In Germany they came first for the Communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me — and by that time no one was left to speak up. — Martin Niemöller
I haven’t been following the latest blogosphere buzz, but it’s time to get involved. The one thing uniting liberal and conservative bloggers is a threat to our First Amendment rights. I may not agree with my liberal counterparts, but I wholeheartedly support their right to blog.
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is considering extending the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 to the Internet. With the complicity of our own George Bush, Congress violated the First Amendment by making law limiting certain groups from campaigning for political candidates in the months leading up to an election and limiting “soft money” contributions, although Congress is expressly prohibited from “…abridging the freedom of speech, or…the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government.”
The campaign finance reform law, like many laws designed by bureaucratic policy wonks, is complicated. The Washington Times wrote an editorial last year that is by far the most coherent explanation of the law, also known as McCain-Feingold :
People exercise their free-speech rights by expressing their ideas in forums that permit the widest dissemination. (What good is freedom of speech if the words cannot be heard by as many people as possible?) Today, television and radio represent the most effective forums for speech. An especially odious provision of McCain-Feingold was its section that attempted to specifically limit these avenues of communication by placing restrictions on so-called “electioneering communications” at the very moment they would be most effective — during the months immediately preceding an election. (What good is free speech if it can be exercised only during periods when it is likely to have the least impact?)In recent years, the national political parties funded hundreds of millions of dollars worth of issue ads (now called “electioneering communications”) with soft money, which the parties collected in unlimited (but fully disclosed) amounts from corporations, labor unions and wealthy individuals.
What should concern bloggers of all stripes is that despite an exemption, the Internet may become subject to the campaign finance reform law. A widely linked article by Declan McCullagh lays it all out. He interviewed Bradley Smith, one of six FEC commissioners. McCullugh writes:
In 2002, the FEC exempted the Internet by a 4-2 vote, but U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly last fall overturned that decision. “The commission’s exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines” the campaign finance law’s purposes, Kollar-Kotelly wrote.Smith and the other two Republican commissioners wanted to appeal the Internet-related sections. But because they couldn’t get the three Democrats to go along with them, what Smith describes as a “bizarre” regulatory process now is under way.
The law as applied to bloggers would mean that our linking to a particular candidate’s web site could be seen as a “contribution” to the campaign. As ridiculous as it sounds, we could be charged with a crime if found in violation.
This is why I am anti-big government, people. Forget the perks, like skin color set-aside programs, subsidies and the like. Government continues to grow more oppressive every day, and its perceived power to regulate every aspect of our lives knows no bounds!
Several bloggers are all over this, including Captain’s Quarters (who also does a great job explaining how the law would affect bloggers — also see his open letter to the Senate), Michelle Malkin (round-up), Devil’s Advocate, Pirates!, Power Line, Mark Tapscott…
If you blogged about this, trackback to this post and I’ll include your link in my round-up.
Pajama Hadin writes: “…I think there would be very strong justification for extending the exemption for the press in the McCain-Feingold law to Bloggers. The difficulty would be coming up with a standard for which kinds of Blogs would consititute representatives of the news media and thereby fall under the exemption. I suppose the specifics of Leahy’s bill would be a good start.” He also has a round-up.
Boy, am I late on this. 
Update: RedState is blogging so much about this issue, they’ve started a new section.
When I first started blogging back in November 2003, I remember reading an article about blogs as “serials” by Biz Stone, who works for Blogger. I found a similar article he wrote. The relevant portion:
Make It LegitIf you publish a weblog, whether it’s a solo project or a group gig, then you qualify for an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN). That’s right, you are a legitimate publication like any magazine or newspaper according to the National Serials Data Program, Library of Congress:
“In the case of electronic serials — especially those available online, such as on the Internet — the most significant criterion is that the publication must be divided into parts or issues which carry unique, numerical designations by which the individual issues may be identified, checked in, etc. Electronic serials that are issued as individual articles meet this criterion as long as the articles carry a unique designation.”
Blogs are published to the Internet in unique individual post so they qualify. In many cases you can apply for your number over the Web. I’ve seen several blogs proudly displaying an ISSN.
According to the definition of “serial,” a blog can be considered a serial publication. In that regard, if my blog is a serial publication akin to a newspaper, it qualifies for the press exemption under the campaign finance reform law. It’s a darn shame bloggers have to jump through all these hoops just to blog!
