- colechristensen 10y ago
  The news _should_ be about informing and educating people about the current state of the world, including the parts that are working well. Why does obsessing over crime and inflating the importance of celebrity and politician have to dominate the news?
  - Analemma_ 10y ago
    Because it's what people pay for. Unless a news outlet is publicly-funded (NPR, the BBC), they all eventually face a choice: give the people what they want, or go out of business.
    - colechristensen 10y ago
      This is the wrong way to think about it. It's not what you pay for because almost nobody is actually making a choice to pay for it. It's what they think you want. They're all trying to sell what they believe has the broadest appeal which happens to be vapid, emotionally charged shit. The thing is, when everyone is selling the most broadly appealing product, the whole market consumes less.[1] I personally consume very little because it has such little value to me. There are quite a few like me for various reasons. [1] https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauc...
    - ac29 10y ago
      NPR isn't publicly funded, only 5% comes from the government [1]. The majority is from individual and corporate donations. [1]http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances
      - kqr 10y ago
        Which is by design, because otherwise the national, supposedly independent radio would be sockpuppets of the current government.