3 ms·

That would be a major concession. Comcast-TWC would need to immediately cease all lobbying efforts to prevent municipal broadband. Furthermore, they would be re

by pyre 12y ago

That would be a major concession. Comcast-TWC would need to immediately cease all lobbying efforts to prevent municipal broadband. Furthermore, they would be required to lobby for municipal broadband whenever there was a push against it (lest they try to wiggle out by just funding opponents while not lobbying directly themselves). [Note: I still don't think this would be a large enough concession to make the merger a net benefit to the public though.]

Bud 12y ago
It's not actually possible to force someone to lobby for something. How could you be sure they were really trying? They could just hire really bad lobbyists or run really bad advertising, for instance.
- fivedogit 12y ago
  It's very possible. They did it to the tobacco industry. http://www.thetruth.com/ http://www.thetruth.com/ Essentially, as part of the Master Settlement Agreement, the government just said, "You have to put X dollars into this independent anti-smoking group." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheTruth.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheTruth.com
  - pyre 12y ago
    This is slightly different because it's just a public campaign: TheTruth.com uses web, print and television promote its message. Lobbying efforts are different. How do you know that Comcast-TWC wouldn't just put more funding into a group that opposed municipal broadband than they put into the required pro-muni broadband group?
  - Bud 12y ago
    That illustrates my point: that's not lobbying. That's giving money to someone else, who then does the lobbying. Very different.
- pyre 12y ago
  Oh, I know it's not air-tight. I say it's a major concession because large ISPs seem to see municipal broadband as a huge wrench in their plans, so taking away their ability to fight it would not just be some sort of 'lip service' concession that they don't really care about. As for forcing them to stop + lobby for it? You might even run into some Supreme Court issues, and they might challenge it on free speech grounds. It would be an uphill battle for something that might not even be enforceable (which is why I also said that it's not enough of a concession to make the merger a net public gain).

by pyre 12y ago

Bud 12y ago

It's not actually possible to force someone to lobby for something. How could you be sure they were really trying? They could just hire really bad lobbyists or run really bad advertising, for instance.

fivedogit 12y ago
It's very possible. They did it to the tobacco industry. http://www.thetruth.com/ http://www.thetruth.com/ Essentially, as part of the Master Settlement Agreement, the government just said, "You have to put X dollars into this independent anti-smoking group." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheTruth.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheTruth.com
- pyre 12y ago
  This is slightly different because it's just a public campaign: TheTruth.com uses web, print and television promote its message. Lobbying efforts are different. How do you know that Comcast-TWC wouldn't just put more funding into a group that opposed municipal broadband than they put into the required pro-muni broadband group?
- Bud 12y ago
  That illustrates my point: that's not lobbying. That's giving money to someone else, who then does the lobbying. Very different.
pyre 12y ago
Oh, I know it's not air-tight. I say it's a major concession because large ISPs seem to see municipal broadband as a huge wrench in their plans, so taking away their ability to fight it would not just be some sort of 'lip service' concession that they don't really care about. As for forcing them to stop + lobby for it? You might even run into some Supreme Court issues, and they might challenge it on free speech grounds. It would be an uphill battle for something that might not even be enforceable (which is why I also said that it's not enough of a concession to make the merger a net public gain).