More from Malkin and other bloggers: thathero.com journal, Air Force Voices, The Liferaft of Love, Ubique Patriam Reminisci, Mount Virtus, Tex the Pontificator, Hold the Mayo, Right Wing Nut House (must-read post), Democracy Project, OKIE on the LAM, What Attitude Problem?, UNCoRRELATED, Mind of Mog (kitty, kitty), Political Teen (he’s really a teenager)…
Update II: RedState has a transcript of the first half of an interview with Bradley Smith, an FEC commissioner. You can also follow Polipundit’s link to the audio.
Lorie Byrd is back and tracking FEC-gate. (Did I just write FEC-gate??)
Update III (3/5): Very interesting analysis about blogs, file sharing and government regulation over at Whither The Fool? More updates here and here. Also see J Rob’s House of Opinion.
Right Wing Nut House receives an e-mail response from FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith.
Beldar the lawyer blogger weighs in on FEC-gate.
Welcome FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blog to the blogosphere. Stroll on over to Darleen’s Place, too.
Read Paradigm Shift’s “US Emulates Communists.”
The Cliffs of Insanity has joined the insanity.
I got a post here citing you and The Sundries Shack.
Comment by Robbie — 03.04.05 @ 11:04 am
First of all, great quote and very fitting!
Secondly, I’m glad you’ve joined in and you’re right that this is an issue wherein bloggers of all political backgrounds can unite.
In my post (I’ll add a tracback later) I point out that there is an exemption for the press in this law that does not presently extend to the Internet. I have argued previously that bloggers are journalists, not every self-described blogger mind you, but those who cover news events with or without commentary and have an intended large audience. What is of very interesting relevance to this is Leahy’s bill that specifically recognizes Bloggers as representatives of the news media.
Comment by PajamaHadin — 03.04.05 @ 11:12 am
The Coming Crackdown on Blogging
Bradley Smith says that the freewheeling days of political blogging and online punditry are over.
In just a few months, he warns, bloggers and news organizations could risk the wrath of the federal government if they improperly link to a campa…
Trackback by Pajama Hadin — 03.04.05 @ 11:13 am
Insight to Rights
"You only have any rights because the rest of u……
Trackback by Pirates! Man Your Women! — 03.04.05 @ 11:17 am
McCain-Feingold is the product of some very confused minds. It makes me think of the third example in the list of the world’s biggest lies:
1. Of course I’ll still respect you in the morning.
2. The check is in the mail.
3. I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.
Comment by RedBeard — 03.04.05 @ 11:19 am
This may not be a problem. See this: http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2005/03/other-side-of-fec.html, and if that does not solve it, then this might: http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2005/03/texas-radio-stands-with-blogosphere.html.
Comment by Don Singleton — 03.04.05 @ 12:06 pm
What was amazing to me yesterday when I read the comments on ZDNet, was the absurd thinking of some of the posters that this was a right wing plot. Maybe because McCain is a RINO, they think right wing.
Besides the fact that the Democrats on the Committee are the ones pushing it, does no one recall how the DNC/MSM tried to shut dow the Swift Boat Veterans?
Big government tends to take on a life of its own regardless of the so-called dominant party.
Comment by Pat'sRick? — 03.04.05 @ 12:16 pm
I am definitely for a smaller government. Start with a smaller Federal government, then shrink local.
Comment by Mark La Roi — 03.04.05 @ 12:26 pm
We Are Periodicals
In Declan McCullagh’s interview with Bradley Smith at C-Net there is an editor’s note (top of page 2): (Editor’s note: federal law limits the press exemption to a “broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication.” ) (emph…
Trackback by Musing Minds — 03.04.05 @ 1:10 pm
Remainders
La Shawn Barber says that McCain-Feingold has infringed upon the citizenry’s First Amendment rights so many times it’s not funny
Trackback by The Shape of Days — 03.04.05 @ 1:25 pm
Using the argument that bloggers are “journalists” should be a fall-back tactic, and avoided like the plague. Basically it conceeds the real issue:
I have the right to speak freely regardless, within the limits set by harm. No one has to be anyone special to have this right.
As I’ve said, it’s all about thought control - on the part of anti-free thought “racists”.
McCain Fiengold is a nonsensical Bill falling under the category of anti-free thought.
So what do I call its supporters? The same thing I also call anyone who wants me to be categorized in law as a “journalist”.
