Re: [videoblogging] Re: FTC rules on blogger Payola
> What's the difference anyway? We are NOT talking about limiting free speechYep, good points. I originally laid out the fears/anger in the US over
> or regulating independent opinions. This rule is about regulating COMMERCIAL
> speech or speech that has been influenced by commerce.
the FTC announcement. As we all know, people in US dont always base
their arguments on facts. There is simply a knee-jerk reaction against
the government getting involved in anything. Hell, poor rural
americans would rather get eaten alive by cancer caused by processed
food and pesticides than have the government offer healthcare.
As Roxanne says, this rule is aimed at Commercial interactions online.
If it stays like this, it'l be fine...just like the blogosphere is
fine with laws against spam and child porn.
It's good to show some muscle when the govt does anything. Makes them
think twice. Now go buy some guns: http://www.auctionarms.com/
917 371 6790
- But blogs are self policing.
They are not a push technology.
They don't have giant multinational structures and teams of lawyers
avoiding the law.
I think the key here is that Blogs are self policing. That's why
they're cool and that's why they're popular.
People have the power to challenge a blog - on the air - so to speak.
It would be like me watching Lou Dobbs then jumping his shit on the
commerical break talking about how he's kowtowing to his parent
That cannot happen.
It happens all the time on blogs.
They might as well regulate the watercooler.
Blogger's who shill get shellacked and lose the trust of the readers.
Corporate Media is a shill period and, unfortunately, loses no trust
because of it.
On Oct 8, 2009, at 8:05 PM, Adrian Miles wrote:
> two wrongs don't make a right and if you want this to happen to
> perhaps the best way is bottom up, so if bloggers acted ethically then
> I think you are in a much stronger position to ask and expect it of
> others. But if someone won't do it until the other does then you've
> got exactly the issues we face with nuclear weapons, global warming
> etc where one side will not actually do the ethical thing simply
> because someone else won't either.
> On 09/10/2009, at 3:28 AM, Ron Watson wrote:
> > I'd like to see disclosure on the Today Show when one of NBC's
> > musicians performs, or when a movie comes out that they review that
> > was produced by a GE subsidiary.
> > I'd like to see disclosure on large clients of GE, or reporting on
> > investments of GE Finance on CNBC.
> > I'd like to see disclosure on Pentagon PR hacks doing their daily
> > rounds on the Sunday shows.
> > Disclosure of ADM as an advertiser on stories about GM foods from
> > every network.
> Adrian Miles
> Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]