"What are you talking about? The Fairness Doctrine didn't promote censorship. It promoted free speech by mandating..."
You say it did not promote censorship, and then go on to describe how it involved the government mandating certain content. How is this not censorship? Especially when it forces the station to remove other content?
"Removing the Fairness Doctrine made it possible for stations to promote political causes.
Check the Bill of Rights. The first amendment was made precisely to protect people from being able to promote political causes. Even if the government did not like it.
"but doesn't it make sense that both sides of a issue should be presented on stations that have been granted the right to broadcast using public airwaves? "
No, it does not. Unless the station chooses to do this on their own. The government has no business meddling in the viewpoints (i.e. censoring political views). This includes mandating that someone present a "side" they do not agree with.
"It's dishonest to claim that a law does the exact opposite or what it really does."
This is exactly what you did, even while you described how the censorship worked. It is quite honest to recognize that a government policy in which it controlled media content is indeed censorship.
Let's say you have a blog. Uncle Sam comes in and says "if you say this, we have to let Joe Hackslob have his say. If you want to keep Joe Hackslob of your site, shut up about politics." How is this not censorship? This is exactly what the "Fairness Doctrine" did.
With the Fairness Doctrine, the government decided what was fair. With it gone, this is left up to the public.
"It required broadcasters to present a multiplicity of viewpoints when dealing with controversial material."
How did it do this? By having the government demand or hang over media so they did what the government thought was "fair". Until the station added government-approved content. It is also censorship because under the doctrine, broadcasters are forced NOT to broadcast material to make up for the "offical government content" taking up the schedule. Shouldn't "Freedom of the press" mean that you can do what you want, even on your editorial page (or your broadcast megaphone), without the government dictating content? I wonder if Ben Franklin and others would have agreed that the First Amendment meant that government could force newspapers to present government-approved "viewpoints".
As far as the public good, let the public decide if they like the content or not. Not the government.
Governor Mario Cuomo, who opposes censorship under the guise of the "fairness doctrine", said it best in this statement: "Precisely because radio and TV have become our principal sources of news and information, we should accord broadcasters the utmost freedom in order to insure a truly free press.".
"but I don't think the Fairness Doctrine counts as such since..."
And then you go on to describe how the Fairness Doctrine DOES dictate content.
There are some people who want "the Fairness Doctrine" brought back and expanded to include cable TV and satellite radio (in order to get political views they do not like censored). If this ever happened, it would open up the pathway for other censorship like what is mentioned in this news item.
I for one do not favor any such content regulation.
"Is the file-sharer evil because he's stealing money from music artists? "
The file sharer may be evil for other reasons, but not because he is stealing. It is technically, legally, and morally imposssible to steal by duplicating files.
"forced morality has always driven me nuts. some people, particularly those in high power, think they have the right to tell me and others what is and isn't wrong"
That is what ALL government legislators do when they pass laws. Laws are nothing more than government telling you what is and what is not wrong.
"we fled england for a reason. we wanted freedom, and force morality "
Are you an anarchist? I don't think the pilgrims were.
The government, that is who. All legislation ends up legislating morality.
"The last time someone tried to put a hold on how people lived, and should live, ended up shooting himself with a luger during a board meeting."
Sorry, that is what EVERY government does when you think about it. Not just that german with the silly 1/4-comb mustache you are thinking of. Go to your local law library and you will find shelves full of record of how government puts a hold on how people live. That is what government is all about. Is all government "Hitlers"? No. Does government legislate action limit how people live and legislate morality? Just about always.
The discussions are different? In other words, one discussion might have a little more Apple bashing than the other. One discussion will have a goatse link, and the other will have a GNAA screed? In one, 89% of the posts are about whether piracy = theft. In the other, 91% of the posts are about whether piracy = theft. Yes, there really is a difference!
I read this yesterday, in this item in the Apple category. Ignore the misleading "mp3" in the category: the article about just about every digital format ASIDE from mp3.
Yes. CR is part of the continent of North America. Regardless of where Mexico turns out to be, CR is not part of the region of North America (Norte America). I still think it causes confusion to have a continent and a region with tbe same name but different areas. Yet again, I also think it causes confusion to use the term "Americans" just for "USAians."
Now, how about the military? A couple of Costa Ricans insists that Costa Rica has no army or military, yet I find several web sites listing how many members are in it, and the $60,000,000 spent by the CR government each year on the military.
You want me to try other domains such as.es? Look at this map of all continents. Or this one, which implies "America" as one continent, but still divides it into Norte and Sud: NO central.
"Eurasia", by the way, is in more and more common usage, because when you get right down to it, Europe is just some peninsulas sticking out of the side of Asia. It does not resemble a distinct land mass on its own. Just like (continentally), Central America is just a narrowing of North America as you go south and east.
"or perhaps the United States is making North America bigger"
The continent was already mapped and defined before there was a United States!
Here's a good description from laborlawtalk that discusses "North America" as a region being different from "North America" as an actual continent (geography). See how Mexico gets lost:
"It should be noted that the term "North America", when employed in a context other than geography, may mean different things to different people. To many U. S. Americans and Canadians the term, in common usage, is often taken to mean "The United States of America and Canada, only", excluding Mexico and the countries of Central America, unless the context makes it clear that they are to be included (for instance, with specific reference to Mexico, when talking about NAFTA). This is due to the fact that culturally and economically, the USA and Canada are more alike to each other than they are to the rest of North America. Mexicans, however, are acutely aware that Mexico is a part of North America and object to this usage. The Central Americans, however, are generally content to be called Central Americans. "
The first link you gave did not work. The second one contains links to "complete" NA maps. As for the Central Americans not knowing that they are in the continent of North America, they probably don't care or have misperceptions of what continent they are in.
Such misconceptions are not uncommon. Many don't think that Iraq and Israel are Asian nations.
At last a map that shows a smaller North America! But, linked within the same site are plenty of maps that show the entire continent, such as this one. Also of interest is this spanish-language map.
However, Panama is part of North America as well, being up the isthmus from South America. The continental dividing line is actually within Columbia's borders. Panama was part of a country that was mostly in South America (Columbia), but this part was not in South America at all.
There are continent-straddling countries elsewhere. A main example is Turkey. An Asian nation, it has a small western part that is in Europe. This western part of Turkey is not Asian just because it is a possession of an Asian country.
Can you find me one continent map that includes the "Americas" as only one continent? Some CR or Brazilian education site or something like that?
I did a Google images site on continents at costa rican sites, and found this one. It shows North and South America as distinct. Searches on continente/continentes were useless.
The threat I see to this, if any, is videogame stores filing frivolous lawsuits about "unfair competition". Or videogame companies saying this encourages piracy. The same thing happened all over the country when video rental places complained about libraries carrying movies.
I guess that the "book library" is such a venerable and beloved institution that Borders, etc won't file frivolous lawsuits against libraries for their competition. It would make them look very very bad. However, the "videogame library" is a newer and odder concept, and might be fair game.
Hopefully, they will have on their shelves: "Grand Theft Book: Alexandria" in which you purloin tomes and spend the rest of the game running from and shooting library cops. I don't think you will find it in the children's section.
"You can have this copy of the Necronomicon when you pry it from my cold dead hands, sucka!"
Anyone know what's the cheat code so the topheavy bookmobiles are not as likely to tip over during high speed chases? The only code I know so far is the "Shhhh" mode that gets rid of the sounds.
"I am Costa Rican....But there is simply no military in Costa Rica.
Big waste of money."
In recent years, Costa Rica has spent more than $60,000,000 a year on the military. If you were Costa Rican, you would likely know that this "big waste of money" was going on.
Yes. An accurate map, or one with mistakes. Here is one that makes no mistakes about the names of the continents and where they are. Other than forgetting entirely about Antarctica:)
Slashdot Mirror
You say it did not promote censorship, and then go on to describe how it involved the government mandating certain content. How is this not censorship? Especially when it forces the station to remove other content?
"Removing the Fairness Doctrine made it possible for stations to promote political causes.
Check the Bill of Rights. The first amendment was made precisely to protect people from being able to promote political causes. Even if the government did not like it.
"but doesn't it make sense that both sides of a issue should be presented on stations that have been granted the right to broadcast using public airwaves? "
No, it does not. Unless the station chooses to do this on their own. The government has no business meddling in the viewpoints (i.e. censoring political views). This includes mandating that someone present a "side" they do not agree with.
"It's dishonest to claim that a law does the exact opposite or what it really does."
This is exactly what you did, even while you described how the censorship worked. It is quite honest to recognize that a government policy in which it controlled media content is indeed censorship.
Let's say you have a blog. Uncle Sam comes in and says "if you say this, we have to let Joe Hackslob have his say. If you want to keep Joe Hackslob of your site, shut up about politics." How is this not censorship? This is exactly what the "Fairness Doctrine" did.
With the Fairness Doctrine, the government decided what was fair. With it gone, this is left up to the public.
How did it do this? By having the government demand or hang over media so they did what the government thought was "fair". Until the station added government-approved content. It is also censorship because under the doctrine, broadcasters are forced NOT to broadcast material to make up for the "offical government content" taking up the schedule. Shouldn't "Freedom of the press" mean that you can do what you want, even on your editorial page (or your broadcast megaphone), without the government dictating content? I wonder if Ben Franklin and others would have agreed that the First Amendment meant that government could force newspapers to present government-approved "viewpoints".
As far as the public good, let the public decide if they like the content or not. Not the government.