Comment by J. Peden — 03.04.05 @ 1:28 pm
Attention all bloggers! The sky is not falling! I repeat: The sky is not falling! Mar 4, 2005 — Setting the Record Straight: There is No FEC Threat to the Internet Statement of the Campaign Legal Center Washington, D.C. –
Trackback by What Attitude Problem? — 03.04.05 @ 1:57 pm
La Shawn, there was a discussion that touched on that back in October when you blogged about sKerry mangling the Book of Jeremiah while “preaching” in a black church.
http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/12/jeremiah/#more-643
Altho I didn’t specifically cite it then, my thinking at the time (IIRC I do believe I specifically commented on someone else’s blog) that sooner or later McCain-Feingold would be aimed at bloggers.
Anyhoo, maybe McCain-Feingold will finally cause me to get off my duff and start my own blog specifically in order to participate in a virtual Boston Tea Party.
Comment by Andy — 03.04.05 @ 2:08 pm
Signs That Your Cause Is About To Die A Slow, Painful Death
When you can get bloggers from both sides stirred up en masse against your cause, might as well start ordering the cushioned coffins.
What can I say about this dumb move that hasn’t been said already? It’s a limitation of free speech. Pure and sim…
Trackback by Ubique Patriam Reminisci — 03.04.05 @ 3:33 pm
Blowback?
C/NET.com has an interesting interview with Bradley Smith - the libertarianish commissioner on the Federal Election Commission - about possible regulation of blogs via the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.
Trackback by A Face Made 4 Radio, A Voice Made 4 the Internet — 03.04.05 @ 4:34 pm
One of the reasons I lost interest in McCain as a Presidential candidate was his promise that there would be “blood on the floor” of the Senate if they didn’t consider his campaign reform bill. He was entirely too self-righteous about that bill. Now he acts surprised at the abuses that occurred. Previously, a very active Democrat and I had a long conversation on how every attempt at campaign “reform” had the opposite effect of what its authors said they intended. Here we go again.
Comment by Evon Bachaus — 03.04.05 @ 4:36 pm
Blogging and free speech
This isn’t a question of free speech, so much as what something is if it walks, quacks, and smells like a duck.
Trackback by The Liferaft of Love — 03.04.05 @ 5:36 pm
I wonder, is the FCC is concerned about speech that is effective and persuasive (is that really a bad thing here?) or are they concerned that the RIGHT WING blogger’s speech is effective and persuasive? I think the latter. Name me a case where public opinion has changed, somebody got fired, some fraud was perpetrated, becuase bloggers swarmed in mass with no justification, with lies, and with wrecklessness. CBS, CNN’s EJ, Kerry’s fabulous lies about Cambodia, they were all true, and exposed, and ignored by the press until the swarm became too loud. Now the FCC wants to limit free speech. What’s the real difference between us all posting here, or chatting over drinks in bar with other like-minded people? This is wrong. And a bit scary.
Comment by Gary — 03.04.05 @ 5:38 pm
You know when something has made an impact when the politicians and bureaucrats (now judges) start to tinker with legislation.
However, is this an assault on free speech…who is lobbying for this legislation?
Comment by Air Force Voices — 03.04.05 @ 5:54 pm
Now, Seriously –
We’re not talking about millionaire nutjobs pouring dirty money into dirty politics here (ok, we’re not as long as you exclude moveon.org), we’re talking about insightful working men and women who take the time and energy to lend their own unabashed…
Trackback by thathero.com journal — 03.04.05 @ 5:54 pm
Fight the McCain-Feingold Tyranny
Today that old feeling of disgust reemerged. It didn’t take me long after I first read about McCain-Feingold - eight years ago in my political science class with Dr. Mickey Craig (to whom I owe a lot of my depth and insights into politics) - to devel…
Trackback by Mount Virtus — 03.04.05 @ 6:14 pm
The FEC Prepares to Attack the Internet and Bloggers
LaShawn Barber has an extended post on this topic. In some respects the power of the internet has seemed too good to be true. McCain and crew seem determined to assure that it’s not true for long.
