Slashdot Mirror


Obama Picks Net Neutrality Backer As FCC Chief

Ripit writes "President Obama on Tuesday nominated Julius Genachowski as the nation's top telecommunications regulator, picking a campaign adviser who has divided his career between Washington, D.C., political jobs and working as an Internet executive. Genachowski is likely to continue the Democratic push for more Net neutrality regulations, which are opposed by some conservatives and telecommunications providers. He was a top Obama technology adviser and aided in crafting a technology platform that supported Net neutrality rules."

2 of 409 comments (clear)

  1. Re:And then... by commodore64_love · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I hate Democrats. They CENSOR what they don't want to hear, by modding posters into oblivion (0) or (-1).

    This are NOT the party of Thomas Jefferson - he would have never, never approved of censorship. Never.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  2. Re:And then... by Polumna · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    First, I was making a semantic argument. Whether or not you 'want any part of it,' Obama's job is change according to his platform, because he was elected to do it, just as it was Bush's job was to remain in Iraq for our national security as he was elected to do in 2004. I am merely arguing that regardless of your agreement with the majority of the population at the time, it is ludicrous to declare that it's not the president's job to uphold campaign promises.

    Second, if I might respond to your opinion. The Fairness Doctrine (and the Equal Time rule, which I believe is at least as important) does not tell citizens what they can and can't say. They tell the few citizens who have been granted the privilege of using public airwaves that they cannot use that privilege to push an agenda. Freedom of speech, does not grant the right to be heard by multitudes using public resources, nor does freedom of the press. An honest question, though it will surely sound loaded: do you believe that Rupert Murdoch has the right to MORE freedom of speech than I do, simply because he can afford the antennas? (It really is an honest question. I am interested in and respect your opinion regardless of my agreement.)