3 ms·

Money can be used to drown out competing messages. This can take many forms, such as overwhelming media appearance in political campaigns/attack ads, large com

Money can be used to drown out competing messages. This can take many forms, such as overwhelming media appearance in political campaigns/attack ads, large companies using litigation against smaller entities that can't afford to fight regardless of their message, to "laundering" money through super PACs or funding think tanks and research groups whose sole purpose is to publish findings to the funding entities' benefit. I also think it's hazardous to assume valid messages would always have competative supporting dollar figures. What people want and what businesses want are often very different things, and from a wealth standpoint you need many times more people in a lower income bracket to equal the "message" of a 1%er. It can be difficult if not impossible to figure out the sources of funding in a lot of these cases. Particularly in elections, that run on money, and presumably whose candidates are paying a lot of attention to the needs of their doners (perhaps more then their voters), the source of this money matters. I think this is a great idea aimed at increasing the transparancy in the shady world of campaigning.

smsm42 12y ago
>>> Money can be used to drown out competing messages "Drown out" is just another way of saying "speech". Unless drowning down is done by non-speech ways - like getting the speaker beaten up or jailed or sued into bankruptcy. >>> large companies using litigation against smaller entities that can't afford to fight regardless of their message And removal of privacy would fix that how exactly? >>> groups whose sole purpose is to publish findings to the funding entities' benefit. If those entities do that, they are PR companies. It is a completely legal business, nothing wrong with that. >>> It can be difficult if not impossible to figure out the sources of funding in a lot of these cases. Which would lead to more and more restrictive policies, and more and more instances of abuse, where incumbents, unable to compete on message, would instigate "campaign finance" investigation against challengers and destroy their campaign, only for the investigation to peter out immediately after electoral threat is gone. More power you put into this system, the more abuse it would generate. >>> increasing the transparancy in the shady world of campaigning. There's nothing shady in anonymous speech. You do not have the right to violate other's privacy, and somebody's refusal to disclose their private matters does not make them "shady". "Honest man has nothing to hide" is a lie.

smsm42 12y ago

>>> Money can be used to drown out competing messages "Drown out" is just another way of saying "speech". Unless drowning down is done by non-speech ways - like getting the speaker beaten up or jailed or sued into bankruptcy. >>> large companies using litigation against smaller entities that can't afford to fight regardless of their message And removal of privacy would fix that how exactly? >>> groups whose sole purpose is to publish findings to the funding entities' benefit. If those entities do that, they are PR companies. It is a completely legal business, nothing wrong with that. >>> It can be difficult if not impossible to figure out the sources of funding in a lot of these cases. Which would lead to more and more restrictive policies, and more and more instances of abuse, where incumbents, unable to compete on message, would instigate "campaign finance" investigation against challengers and destroy their campaign, only for the investigation to peter out immediately after electoral threat is gone. More power you put into this system, the more abuse it would generate. >>> increasing the transparancy in the shady world of campaigning. There's nothing shady in anonymous speech. You do not have the right to violate other's privacy, and somebody's refusal to disclose their private matters does not make them "shady". "Honest man has nothing to hide" is a lie.