Trackback by Tex the Pontificator — 03.04.05 @ 6:15 pm
Blogs Will Not Go Quietly
Ed Morrissey, the Captain of Captain’s Quarters, has written his own letter to McCain and Feingold and copied every Senator as well. His letter is detailed, thorough and restrained. Which puts it in fairly stark contrast from the shoot-from-the-hip im…
Trackback by Hold The Mayo — 03.04.05 @ 6:20 pm
WHY MAKING A MOUNTAIN OUT OF A MOLEHILL IS SOMETIMES A GOOD THING
The blogswarm surrounding the C-Net interview yesterday with FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith may prove to be much ado about nothing. This statement from The Campaign Legal Center courtesy of What Attitude Problem:
Washington, D.C. — In a recent inte…
Trackback by Right Wing Nut House — 03.04.05 @ 6:27 pm
Countering Candor at the FEC or, How Do You Stop a Blogswarm?
Let’s say you favor, either through conviction or employment demands, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, commonly known as McCain-Feingold. You’re stunned by a blogswarm born of a candid interview one of the commissioners of the FEC grants t…
Trackback by Democracy Project — 03.04.05 @ 6:56 pm
Bad Moon Risin’ - Killing off the Blogs
[Heads up: Michelle Malkin]
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is starting the process to expand the reach of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Act to include the Internet. This has far reaching implications for bloggers such as your’s truly, a…
Trackback by OKIE on the LAM - In LA — 03.04.05 @ 7:08 pm
Walking it back
In response to the hysteria about Bradley Smith’s musings about the possible impact of campaign finance law on blogger speech rights, the FEC is doing damage control. The issue the FEC - and the courts - are grappling with is…
Trackback by UNCoRRELATED — 03.04.05 @ 7:44 pm
No FECing Blogs
So that’s why Redstate has a whole section dedicated to the FEC. While waiting to discover just how illegal out blogs are, check out this helpful bit of instructions. This comment by Maximos at Redstate sums it up.
The difference is that under the ne…
Trackback by Mind of Mog — 03.04.05 @ 7:48 pm
Completely unacceptable of the FEC.
Comment by RepJ — 03.04.05 @ 8:06 pm
Bloggers Covered?
LaShawn Barber found something that would cover a big percentage of bloggers if that horrible bill got passed. It seems that anyone using Blogger/Blogspot is covered by some type of media protection: Make It Legit If you publish a weblog,…
Trackback by The Political Teen — 03.04.05 @ 9:25 pm
Well, I don’t mind the idea of a campaign FINANCE law, as long as it remains a FINANCE law. I don’t like the fact that a few interest groups can donate billions of dollars to one campaign while another campaign might not get anything. But a FINANCE law shouldn’t have anything to do with the freedom of speech in any case. Money and speech are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things. (Sorry for all the captials, but I want to make my point…)
I think McCain is a creep, and I’m glad he didn’t become president.
Comment by Shayne — 03.04.05 @ 9:37 pm
shayne
as far as I’m concerned money and speech are NOT different
and McCain-Feingold was a baldfaced move NOT to “reform campaign finance” but to protect incumbents from non-politico upstarts. If I want to spend my time throwing neighborhood cocktail parties to promote my candidate, or put a bumpersticker on my car, or a sign in my yard, or write about my opinions on my blog is NO FRIGGIN BUSINESS of the FEC. Period.
Geez, if LINKING to a campaign site is a “contribution”, if I link to a charity do I get to DEDUCT that “contribution” on my taxes??
Comment by Darleen — 03.04.05 @ 10:07 pm
“The sky is not falling!”
by What Attitude Problem? — 03.04.05 @ 1:57 pm
I think the proper way to evaluate the likelihood of an attempt by the FEC to “regulate” is to view it in an historical and biological context.
The stream of history shows that societies usually resolve themselves into two camps: those who’re content with an existing order, and others who desire change; this situtation causes tension that usually cause the camps to come into some sort of conflict, unless the society has provided the means to peacefully deal with the tensions. The US was the first nation on earth to develop a formal framework that enabled a society to evolve without conflict…it’s called the Constitution.
Biology, and Abraham Maslow, agree that survival is the fundamental drive in all organisms. Institutions built by human beings are no less motivated to survive. Political institutions, media organizations (i.e., the MSM), lobbyists, legal foundations, ecclesiastical organizations, NGOs (nongovernmental organizations such as the Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, etc.), all have this overarching need to survive.
