4 ms·

I believe I have more say in how the FCC operates than I do in AT&T and Comcast. Perhaps that's the problem. Other people, who may have very different values t

I believe I have more say in how the FCC operates than I do in AT&T and Comcast. Perhaps that's the problem. Other people, who may have very different values than you, also have say in how the FCC operates. Since we've long ago crossed a line limiting the federal government to enumerated powers, and that protecting our physical safety is now at least as important as protecting our freedoms, it's easy to imagine a regime where some majority elects to silence some minority of [porn readers | gay supporters | militia supporters | whatever unpopular minority].

jorgeortiz85 17y ago
As someone in a thread below points out, unaccountable commercial carriers were already restricting speech on their networks: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html?_r=1 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html?_r=1
- lupin_sansei 17y ago
  You can always change carriers that restrict what you want to do though. When the government restricts something you can't change to something else.
- CWuestefeld 17y ago
  In what way are the commercial carriers "unaccountable"? I can always vote with my pocketbook, as the saying goes. But when it's the FCC ensuring that one-size-fits-all, I can't do that. And in the past, when the FCC has issued regulations or fines that you disagree with, how have you made them account for their actions? What, exactly, is the process for a citizen to exert influence over specific regulatory policy? Granted that, as a parent post argued, you can exert some influence in general by way of your legislators, but how can you ever say "that was the straw that broke the camel's back, I want out."? In the case of the commercial carriers, though, restricted speech may in some specific situations be a good thing. While I disagree with it myself, should people with specific sets of values be allowed to purchase a net connection that's pre-filtered for ideas the find offensive (say, hate speech, or gay content)? That's their right, isn't it? Today in the television arena, we argue because what's broadcast goes out to everyone, and some people don't want some shows to be seen. With broadcast, they don't have the option of blocking it from their own home, so the get the FCC to block it from everyone's home. If ISPs are allowed to filter, then those ISPs can do the filtering for those with "delicate sensibilities" can have the bland world they want, and the rest of us can revel in free speech unhindered.

jorgeortiz85 17y ago

As someone in a thread below points out, unaccountable commercial carriers were already restricting speech on their networks: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html?_r=1 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html?_r=1

lupin_sansei 17y ago
You can always change carriers that restrict what you want to do though. When the government restricts something you can't change to something else.
CWuestefeld 17y ago
In what way are the commercial carriers "unaccountable"? I can always vote with my pocketbook, as the saying goes. But when it's the FCC ensuring that one-size-fits-all, I can't do that. And in the past, when the FCC has issued regulations or fines that you disagree with, how have you made them account for their actions? What, exactly, is the process for a citizen to exert influence over specific regulatory policy? Granted that, as a parent post argued, you can exert some influence in general by way of your legislators, but how can you ever say "that was the straw that broke the camel's back, I want out."? In the case of the commercial carriers, though, restricted speech may in some specific situations be a good thing. While I disagree with it myself, should people with specific sets of values be allowed to purchase a net connection that's pre-filtered for ideas the find offensive (say, hate speech, or gay content)? That's their right, isn't it? Today in the television arena, we argue because what's broadcast goes out to everyone, and some people don't want some shows to be seen. With broadcast, they don't have the option of blocking it from their own home, so the get the FCC to block it from everyone's home. If ISPs are allowed to filter, then those ISPs can do the filtering for those with "delicate sensibilities" can have the bland world they want, and the rest of us can revel in free speech unhindered.