Quote:
Originally Posted by August
BTW let's take the lefts objection to this ruling to it's natural conclusion.
Who owns the New York Times? That's right, a corporation. If corporations shouldn't have free speech then the corporate owned NYT shouldn't either.
"Freedom of the press" you say? Well as we see these days you don't have to belong to a corporation to report the news. Just ask any blogger.
So mookie, I expect that you and Keith Olberman to immediately start advocating that the New York Times, the Boston Globe and any other corporation owned "news" network be banned from providing politically related news reporting during elections.
|
Wrong natural conclusion. Since companies can now use the media to run ads supporting the positions of the politicians they've contributed to, they can basically pay to get whomever they want elected.
Hate the price of prescription medication? Sorry, the Senator from Merck, in a bill co-sponsored by the Senator from Pfizer, has established that drug company patents don't expire, thus effectively ending the generic drug market.
Hate the bailouts? Well, hate to break it to you, but the House of Representatives brought to you by Goldman Sachs will vote 434-1 in favor of the next one.
Want to start a business? Well, the City Council, sponsored by WalMart along with the Mayor, brought to you by Target has changed the zoning laws, and your store must close.
Quote:
|
"Freedom of the press" you say? Well as we see these days you don't have to belong to a corporation to report the news. Just ask any blogger.
|
Good luck with that when the President, brought to you in part by Boston Globe and Rupert Murdoch signs a bill preventing "unlicensed news reporting."