3 ms·

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 follow

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.
- pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
  This submission claims to be about this announcement [1]. It is not about the full context of American politics right now. In fact generic politics is off-topic for HN [2]. I am responding to the main text of the announcement, not to general American politics. [1] https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-418890A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-418890A1.pdf [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
    So you AREN'T 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? The omission of that critical context might be why none of my post made sense to you: you would be unable to realize that the 'invitation to participate' we're discussing involves a degree of coercion, based on those threats. If you threaten somebody to give you their money 3 times, and then a 4th time you 'invite them to participate in giving you their money', that is 4 threats total, not 3. Of course, anything in the world can be justified if you omit enough context, even government-compelled speech and government censorship. Just omit the context of the 3 times you threatened your mugging victim to comply, and all you have left is a polite invitation to share money. Totally okay, right?
    - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
      My claim is -- the main text of the announcement is _good_. I make no claim about the larger context. Obviously I don't like Trump. But IMO that kind of generic discussion is not what HN is for.

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.

pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
This submission claims to be about this announcement [1]. It is not about the full context of American politics right now. In fact generic politics is off-topic for HN [2]. I am responding to the main text of the announcement, not to general American politics. [1] https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-418890A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-418890A1.pdf [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ImPostingOnHN 8mo ago
  So you AREN'T 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? The omission of that critical context might be why none of my post made sense to you: you would be unable to realize that the 'invitation to participate' we're discussing involves a degree of coercion, based on those threats. If you threaten somebody to give you their money 3 times, and then a 4th time you 'invite them to participate in giving you their money', that is 4 threats total, not 3. Of course, anything in the world can be justified if you omit enough context, even government-compelled speech and government censorship. Just omit the context of the 3 times you threatened your mugging victim to comply, and all you have left is a polite invitation to share money. Totally okay, right?
  - pinkmuffinere 8mo ago
    My claim is -- the main text of the announcement is _good_. I make no claim about the larger context. Obviously I don't like Trump. But IMO that kind of generic discussion is not what HN is for.