9 ms·
SOPA-Supporting News Outlets Aren't Covering SOPA
- jaequery 15y agoThe same goes for Ron Paul. Google for "Ron Paul ignored by media". US does the exact same thing the China, N.Korea does to brainwash their civilians, and yet, they accuse the others for doing so.
- jaylevitt 15y agoRon Paul's been on the front page of the Washington Post web site nearly every day. And they're kinda mainstream.
- wrath 15y agoI was talking to my father over the holidays about SOPA. He's an avid FOX news and CNN viewer. He had no idea what I was talking about. After our conversation he took it upon himself to search Google on the subject to educate himself on it. I'm from Canada so all I can do is keep an eye on this at the moment, but it goes to show you that everyone in the US need to spread the word.
- oacgnol 15y agoWhat is your father's opinion on it after educating himself? I'd be interested to know the average person's viewpoint before and after learning about SOPA.
- wrath 15y agoHis first impression was that it was a good thing since it protected right holders. I had to explain to him why SOPA was bad for the internet before he got it. Now that he gets it he's looking out for similar laws in Canada!
- orenmazor 15y agoyour dad would be the first canadian I've heard of that is an avid FOX news fan. how can you even catch fox news up here? (I dont have cable, but when I did I dont think we had the news…)
- nitrogen 15y agoHypothetically, if you're close enough to the border, you can pay for e.g. a DISH Network subscription at a US address and bring the equipment across. I'm neither Canadian nor a border patrol officer, so I can't say how common or effective this strategy would be.
- wrath 15y agoGo here: http://www.bell.ca/Bell_TV/Channels/Theme_Packs.tab http://www.bell.ca/Bell_TV/Channels/Theme_Packs.tab Select Ontario as your province and look under the "News & Learning 2" package. Fox News is there. He's a big Bill O'Reilly fan!
- bediger 15y agoBen Bagdikian called. He wants his truth back. http://www.amazon.com/New-Media-Monopoly-Completely-Chapters/dp/0807061875/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325861031&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/New-Media-Monopoly-Completely-Chapters...
- tomelders 15y agoFreedom of the press... to do whatever the fuck they want. I propose they lose that freedom and instead we burden them with the "Responsibility of the press". That should grant them the same privileges and protection, but also makes them accountable when they pull crap like this.
- gldalmaso 15y ago>> "Responsibility of the press" That would be good but hard to put in place. In Brazil, whenever there's talk about regulation they always make claims about censorship. These companies tend to confuse Freedom of press with Freedom of enterprise.
- tomelders 15y agoYou're dead on. Freedom of the press is dead already.
- cellis 15y agoI propose you should be downvoted for promoting the same type of authoritarianism that you claim to hate. Instead of trying to enforce some highly subjective rule, why not just start your own new disruptive news services?
- tomelders 15y agoI propose you think before you type and stop looking for things that aren't there. You're the tyrant here.
- cellis 15y agoHow about instead of snide remarks and name calling, you actually give a decent rebuttal to my argument? How on earth would a "responsibility of the press" law make things any better? By reporting on things tomelders likes to hear about? It sounds like an authoritarian lockdown and your cavalier suggestion of it implies you haven't done much research on why freedom of the press actually works.
- jader201 15y agoI wonder if they will continue to remain silent if this happens: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3429145 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3429145
- smokeyj 15y agoIt seems as if our representative government only represents money. Yet again, the profit motive prevails.
- walru 15y agoThis is why we're left with a 'Vocal Minority' as Lamar Smith stated when pressed about the opposition. What he should have called us was the 'conscious' and 'educated'. With a near media blank out, he thought this was going to be a walk in the park. More people would be outraged if they only knew about the bill, or once they were told about it believed in the power that it wields. I tried to educate my family over the X-mas holiday about the recent poison legislation being put through our government, but it was met with blank stares, followed by, "our government would never do that". In a way I don't blame them, because this all sounds so crack pot. A simple personal can't fathom why the media would be in cahoots with government and not cover something that could change the foundation of the rights this nation was founded on. The 'Vocal Minority' must begin to educate, the media will never do it for us. Sadly you can't just throw a book at someone, or a wall of text to do it either. Many on Reddit have had the right idea by creating memes and such, but the real power needs to come from the Google and those who oppose it. Put it front and center in the masses faces. They need to show them what a post-SOPA world looks like, and they need to do it before they get back into session to vote again.
