Recent FEC hearing were used to push for a censored internet.
Democrats have reached the point of asserting that a censored internet is necessary to preserve Democracy. One way to bring that about, while pretending to respect the First Amendment, is to set up complicated and expensive rules about how you can use the internet to publicize a message. That way, only large corporations will have the legal resources to use the internet effectively.
Dan Backer writes at The Hill, “Free speech means a free internet — even if Democrats don’t like it.”
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) recently held two days of hearings on proposed internet regulations. While the hysterical mediahas ginned up a new “red scare,” the FEC’s proposals will do nothing to stop bad actors, but will undermine our First Amendment rights to online political speech.
Existing regulations are clear and comprehensive. The law isn’t the so-called problem being addressed here, though; it’s all that persnickety speech outside the political establishment.
The FEC’s Democrats, most notably Vice Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub, condemn advertising “paid for by Russia or other foreign countries,” urging Congress to “regulate political spending on the internet.” But that’s silly: The law already forbade those bad actors […].
Bad actors won’t comply with the law — because they’re bad actors. For the political elites, who can afford to hire campaign finance lawyers and well-paid vendors, the FEC’s proposals will at most be a nuisance as they continue delivering their messages online.
This is why the media loves the “Russia hacked the election” story. Hysteria over “information warfare” gives them a chance to “protect” the internet, not from Russians, but from Deplorables.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com