Now, couple the inevitable tensions between bloggers (who’re individuals in the truest sense of the word) and the self-satisfied elites who’re at the top of the food chain, with the survival need which the elites, the institutions they inhabit, and the bloggers all share, and you have an explosive situation. Bloggers have displayed muscle in the past couple of years [e.g., Trent Lott; Howell Raines & Jayson Blair; Eason Jordan] that truly frightens the elites, and directly threatens the institutions they revere. These institutions themselves feel as threatened as the elites who are at the top of the power structures. Organisms whose survival is threatened strike back.
You can expect anyone who is part of the existing power relationships, and organizations tha derive their significance from it, to be natural allies in the struggle with the bloggers. Bloggers are individuals, but are Borg-like in how they’re connected with one another, and are likewise natural allies when what they value (the blogosphere and their right to enshrine their thoughts and opinions in it) is threatened.
The conflict is inevitable, as is the outcome [Hint: the bloggers win]. Trying to control free speech in a virtual world is like trying to grasp the wind…impossible to do, and foolish to try. This lame attempt to expand specious judiciary authority to enable limiting the kind of speech that threatens an established power structure will be about as successful controlling a rainstorm. The control mechanisms of today were formed in an era when it took large organizations to disseminate information. And, these themselves run by a small group of individuals who were themselves either part of the power structure, or beholden to it. So, the limited free speech exercised by the average person was limited to a very small circle of family, friends, and coworkers. This was no threat.
Now, the internet and the blogosphere enable anyone with a PC, a modem, and the time for it, to make his/her voice heard literally around the world. Search engines and surfing enable these people to rapidly develop networks of likeminded people, and overnight to crystallize a powerful movement that temporizing politicians can’t ignore. The established leaders and institutions of today “grew up” in an environment where occasional seamy deals were made for less than noble purposes. These kinds of deeds love the dark, not the light. The blogosphere turns a harsh light on everything, and hence threatens the established order. So, they’ll fight to hold onto what they know, because they fear the blog’s power. It’s normal, and predictable, as is the ultimate resolution [HINT: The bloggers win]
I expect the blogswarm to continue, and to grow at a rate that’ll make the Eason Jordan fiasco pale in comparison. Incidentally, do you think the temporal proximity of the infamous Bradley Smith FEC interview and Eason Jordan’s ouster, is coincidental? The world has seen what the blogosphere can do, and CNN is a powerful “old” institution. It’s survival is threatened, and with it that of the MSM, and the politicos who depend upon these institutions for their survival. The threat to existing power structures is generally recognized now, and you can be sure traditional enemies will make common cause to attempt to control or eliminate the threat. The FEC’s trial balloon is just the first salvo. The best way to rock the elites back on their heels to “swarm” the dickens out of them. At some point, they’ll realize that there’s no turning back the clock to the 1960s, and that they have to live with the changes, just like candlemakers had to live with the electric light bulb.
It hasn’t yet occurred to them what it would be like to have most US political blogs hosted on servers outside the country. Inside the country, they may not be able to control them, but it’s a heckuva lot easier to influence them. Out of the country…you get my drift.
But, they won’t go quietly into the night. They long for the world they understand, and only now realize things are fundamentally changing. Just like Gutenberg’s printing press started a fundamental change in medieval Europe (thanks, Hugh Hewitt), so is the expansion of the blogosphere causing a fundamental shift in politics and organizations.
The Chinese have a proverbial curse: “May you live in interesting time.” We just happen to live in “interesting” times.
Hektor
Comment by Hektor — 03.04.05 @ 10:19 pm
I’m with Darleen.
McCain’s only constituency is a fawning press so it’s no surprise he wants to eliminate any criticism from the non-MSM and blogs.
Comment by capitano — 03.04.05 @ 11:25 pm
The devil is in the details: the Internet was designed for collaboration thus it is inherently a prime target for McCain-Feingold
The Democracy Project has a very good smack down of the shill who came to McCain’s defense. There is just one point that I am surprised that the Democracy Project didn’t realize the significance of in the Campaign Legal Center’s…
Trackback by Blind Mind's Eye — 03.04.05 @ 11:43 pm
Speech Regulators Counterattack
Instapundit has a link about yesterday’s blogstorm over the FEC looking into regulating the Internet drew blood. Now those who want to regulate blogs are striking back. They put out a press release stating emphatically that Brad Smith is wrong…
Trackback by Just Some Poor Schmuck — 03.05.05 @ 3:02 am
On the subject of whether blogs should have ISSN, the British Library (which assigns these in the UK) says: “ISSN may also be assigned to online journal titles, CD-ROMs and diskettes which are intended to be issued on a continuous basis. Different editions of serials must have different ISSN. This applies to different language editions, regional editions and different physical formats (e.g. CD-ROM, online and print versions of a journal title have separate numbers). However ISSN are not assigned to Internet resources consisting predominantly of links, nor individual or company home pages including Weblogs. (My emphasis)
I don’t see this as a case of government grabbing more power to itself by stealth, but rather an unintended consequence of an attempt to regulate political campaigning in the new internet era. But things don’t look the same from this side of the Atlantic…
Comment by Richard Hall — 03.05.05 @ 6:22 am
FEC, Blogging and Political Speech
There is a storm brewing.
