- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Net Neutrality Proponents--this is the crap you get-"Fed to collect social media data?"
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:18 am
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:18 am
Who wants this crap?
Giving the FEC the power to regulate the internet was a huge mistake and we should all be glad Trump rolled it back somewhat.
LINK
Just because political speech is now electronic does not make it any different than the political speech of the past.
Giving the FEC the power to regulate the internet was a huge mistake and we should all be glad Trump rolled it back somewhat.
LINK
quote:
Ann Ravel, the former Democratic chair of the Federal Election Commission who controversially pushed to regulate the internet during her time leading the commission, is now suggesting a new government enforcement agency be established to help tech companies discover questionable communications from social media sites in an effort to find alleged disinformation campaigns.
Ravel made the suggestions in a recent Atlantic essay titled "How the Government Could Fix Facebook," which featured insights from a number of experts and suggestions such as imposing fines for data breaches, making tech companies liable for objectionable content, and installing ethics review boards.
Under a section titled "Police Political Advertising" within the piece, the former chair told the publication that the definition of ‘election advertising' should be expanded to help detect new disinformation campaigns that may not be found under the current definition. This could be established if the FEC were to create a "multifaceted test" to help determine if certain additional communications should fall under the category of election-related materials, Ravel said.
Ravel added that if the definition were to be expanded, a new government enforcement agency could be created to help the tech companies find questionable communications, which would also help the FEC.
Just because political speech is now electronic does not make it any different than the political speech of the past.
This post was edited on 4/10/18 at 11:23 am
5
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:20 am to I B Freeman
quote:
How the Government Could Fix Facebook
Why the frick does the government need to fix Facebook? The only thing they need to worry about fixing is the economy, our borders, and the CFP selection committee
This post was edited on 4/10/18 at 11:21 am
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:25 am to Mr. Hangover
It is unbelievable to me that people actually trusted the government to regulate the internet.
How naive are people today??
How naive are people today??
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:41 am to I B Freeman
You act like the Fed suddenly started collecting shite & spying on us....they've been doing this for decades and no law will stop them. The only answer is no or very little social media footprint.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:48 am to Wtodd
The answer it to keep the government out of the manipulation of news and media the best we can.
Friggin Net Neutrality was a big ole invitation to "manipulate the masses" ect.
Friggin Net Neutrality was a big ole invitation to "manipulate the masses" ect.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:50 am to I B Freeman
quote:=/=
Fed to collect social media data
quote:
if
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:52 am to LSURussian
"Fed to collect social media data?"
=
having the power to do so if they regulate the net as a utility.
=
having the power to do so if they regulate the net as a utility.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 11:53 am to I B Freeman
But it hasn't happened yet. Your own link says that.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 12:04 pm to LSURussian
You are correct but the point the OP makes is that had NN laws stayed in place there would in fact be people in government wanting to use them to do such things as collect social media data.
No better evidence than a former FEC regulator saying so.
No better evidence than a former FEC regulator saying so.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 12:18 pm to I B Freeman
There is absolutely nothing in that article that pertains to net neutrality.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 12:19 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Friggin Net Neutrality was a big ole invitation to "manipulate the masses" ect.
With it or without it, nothing will change
Posted on 4/10/18 at 12:19 pm to ctalati32
The power to regulate the internet as a utility is the power they would have to collect social media data.
That may be hard for you to understand. No one that favored net neutrality (besides the profiteers) considered the full ramifications of empowering the bureaucrats with that power.
That may be hard for you to understand. No one that favored net neutrality (besides the profiteers) considered the full ramifications of empowering the bureaucrats with that power.
This post was edited on 4/10/18 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 4/10/18 at 12:20 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Under a section titled "Police Political Advertising" within the piece, the former chair told the publication that the definition of ‘election advertising' should be expanded to help detect new disinformation campaigns that may not be found under the current definition. This could be established if the FEC were to create a "multifaceted test" to help determine if certain additional communications should fall under the category of election-related materials, Ravel said.
this is why Citizens United is so important
if that case went the other way, the FEC could dissolve free speech well beyond anything we could imagine
Posted on 4/10/18 at 7:48 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
The power to regulate the internet as a utility is the power they would have to collect social media data.
That may be hard for you to understand. No one that favored net neutrality (besides the profiteers) considered the full ramifications of empowering the bureaucrats with that power.
If this is the case, why haven't you all been fighting for phone calls to be deregulated as a utility. This is just some talking point made up to scare people into being against net neutrality to get more money into the pockets of the big telecom companies
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:22 pm to I B Freeman
OP I’m thinking you aren’t understanding what NN actually is. Nothing in there is related to it.
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:30 pm to ctalati32
quote:
This is just some talking point made up to scare people into being against net neutrality to get more money into the pockets of the big telecom companies
IB Freeman is against local governments giving monopolies to those companies.
Are you?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News