3 ms·

I'm disappointed by the discussion on this submission. Here's a list of things that would be encouraged by the main text of the request [1]: - The national ant

I'm disappointed by the discussion on this submission. Here's a list of things that would be encouraged by the main text of the request [1]: - The national anthem / pledge of allegiance (explicitly suggested by the text) - Civics-related stuff -- information about voting, how laws are passed, the branches of govt, the separation of powers, etc. - Arts that are "truly" American -- Blues, Jazz, Rock n Roll, etc. I know there will be disagreement about what counts as "American", but it's clear that there are some art forms that wouldn't exist without America's unique mixture of cultures. - Things about America's history -- speeches from George Washington/Lincoln/MLK/Other significant figures, the musical Hamilton, the emancipation proclamation, the text from the statue of liberty, discussion of Japanese internment camps, the history of Hawaii/Peurto Rico/Alaska/Any relevant state, etc I think those would all be positive. I'm sure there will also be some less inclusive parts that will endorsed by some broadcasters (I think discussion of that is good, but not endorsement). Carr's message is not asking for that, it's just encouraging an increased focus on America. [1] https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-418890A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-418890A1.pdf

ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
"I think these would be positive" is fine. The problem is the rest of the sentence: "...and I am the government, and I order you to broadcast my message, and also you can't say these other things I dislike, or I will revoke your ability to operate at all." It's disappointing to see this point missed: this isn't a random person sharing their opinion, it is both government-mandated speech and literal censorship.
- pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
  Did you read the text? It _does not_ order such broadcasting, your quote is made-up. Here's the closest quote I find: > Chairman Brendan Carr issued the following statement: ... "I am inviting broadcasters to pledge to air programming in their local markets in support of this historic national, non-partisan celebration."
  - Analemma_ 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
      I am obviously not wholesale endorsing the administration. The request as-issued is a positive thing, and indeed _would encourage_ discussing why we have term limits, why we should push back against autocrats, bigotry, etc. If they go around arresting people for not obeying their request, I'll feel differently.
      - mindslight 8mo ago
        The only use for lofty values or nuance that fascists have is for distracting from their plain agenda. At the point we're at, it's prudent to wonder why someone would help carry water if they don't support the regime. Also, setting your criteria at "arresting people" seems like straightforward denial, especially as we're talking about broadcasters where the actual threat being wielded is to shut down their transmitters. I'd say the GP comment was entirely appropriate, despite it being flagged by the tone police. The context is very important here, and you seem to be deliberately ignoring it.
        pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
        > The only use for lofty values or nuance that fascists have is for distracting from their plain agenda. “Only a Sith deals in absolutes”
        mindslight 8mo ago
        Even Jar Jar was wise to treachery.
  - ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
    Are you aware that this government, and indeed this government rep which we're discussing, has threatened to revoke broadcasting licenses from companies for airing content the government disagrees with? Or worse? On multiple occasions? If you don't have that context, none of my post will have made sense to you, which it appears is what happened.
mzajc 8mo ago
> Things about America's history -- speeches from George Washington/Lincoln/MLK/Other significant figures Is there a source for this? I'd be little surprised if they encouraged airing MLK's speeches, but the linked document doesn't mention MLK, or encourage airing historical speeches of any kind.
- Jtsummers 8mo ago
  No, GP is making things up to try and paint the request in a positive light. They're just bullshitting, safe to ignore folks like that.
  - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Jtsummers 8mo ago
      Hi pinkmuffinere, please do me a favor and consider the context surrounding this request and Carr's behavior in general. Others have provided it, you've chosen to ignore it. Choosing to be ignorant does not help here, you can do better.
      - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
        You claim that the request does not encourage "speeches from George Washington/Lincoln/MLK/Other significant figures". I believe I've provided quotes and sources proving otherwise. I am not here to discuss more generic American politics, I'm here to discuss the main text referenced by the submission -- to wit, the Gizmodo article misrepresents the main text. I'm defending that (fairly narrow) claim.
        ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
        > I am not here to discuss more generic American politics This entire submission is about generic American politics. If you don't want to comment on this submission and participate in discussions about it, that's okay, but I think folks are confused by your insistence on discussing generic American politics (this submission) while omitting other generic American politics about the very same topic (the context of this submission). If you want to discuss a thing, you should be okay with thinking and talking about the critical context around that thing. As an engineer, I'm sure you can understand.
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
Zigurd 8mo ago
> I think those would all be positive. Sure, if you ignore context.

ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago

"I think these would be positive" is fine. The problem is the rest of the sentence: "...and I am the government, and I order you to broadcast my message, and also you can't say these other things I dislike, or I will revoke your ability to operate at all." It's disappointing to see this point missed: this isn't a random person sharing their opinion, it is both government-mandated speech and literal censorship.

pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
Did you read the text? It _does not_ order such broadcasting, your quote is made-up. Here's the closest quote I find: > Chairman Brendan Carr issued the following statement: ... "I am inviting broadcasters to pledge to air programming in their local markets in support of this historic national, non-partisan celebration."
- Analemma_ 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
    I am obviously not wholesale endorsing the administration. The request as-issued is a positive thing, and indeed _would encourage_ discussing why we have term limits, why we should push back against autocrats, bigotry, etc. If they go around arresting people for not obeying their request, I'll feel differently.
    - mindslight 8mo ago
      The only use for lofty values or nuance that fascists have is for distracting from their plain agenda. At the point we're at, it's prudent to wonder why someone would help carry water if they don't support the regime. Also, setting your criteria at "arresting people" seems like straightforward denial, especially as we're talking about broadcasters where the actual threat being wielded is to shut down their transmitters. I'd say the GP comment was entirely appropriate, despite it being flagged by the tone police. The context is very important here, and you seem to be deliberately ignoring it.
      - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
        > The only use for lofty values or nuance that fascists have is for distracting from their plain agenda. “Only a Sith deals in absolutes”
        mindslight 8mo ago
        Even Jar Jar was wise to treachery.
- ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
  Are you aware that this government, and indeed this government rep which we're discussing, has threatened to revoke broadcasting licenses from companies for airing content the government disagrees with? Or worse? On multiple occasions? If you don't have that context, none of my post will have made sense to you, which it appears is what happened.

mzajc 8mo ago

> Things about America's history -- speeches from George Washington/Lincoln/MLK/Other significant figures Is there a source for this? I'd be little surprised if they encouraged airing MLK's speeches, but the linked document doesn't mention MLK, or encourage airing historical speeches of any kind.

Jtsummers 8mo ago
No, GP is making things up to try and paint the request in a positive light. They're just bullshitting, safe to ignore folks like that.
- pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  - Jtsummers 8mo ago
    Hi pinkmuffinere, please do me a favor and consider the context surrounding this request and Carr's behavior in general. Others have provided it, you've chosen to ignore it. Choosing to be ignorant does not help here, you can do better.
    - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
      You claim that the request does not encourage "speeches from George Washington/Lincoln/MLK/Other significant figures". I believe I've provided quotes and sources proving otherwise. I am not here to discuss more generic American politics, I'm here to discuss the main text referenced by the submission -- to wit, the Gizmodo article misrepresents the main text. I'm defending that (fairly narrow) claim.
      - ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
        > I am not here to discuss more generic American politics This entire submission is about generic American politics. If you don't want to comment on this submission and participate in discussions about it, that's okay, but I think folks are confused by your insistence on discussing generic American politics (this submission) while omitting other generic American politics about the very same topic (the context of this submission). If you want to discuss a thing, you should be okay with thinking and talking about the critical context around that thing. As an engineer, I'm sure you can understand.

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

Zigurd 8mo ago

> I think those would all be positive. Sure, if you ignore context.