If you haven’t read this CNET story, check it out:
Bradley Smith says that the freewheeling days of political blogging and online punditry are over.
In just a few months, he warns, bloggers and news organizations coul…
Trackback by Myopic Zeal — 03.05.05 @ 7:16 am
First Ammendment and the FEC (I Wonder if Either
At issue here is where does the FEC’s authority over “electioneering communications” ends and free speech begins. To me the distinction is false
Trackback by J Rob's House of Opinions — 03.05.05 @ 10:01 am
Freedom To Blog?
UpDate #2: Democracy Project has a great piece on the role of Senator McCain and his former staff and their influence in the FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith affair.
But, what no one has discussed is McCain’s relationship with other members of the FEC…
Trackback by FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog — 03.05.05 @ 11:37 am
Beldar to FEC: Bring It On!
The blogosphere (e.g., InstaPundit, Power Line, Michelle Malkin, Prof. Bainbridge, Red State, La Shawn Barber, The Democracy Project, etc.) is abuzz with worries that the Federal Election Commission, per a decision of a single federal district judge, m…
Trackback by BeldarBlog — 03.05.05 @ 12:49 pm
It was the strawberries … the strawberries …
For good reason the blogsphere is rightfully alarmed by the threats coming from the FEC in regards to free speech on the Internet. Transcripts of the interview with FEC commissionar Bradley Smith can be found at Redstate.org. She [Judge Koller-Cotella]…
Trackback by Darleen's Place — 03.05.05 @ 1:01 pm
US Emulates Communists
There has been a bit of commotion lately in the blog-sphere over the extension of the recent Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 to include web sites under its aegis of restricted speech. I of course oppose any restriction…
Trackback by Paradigm Shift — 03.05.05 @ 2:41 pm
FRC v. The Blogosphere Cont’d
Democracy Project on the smear Brad Smith campaign Day by Day (for March 5) has a day of silence La Shawn Barber on how McCain united the left and right Stop the Bleating on the related California legislation JurisPundit on
Trackback by ProfessorBainbridge.com — 03.05.05 @ 6:12 pm
Look Out Bloggers; Here Comes McCain-Feingold!
Basically, what this ruling is saying is that Dan Rather is perfectly free to regurgitate DNC talking points under the guise of “reporting,” but my hyperlink to a Hillary Clinton campaign site, along with a mocking analysis of her campaign platform, …
Trackback by The Cliffs of Insanity — 03.05.05 @ 7:00 pm
This is going to bite us in the hindquarters
I continue to read the various contributions about the FEC ‘kerfuffle’ and continue to be underwhelmed by the threat. In fact I know that things are going to hell in a handbasket when normally conservative blogs start repeating ‘guilt by…
Trackback by UNCoRRELATED — 03.05.05 @ 9:12 pm
They Can’t Have It Both Ways (Or Can They?)
The blogosphere is a truly organic, participatory medium that transcends “media” and achieves parity with casual conversation, in a sense. It just happens that there may be as many as tens of thousands of people participating in the chat. They wouldn…
Trackback by No Easy Answers — 03.05.05 @ 10:41 pm
Thanks for the info..
Monika Brooks
Comment by Monika Brooks — 03.06.05 @ 3:18 am
UNCorrelated: This is going to bite us in the hindquarters
“…Only if the blog is instituted for the specific purpose of advocating the election or defeat of a candidate AND the blog is coordinated with a federal campaign committee…”
My sojourn on this sod has taught me to beware of words like “only if” when used in the context of abridging someone’s legal rights. It immediately begs the question of WHO decides when “only if” applies.