- thebigshane 15y agoI've read the bill at least twice now and I still don't see the doomsday scenario described many times here on HN. I get the slippery-slope argument, that SOPA is just one step closer to true censorship and control over the internet, but I don't think that is enough to get so upset about (its a very small step, with obvious workarounds) Somebody please point out to me: 1) Where it says that Youtube, Facebook, Google are affected by this bill. -- It looks to me like it only affects sites on foreign domains or foreign servers. They explicitly say that these popular sites are not affected. 2) Where it says that ISP's, hosting companies, domain registrars or even sites focused on user-generated content are required to actively monitor their data and their customers' data for infringing content and are held liable if they fail to monitor. -- It appears to me that the bill specifically says they DON'T have to do this; that they only have to make reasonable attempts at prevention and then are required to take data down when given a take-down request. 3) How tor would be made illegal under this bill. -- It looks like only tools designed or marketed for the primary purpose of circumventing this bill are made illegal. That means DeSOPA and MAFIAAfire, but tor seems to be out of reach. Back on topic of the article, perhaps there isn't a conspiracy here, perhaps media outlets genuinely don't see what the big deal is. I agree that the bill is mostly useless and mostly supported by an aging industry, and I don't support it. But I don't see the big deal either. So, somebody please enlighten me because the sensational fog is obstructing my view.
- sp332 15y agoSOPA doesn't require sites to monitor their users. The complaints I've heard: 1. It requires sites to be removed from DNS if a copyright complaint is made against them. Specifically, the removal avoids due process. The copyright holder doesn't need a court order to have the offending site taken down. 2. Sites are held responsible for content their users upload. So e.g. Mediafire would be taken down because of content the users uploaded.
- thebigshane 15y agoRegarding your #1: My interpretation (which may very well be wrong of course, IANAL), is that the copyright holder DOES need either a court order or Attorney General intervention to remove a site from DNS. Regarding your #2: Again, my interpretation is that this only applies to foreign sites (either foreign domains or foreign servers)
- warmfuzzykitten 15y agoClicking on the "developing apps" link gets to a reference to a "NoSOPA" chrome app. I installed it and went to Lamar Smith's website. Nothing. Went to Kirsten Gillibrand's. Nothing. NoSOPA noWorka. But it did have access to all my web content. Uninstalled.
- 4tacos 15y ago"There's no conspiracy" he said sarcastically. Screw the "International Banker" Media. Think for yourself!!!!!!!!
- ck2 15y agoStart asking on all their twitter and facebook feeds why they aren't covering SOPA Cover both the channel and all their anchors. Be polite. MSNBC constantly proclaims how progressive they are but they sure don't act like it.
- davehod 15y agoNo surprises here
- pivotal 15y agoThis is precisely why a blackout day of major web sites is necessary. If Google, Yahoo, Bing and Facebook are all down for the day, not only would the users be made more aware of the issue, but the media would be forced to cover the blackout and subsequently SOPA, lest they appear completely out of touch with the world.
- maeon3 15y agoIn case you didn't already know, all news stations are agenda driven propaganda machines, that means they get paid to cause people to have certain opinions, desires, fears and knowledge. It is a brainwashing engine that takes every measure to make sure it doesn't look like that. The same can be found in China, Russia, Iran, Japan. stations that install complete fabrications of reality in the viewers minds for profit. Getting fox news to report sopa is a lost cause. Even if we were to riot and set half the country on fire against sopa... All news stations would have their own narratives and spin the hell out of it to make it seem like the terrorists are winning because there isn't enough censorship.
