On Wednesday the Federal Election Commission held a hearing to decide how much they can interfere with public political discourse by regulating “political speech” including on blogs, YouTube videos and internet “news” sites like this one.
CNS News reports,
“The hearing is a response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC last year, which struck down the FEC’s previous cap on aggregate campaign contributions from a single donor in an election cycle.”
It seems an unlikely stretch from campaign financing to regulating political speech online, but history has shown how frequently loose laws open doors for loose definitions of said laws. Free speech is about to be stomped and no one seems to be watching.
In a statement issued last October, FEC Chairwoman, Ann Ravel said this was about gaining transparency for the public and proponents complain of sites like Drudge who in their opinion only tell one side of a political story without linking to adversarial opinions. Hmm, can the same not also be said for television entities like FOX News? Will they be regulated as well and actually forced to practice their slogan of “Fair & Balanced”?
If you like this or other Challenging the Rhetoric articles, please share it with others; follow our website, Facebook page and/or follow us @CTRNewsFeed on Twitter. Don’t forget to listen to the LIVE show every Weds. @6pm PST/9pm EST. Thank you!
Please also read other articles published by Challenging the Rhetoric contributors:
- Samsung Admits Their Smart TVs Spy On You
- FBI Director James B. Comey Makes Public Excuse For Racism in Law Enforcement
- Nuke or Chemical Plant? What Really Happened in the Ukraine?
- Red My Lips: A Simple Act of Outright Defiance
- LIAR OF THE WEEK: Corporate Media Over “Measles Parties”
- Is the Tea Party a Cult?
- Sex and [National] InSecurity
- Corporate Media Ramps Up Pro-Vaccine Rhetoric
- The Importance of Art in the Struggle for Change