Thank you for the link to the BCRA…I was especially interested in the appendix, “Cases Concerning the Internet.” While grateful to note that all the legal advisors specifically caution the FEC to “…tread very lightly when regulating in the the area of the internet…” This isn’t what I’d call an emphatic “Don’t do it!”; it’s simply legalese and bureaucratese for “Be sure you can get away with it when you try to do it.” The FEC signals that it received the message loud and clear in the next paragraph, when it “…indicated this subject would require a considerable amount of addtional work and research before rules can be promulgated. Accordingly, it concluded that FOR THE TIME BEING, IT WOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ISSUE UNTIL SUFFICIENT RESOURCES BECAME AVAILABLE.”
I take from this that the FEC believes it should regulate internet speech, recognizes that there’ll be a lot of resistance, and initially intends to attempt to regulate only those portions they can easily win. Once they’ve built precedent, they’ll extend their regulating power to other areas determined by those with “only if” decisionmaking power.
This is NOT a “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” question. This is a trial balloon being floated to see just where the red lines are with the internet community. You can be sure…the government very much wants to regulate the blogosphere, especially the political arena. Political blogs shine the harsh light of public scrutiny into the dark corners that ALL politicians (Dem and Rep) would prefer to keep dark.
I encourage the internet community to keep bellowing until the FEC and their political masters tuck tails and slink away. Toning down the screaming is the surest way to tell the FEC where one of the red lines is. It’s consituent screams (measured in decibel level) that gives otherwise spineless politicians the political courage to oppose something.
And don’t listen to those who say “it’s only a few words” uttered by a single commissioner. The First Amendment is only a few words long, but it’s all that stands between you and a “Workers Paradise.” Read it closely…I challenge you to find one area in it that the federal government hasn’t tried to abridge or limit in the past 30 years.
Hektor
Comment by Hektor — 03.06.05 @ 8:31 am
In some ways this is hysterical. OK - let’s take the worst case scenario - they apply this to bloggers. So if you can’t put it on your blog but you guest post on mine, and I link to a campaign website - who are they gonna call? Ghostbusters? And of course the whole underground nature of such continual guest posting would just skyrocket the interest. And if I write a series of posts for weeks on end what exactly can they do to me? Of course it’s not likely I would - although if this happens I could change my mind… But really - and perhaps a little jostle for some folk here too - they cannot regulate global blog expression. So my tongue in cheek advice is to make friends with some non-US bloggers. Could come in handy…
Comment by Catez — 03.06.05 @ 9:13 am
Liberal and Conservative Bloggers Unite
There are so many things the gov’t is trying to steal from us with Bush’s blessing. Besides trying to make a national ID card, further attacks on the constitution are coming under Bush’s watch.
Trackback by HCS's Pad — 03.06.05 @ 10:00 pm
The First Amendment
Does anyone remember this little item from past history classes or what was once called civics?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, …
Trackback by Snugg Harbor — 03.07.05 @ 8:33 pm
LEFT AND RIGHT BLOGGERS UNITED
A coalition of conservative and liberal bloggers has formed to help preserve and protect online free speech against overzealous FEC regulation. I have signed my name to a letter addressed to FEC chairman Scott Thomas along with 21 other bloggers…
Trackback by Michelle Malkin — 03.11.05 @ 11:27 am
Media Notes Covers FEC Showdown With Bloggers
I have given Howard Kurtz some harsh criticism over his lack of coverage in the Eason Jordan controversy, but today he does an excellent job of covering the wide-ranging debate over the FEC and its new charge to strip the…
Trackback by Captain's Quarters — 03.11.05 @ 2:27 pm
FEC, the Internet and BCRA
From The Washington Post via Lucianne.com March 11
Rarely do I read Howard Kurtz column but F…
Trackback by Vista On Current Events — 03.12.05 @ 3:21 am
Updates on Blogs and Campaign Finance “Reform”
Following up on yesterday’s post about the FEC trying to claim that blogs may be “issue ads,” Professor Bainbridge posted a short article in which he says:
…
Trackback by Cyber-Conservative — 03.15.05 @ 11:49 am
Bloggers Pacified by Rule Softening
After reading the first draft of the FEC’s proposed rules for internet speech, I think I have to be the only person in the blogosphere disappointed that these rules were not pushed through. We bloggers, at some level, should be
Trackback by Ex Nihilo — 03.25.05 @ 5:30 pm