Web Logs, Politics, and You
I received an email invitation to an event the other day; the Institute
For Politics Democracy & The Internet briefing on the FEC's
proposed rule changes on internet communications "Will the revolution be Regulated". I am interested in what they have to say and will try to get out of work early next week to go to this. I had written a post on the FEC a
little over a month ago after hearing about the draft of these
proposals following the FEC's 24 Mar 05 meeting. The news reports had
left me a little apprehensive. Reading over the text of the draft, it
seemed to indicate they favored an intention to cut out a broad
exemption in their rules regarding media, for web loggers (and similar
such).
While it is clear a lot of envelope pushing activity
was occurring in the last election, its not clear how much of a cure is
needed. Some web loggers were engaged in co-ordinated activities with
campaigns (and with each other in astro-turf campaigns), some were
taking money from campaigns. Both previous generally with-out
disclosing any of it. Others were raising money for campaigns. In these
latter cases; though, it's not as though anyone ought to feel deceived
by any perceived content bias.
The FEC seemed to recognize that web loggers survive on on
their reputations - for reliable information, insight, or consistency.
Little stays concealed in the internet world for long. Caveat emptor
works fairly well broadly speaking. The FEC's residual concerns seemed
to lie in the direction of whether well funded concerns could leverage
this into either providing or denying equipment and services in
attempts to influence information flow. My remaining concerns lie with
the possibility that the independent internet world - read that as a
slightly broadened synonym for web logging - might fall in to cycles of
leveling bias charges against each other. In the face of which
resourceless amateurs like myself would find themselves either shutdown
or chilled in the discussion of ideas and their merits. Trying to prove
a negative. I run Atomized jr here as a public discussion. I vote and I
don't hide what opinions I have (I have fewer opinions than people
suppose), but I don't intend to ever become a signal repeater for any
political campaign.
On Tuesday the Washington Post ran a medium length article On Bloggers and Money
covering all this. The article indicates that some election law experts
are continuing to put pressure on the FEC to tighten rules. A professor
of law at Loyola university points out in the article that since
elections are finite events, it doesn't help if eventually a web
writer's unrevealed interests are laid bare afterwards. The articles
notes that congress may not leave it up to the FEC. The Senate rules
committee has approved and passed out a bill [ I can't find the Senate
bill that the Post refers to but the description matches H.R 1606.IH Online Freedom of speech act (introduced in the house see Thomas) ] that would prevent the FEC from promulgating more stringent rules.
IDPI's event which it bills as a legal briefing will involve
a panel discussion by Ken Gross, Robert F. Bauer, and Don Simon. All
campaign finance law lawyers. and will discuss the effect of the rule
changes, proposed and potential, on political activists with websites
and the web logging community of the politically active. The event
takes place 11 May 2005 4:30 pm to 6:30 pm on The George Washington
University Campus, Media and Public Affairs Building, 805 21st Street,
Room B07, Washington, D.C.
11:42:55 PM  ;;
|
|