- the_tubes 15y agoI want to call my representatives but I feel they will give me a hard time and use that politician improve skill to make it seem like I don't know what I am talking about. Give me good ideas on what to say when I don't support SOPA and PIPA that they can't fight back. Ideas why I don't like it while playing devil's advocate +policing my web site to a point I can't manage it. -well your website can't be controlled and needs to be shut down +Small time businesses use user created content to advertise cheaply and won't be able to when these sites shut down or big business shuts you down with the excuse of violating their IP -Sites and small businesses will only be taken down when they are obviously designed to infringe on others IP +The security of the internet will crumble with DNS blocking from other countries -How? I want wording to the point where they say, "Well, damn! I guess you're right."
- mr_luc 15y agoI agree with you, it's hard to explain. Here's a sketch of how to frame the discussion, just for fun: WHAT WILL SOPA DO TO THE INTERNET? The Internet is the Goose That Lays the Golden Eggs, and this bill wants to let Hollywood perform surgery on it. Every tech expert and internet company agree that this would be a drastic, disruptive shift. I say, the Internet's been working pretty good for [country] so far. Don't break it by putting more paperwork and gatekeepers in there. HOW, IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, IS SOPA HARMFUL? Imagine you're an entrepreneur. Your small business is disruptive and different and successful. But your big, slow, powerful competitors get worried, and suddenly, your shop's lights and water are turned off. Crazier still, your shop is physically relocated back away from the street, with no signs and no way for people to find you. Your bank has closed your account and frozen your funds. This is all because of a letter, not a court order. Your providers and suppliers and utilities, they got a letter that claims that you're infringing on other company's trade secrets. And the law says that they're guaranteed legal immunity, only if they stop doing business with you. Most people would say that could never happen in this country. It'd be crazy! But every reputable Internet expert, and every Internet company agree that this is what SOPA will do to the Internet. SOPA provides incentives to service providers to shut down businesses based on unsubstantiated claims. And it could bring free-market innovation on the Internet -- the one thing America still does well, the one thing pulling the economy forward -- to a screeching halt. WHY IS SOPA BAD FOR THE ECONOMY? Making new internet businesses vulnerable to immediate and brutal closure (usually, for their user's actions, not their own!) unless they work out deals with Big Content in advance would be a terrible drag on innovation. WHY WOULD THEY WRITE SUCH A BILL? Because SOPA and PIPA are actually industry-wide power-grabs, a power-play by the Content Industry Dinosaurs to give themselves the keys to the tech kingdom under the guise of 'fighting piracy'. This is backed up by how google, Amazon, Facebook, Tumblr, Youtube and Twitter are all banding together with the Net Coalition. But the new, growing sectors of the economy aren't as good at gaming politics as the old, stagnant sectors. The old sectors see disruption in their future, and this bill would give them the upper hand in negotiations for how people consume content. In the process, they would make themselves kingmakers and protection-money-collectors of startups and services that let users interact and connect in ways that could be claimed to be 'infringement'. Like sharing a link, or posting a youtube video. WHY IS THE BILL SO WELL-SUPPORTED? It's got scary, bipartisan support, because Big Traditional Business is for it on the Right, and Big Hollywood Labor is for it on the Left. ... Just a sketch. ;) This is just for fun -- but if you want to explain it to someone, I think the shopkeeper-gets-shut-down analogy is a powerful one. Ever since Rick's Cafe getting shut down in Casablanca, or Jimmy Stewart's S&L, it's resonated.
- InclinedPlane 15y agoThey aren't covering NDAA either. Or the Mexican civil war. It's not necessarily because of a conflict of interest, I think it's more down to failure of competence.
- jjackson21 15y agoThere is a clear agenda, the only failure is journalistic integrity. They have to keep the masses ignorant of SOPA, Patriot Act, and NDAA, wouldn't want people to be upset with the destruction of the Constitution. They are expecting the worst and so are now preparing for the worst. I am scared of things to come.
- InclinedPlane 15y agoYou imagine that the media takes its purported role of keeping the public informed on the most important news of the day seriously. That hasn't been true even moderately for the last decade at the least. It's infotainment. There is no fundamental difference between CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, and techcrunch, or TMZ. The biggest differences are primarily stylistic.