Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

President Obama To Nominate Cable and Wireless Lobbyist To Head FCC

Posted by Soulskill on from the break-out-the-tinfoil-hats dept.

symbolset writes "The Wall Street Journal and others are reporting that longtime telecomm lobbyist Tom Wheeler will be nominated to head the Federal Communications Commission. According to the LA Times: 'Wheeler is a former president of the National Cable Television Assn. and the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Assn. Despite his close ties to industries he will soon regulate, some media watchdogs are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. "As someone who has known Tom for years, I believe that he will be an independent, proactive chairman," said Gigi B. Sohn, president and chief executive of Public Knowledge, adding that she has "no doubt that Tom will have an open door and an open mind, and that ultimately his decisions will be based on what he genuinely believes is best for the public interest, not any particular industry."'"

17 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. The revolving door continues to spin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    adding that she has "no doubt that Tom will have an open door and an open mind, and that ultimately his decisions will be based on what he genuinely believes is best for the public interest, not any particular industry."

    Seriously?

  2. wolf in sheep skin shoes by zlives · · Score: 4, Funny

    in other news Dr. Kevorkian to head Department of Health and Human Services

  3. Re:Yep, typical by JackieBrown · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What do you expect? This is the same party that gave us the DMCA.

  4. Third parties by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You must not have been paying attention. There were many third party candidates who were not on the corporate payroll.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Third parties by claytongulick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a common misunderstanding/misperception. The Libertarians vehemently oppose corporate welfare and public/private partnerships. What you're calling "pro-corporate" is really not true - they believe that in general, the market should be left alone, regulation minimized and clear separation between companies and government should exist. They are deeply suspicious of things like the military-industrial complex.

      The Libertarians believe that a person has a right to the fruit of their own labors, and that people should be free from burdensome regulation and oppressive government manipulation of markets. This is not "pro corporate" this is "pro human". They also believe that just as a person should be free to succeed, they should be free to fail. The libertarians are passionately opposed to "bail outs" and "stimulus" government corporate welfare programs.

      Any Libertarian who tried to pull the sort of shenanigans that we're seeing here would be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail by his/her own party.

      --
      Drinking habits can be dangerous. You can choke on the cloth and the nuns will wonder where their clothes are.
    2. Re:Third parties by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the libertarians, really really really are pro-corporate in their actual published platform.

      Nope. Libertarians are pro-market. The Ruling Party is pro-corporations, and does all it can to help their cronies exclude competition.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    3. Re:Third parties by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any Libertarian who tried to pull the sort of shenanigans that we're seeing here would be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail by his/her own party.

      And then the Libertarian would rebrand himself a Republican and run as that.

      Plus, it wouldn't matter anyway - after killing off regulations, the large corporations would have an even larger stranglehold on the marketplace, as there would be no anti-trust laws to keep them from colluding, price-fixing, etc. and any competitor who tried to enter the field would be crushed before they could get a foothold.

      --
      That is all.
    4. Re:Third parties by Arker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Believing each individual has an inalienable right to the fruit of their own labour does not equal believing that capitalists have the right to the lions share of the fruits of others' labour. The difference should be obvious to anyone that can read English.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    5. Re:Third parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Is it "pro human" to let someone die of an easily-treatable health condition just because they previously depleted their savings and can't work while disabled?

  5. Conflict of interest by onyxruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This doesn't even pass the sniff test with regards to conflict of interest. Obama is as much of a tool of industry as W ever was, his entire populist election campaign of 2008 was one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the American public. Seriously, look at industry after industry and you will see Obama acting fundamentally the same. How many bankers are in jail for the collapse of the economy, etc, etc?

    1. Re:Conflict of interest by Krojack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Every President that gets elected to a second term stop giving a shit. It's the home stretch to pad their pockets and spend paradise on a beach.

    2. Re:Conflict of interest by symbolset · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Neil Macbride, former Business Software Alliance general counsel and vice president was appointed US Attorney shortly after President Obama's first inauguration - probably at the behest of his former boss Vice President Joe Biden. Since then he has been a tireless bulldog as the US Government's enforcement arm of the MPAA and RIAA - notably in the case of Kim Dotcom's Megaupload in New Zealand, which is now bordering on an international incident.

      Darned right it doesn't pass the sniff test.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
  6. More of the same... by superdave80 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Good thing we didn't elect that mean ol' corporate guy, Romney, eh? Keep electing Democrats hoping that they will be different than Republicans, and don't you DARE 'waste' your vote on anything other than an (R) or a (D)!

    1. Re:More of the same... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The more votes a third party gets, the more the Rs and Ds try to copy their policies in order to win those votes back. Better to change position on a few topics then let another party gain good media attention. The third parties see that someone cares about them and they keep on fighting for their principles. Your vote does more than you think it did.

      Thank you for voting for a different party.

  7. This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Despite the promises made by President Obama, there are plenty of lobbyists with jobs in government, hired on his watch. What's one more? What difference does it make?

    http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-lobbyists-inside-the-obamas-administration?op=1

  8. Re:Yep, typical by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Back up further: what do you expect of politics in general? Money buys influence in any government, no matter what form it takes. The only time that is not true is when enough people oppose the money. You can argue about this party or that party, or the number of parties, or term limits, or democracy even, but in any organization where the citizens don't care, you'll get money buying rules. Parties aren't going to do the job of the public for the public.

    Actually, you can generalize that last part as well. No one is going to do any job you want them to do unless you keep on them or they have their own interests in doing it. Politicians aren't going to have our interests at heart unless you threaten to kick them out if they don't. And we're not doing that.

  9. All is not lost by symbolset · · Score: 5, Informative

    Part of the vetting process for this means taking down your blog. Fortunately the Wayback Machine is our friend. I haven't read the whole blog yet, but this article about SOPA seems to indicate Mr. Wheeler might not be entirely clueless.

    Hat tip to Slate's Emma Roller, who found it.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.