Governor Mario Cuomo, who opposes censorship under the guise of the "fairness doctrine", said it best in this statement: "Precisely because radio and TV have become our principal sources of news and information, we should accord broadcasters the utmost freedom in order to insure a truly free press.".
"but I don't think the Fairness Doctrine counts as such since..."
And then you go on to describe how the Fairness Doctrine DOES dictate content.
Oh. Still watching the 700 Club, are we?
I for one do not favor any such content regulation.
The file sharer may be evil for other reasons, but not because he is stealing. It is technically, legally, and morally imposssible to steal by duplicating files.
Shhh. He thinks the Puritans were revolutionary libertarians who shocked old England with their loose ways. Don't bother him with reality.
That is what ALL government legislators do when they pass laws. Laws are nothing more than government telling you what is and what is not wrong.
"we fled england for a reason. we wanted freedom, and force morality "
Are you an anarchist? I don't think the pilgrims were.
I don't come here for variety, I come here for redundancy.
The government, that is who. All legislation ends up legislating morality.
"The last time someone tried to put a hold on how people lived, and should live, ended up shooting himself with a luger during a board meeting."
Sorry, that is what EVERY government does when you think about it. Not just that german with the silly 1/4-comb mustache you are thinking of. Go to your local law library and you will find shelves full of record of how government puts a hold on how people live. That is what government is all about. Is all government "Hitlers"? No. Does government legislate action limit how people live and legislate morality? Just about always.
This is hardly news
The discussions are different? In other words, one discussion might have a little more Apple bashing than the other. One discussion will have a goatse link, and the other will have a GNAA screed? In one, 89% of the posts are about whether piracy = theft. In the other, 91% of the posts are about whether piracy = theft. Yes, there really is a difference!
Do you want to submit this one tomorrow and make it 3 days in a row? Or should I do it?
I read this yesterday, in this item in the Apple category. Ignore the misleading "mp3" in the category: the article about just about every digital format ASIDE from mp3.
Now, how about the military? A couple of Costa Ricans insists that Costa Rica has no army or military, yet I find several web sites listing how many members are in it, and the $60,000,000 spent by the CR government each year on the military.
How about this: "if there is a North American continent, Costa Rica is in it". ok ? :)
The Google search on central america for me came up with many nice examples showing the region of Central America: . One of them, however, showed only South America!
You want me to try other domains such as .es? Look at this map of all continents. Or this one, which implies "America" as one continent, but still divides it into Norte and Sud: NO central.
"Eurasia", by the way, is in more and more common usage, because when you get right down to it, Europe is just some peninsulas sticking out of the side of Asia. It does not resemble a distinct land mass on its own. Just like (continentally), Central America is just a narrowing of North America as you go south and east.
"or perhaps the United States is making North America bigger"
The continent was already mapped and defined before there was a United States!
Here's a good description from laborlawtalk that discusses "North America" as a region being different from "North America" as an actual continent (geography). See how Mexico gets lost:
"It should be noted that the term "North America", when employed in a context other than geography, may mean different things to different people. To many U. S. Americans and Canadians the term, in common usage, is often taken to mean "The United States of America and Canada, only", excluding Mexico and the countries of Central America, unless the context makes it clear that they are to be included (for instance, with specific reference to Mexico, when talking about NAFTA). This is due to the fact that culturally and economically, the USA and Canada are more alike to each other than they are to the rest of North America. Mexicans, however, are acutely aware that Mexico is a part of North America and object to this usage. The Central Americans, however, are generally content to be called Central Americans. "
Such misconceptions are not uncommon. Many don't think that Iraq and Israel are Asian nations.
However, Panama is part of North America as well, being up the isthmus from South America. The continental dividing line is actually within Columbia's borders. Panama was part of a country that was mostly in South America (Columbia), but this part was not in South America at all.
There are continent-straddling countries elsewhere. A main example is Turkey. An Asian nation, it has a small western part that is in Europe. This western part of Turkey is not Asian just because it is a possession of an Asian country.
I did a Google images site on continents at costa rican sites, and found this one. It shows North and South America as distinct. Searches on continente/continentes were useless.
I guess that the "book library" is such a venerable and beloved institution that Borders, etc won't file frivolous lawsuits against libraries for their competition. It would make them look very very bad. However, the "videogame library" is a newer and odder concept, and might be fair game.
"You can have this copy of the Necronomicon when you pry it from my cold dead hands, sucka!"
Anyone know what's the cheat code so the topheavy bookmobiles are not as likely to tip over during high speed chases? The only code I know so far is the "Shhhh" mode that gets rid of the sounds.
In recent years, Costa Rica has spent more than $60,000,000 a year on the military. If you were Costa Rican, you would likely know that this "big waste of money" was going on.
Yes. An accurate map, or one with mistakes. Here is one that makes no mistakes about the names of the continents and where they are. Other than forgetting entirely about Antarctica :)