Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ShadowAce; The Watcher; DGHoodini; combat_boots; jdege; cripplecreek; sauropod; Marty62; ...

Now this explains a lot! For those of you who I’m bumping, you may remember this thread:(that’s where I got many of your usernames)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2617966/posts

No wonder the Electronic Frontier Foundation was willing to take Soros funds. Look at how cozy the activist Berkman Center is with the EFF!

http://www.google.com/search?q=berkman+center+eff

One of the EFF’s advisory members even came from the open society institute.(soros’ outfit)

It all fits, it always comes back full circle. This net neutrality garbage gets dirtier and dirtier the more one digs.


4 posted on 04/27/2011 3:58:55 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing ( Net Neutrality - I say a lot of unneutral things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Halfmanhalfamazing

I will continue to oppose dishonest efforts to lump other issues with net neutrality. Either from the left so they can enact their statist policies, or from the corporate-bought so they can be free to control our freedom of speech and stifle innovation.


10 posted on 04/27/2011 4:12:17 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Now here is the book by this guy that I read a couple of years ago. I suggest it for anyone seriously studying the mindset of these people that are arrayed against freedom of human communications.

http://books.google.com/books?id=WuY7t7Cr5GoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Telecommunications,+Mass+Media,+and+Democracy:+The+Battle+for+the+Control+of+U.S.+Broadcasting,+1928-1935&source=bl&ots=0uV_Hu_d-8&sig=YdgH8utebSqaQCOOnbCljY_hNIg&hl=en&ei=v564TauON9DAtgec8ZneBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

Telecommunications, mass media, and democracy: the battle for the control of US Broadcasting, 1928-1935
By Robert Waterman McChesney

Their goal was to curtail commercial broadcasting and the corresponding advertising that goes with it. Then broadcasting would be nationalized.

The nut is that with advertising the content nominally belongs to those who pay for it (private enterprise), rather than belonging to the government.

Their goal is just that simple.


11 posted on 04/27/2011 4:13:41 PM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
The media reform conference was just a couple of weeks ago. It was hosted by Free Press and Nancy Pelosi was one of the featured speakers.

Presenters include House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, FCC Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Michael Copps, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman and Tony Award-winning playwright and performer Sarah Jones.
14 posted on 04/27/2011 4:29:48 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson