Quantcast

FCC Votes For Online Transparency Of Political Advertisement Purchases

ProudProgressive 2012/04/28 14:19:42
In another example of the increased transparency that the Obama Administration has pushed for the last four years, and in yet another blow to the Right Wing attempt, aided and abetted by the most activist Supreme Court in American history, to buy the American election process, the FCC has moved to lift the veil of secrecy over funding of the endless attack ads that have already been launched against both the President and other Democratic candidates across the nation. It's not enough, of course, but it is another step in the right direction.

Article excerpt follows:

FCC Votes For Online Transparency Of Political Advertisement Purchases
April 27, 2012

By a two-to-one vote, the Federal Communications Commission voted today to require broadcasters to make previously hard-to-find public records available online. Within two years, they will have to post in an FCC online database their "public file" including who purchased or attempted to purchase air time for political advertisements and how much they paid for it. This information is currently only available by showing up, in person, at each television or radio station, and there are often bureaucratic barriers to actually accessing the information. While this additional transparency will not allow citizens to know who is funding shady independent ads, it will at least allow them to track where the spending is going and how much is being spent for each airtime purchase. The two Democrats on the Commission voted for the rules, the lone Republican voted against.

Read More: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/27/472899...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Evil 1 2012/04/28 15:02:33
    Evil 1
    +1
    What a crock! Obama and his adminstration are about as transparent as a brick wall.
  • ProudPr... Evil 1 2012/04/28 15:07:19
    ProudProgressive
    If the Obama Administration is a brick wall, then the prior administration is a mile thick slab of steel.

    But if you're dissatisfied with the level of transparency in the current government, then why would you oppose regulations that increase transparency?
  • Evil 1 ProudPr... 2012/04/28 15:23:53
    Evil 1
    Again with the prior administration. Time to man up and accept the fact that Obama is in office and has been for three years. We weren't discussing the previous administration we were discussing Obama and his administration. If you choose to redirect rather than address the premise of the discussion then I will choose to ignore you ignorance.

    Furthermore Obama ran on the mantra that his administration would be the most transparent in the history of the US. He has come no where near delivering on that promise. His administration has beed so far from tranparent it's ridiculous. When the media has to repeatedly file lawsuits under the FOIA to acquire information that is public record it shows just how untransparent they truly are.

    I never said I was opposed to increasing transparency. Nice try in spinning the facts but you fail. I am for total tranparency by the government. I am unhappy with Obama's failure to deliver on his promise of a transparent administration and a BS article such as this trying to dispell the fact and truth. No where does it state that Obama had anything to do with pushing for this ruling. If he were true to his word the healthcare bill would have been on the internet for everyone to read (another failed campaign promise he made) before its passage. And...
    Again with the prior administration. Time to man up and accept the fact that Obama is in office and has been for three years. We weren't discussing the previous administration we were discussing Obama and his administration. If you choose to redirect rather than address the premise of the discussion then I will choose to ignore you ignorance.

    Furthermore Obama ran on the mantra that his administration would be the most transparent in the history of the US. He has come no where near delivering on that promise. His administration has beed so far from tranparent it's ridiculous. When the media has to repeatedly file lawsuits under the FOIA to acquire information that is public record it shows just how untransparent they truly are.

    I never said I was opposed to increasing transparency. Nice try in spinning the facts but you fail. I am for total tranparency by the government. I am unhappy with Obama's failure to deliver on his promise of a transparent administration and a BS article such as this trying to dispell the fact and truth. No where does it state that Obama had anything to do with pushing for this ruling. If he were true to his word the healthcare bill would have been on the internet for everyone to read (another failed campaign promise he made) before its passage. And it wouldn't have been passed in the dark of night behind closed doors without even being read by those that passed it. This is just one example of his non-transparency and his failure to deliver on his promises.
    (more)
  • Reichstolz 2012/04/28 14:39:31
    Reichstolz
    +1
    Considering this rule does nothing to increase transparency it is more folly from the left. The information is currently available, why force more cost onto broadcasters? Much to do about nothing, exactly what we expect from Obama and the FCC.
  • ProudPr... Reichstolz 2012/04/28 15:06:19
    ProudProgressive
    The information is not currently available. It might have been had the Republicans not blocked the "Disclose Act", but so far the Right has done a very good job of keeping all of this information secret.
  • Reichstolz ProudPr... 2012/04/28 15:08:06
    Reichstolz
    +1
    "This information is currently only available by showing up, in person"
    From your own posting, try reading what you post!
  • Evil 1 Reichstolz 2012/04/28 15:24:25
    Evil 1
    +1
    You're asking way too much.
  • Reichstolz Evil 1 2012/04/28 15:27:41
    Reichstolz
    +1
    I know, but damn it is fun to play with the mentally handicapped. The more people like "proud" I deal with the more I realize why the democrats continue to be relevant. They are too blinded by their own thoughts to actually read and comprehend.
  • Evil 1 Reichstolz 2012/04/28 15:39:19
    Evil 1
    +1
    Well I would say some Democrats. I'm a registered Dem and have been for over 30 years. But I'm an old school Democrat who thinks for himself, believes in self reliance, working for what you get and being realistic. The 'New Democrats' have destroyed any good that existed in the old party. Truthfully I should register as an Independent. But you're right about one like the poster of this thread. They have more BS than shinola. And the problem is they actually believe it.
  • Reichstolz Evil 1 2012/04/28 15:47:22
    Reichstolz
    +1
    I understand. I started life in a Union household, my parents couldn't account for how the "life" issue, from democrats, fit into our religious beliefs. So I became a republican, then I realized they are nothing more than the democrats just taking my labor for a different purpose. I found independents to be brain dead. So I am just a lonely conservative with enough wealth to make sure what the "talking heads" do matters little in how I live my life. I love the people on SH, the vast majority is so rooted in their party hypocrisy that cannot see there is not a dimes worth of difference between the two.
  • Evil 1 Reichstolz 2012/04/28 17:03:56
    Evil 1
    +1
    I was brought up in a Republican household. In fact my father was chairman of the county party for 15 years. I got fed up with the dying, old school attitude of the party and switched (and there were also business reasons that helped with that decision as we were in a heavily controlled Democratic county).

    You are right about brain dead independents. In fact all the factions have here idiots to deal with. I'm just a conservative who is doing the same as you. I have never been a party line voter, I have always voted for the individual that I felt would do the best job. Right now that would be anyone other than Obama.
  • Reichstolz Evil 1 2012/04/29 01:00:29
    Reichstolz
    Agreed, anyone but any incumbent is the way I see it. There is no political will to be honest with the people, so they all need to go.
  • Evil 1 Reichstolz 2012/04/29 11:45:01
    Evil 1
    +1
    I agree 100%! That would be the beginning to turning things around in this country. But sadly I doubt it will happen.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/25 21:21:48

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals