New York AG reveals CNN, MSNBC parent companies funded millions of fake net neutrality comments

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,480
17,978
1,743
#1
"This type of fraud has significant consequences for our democracy."

The Office of New York Attorney General Letitia James has revealed in a new report that nearly 18 million of the more than 22 million comments the FCC received during its 2017 rulemaking were fake, intended to support the repeal of net neutrality, the idea that internet service providers (ISPs) should provide all online content equally and prevent them from favoring their own services or customers over their competitors.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/comcast-att-fake-net-neutrality-comments


My guess is they will get a slap on the wrist, if that, and that will be the end of it.
 

CowboyOrangeFan

Mmmm, yeah.
A/V Subscriber
Jun 9, 2006
5,209
3,532
1,743
Florida
#2
LOL

Dude, you are a trip.

These major corporations pull some shenanigans in support of the orange shit gibbon’s policies, and you just want to take shots at CNN and MSNBC?

Ok, fine. They do suck almost as bad as their parent corps, Ajit Pai, and your orange almighty. So have at it. They all deserve each other.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,451
2,394
1,743
46
DFW
#3
Article doesn’t even mention CNN or MSNBC. It’s the broadband companies that backed it. Too bad they couldn’t squeeze the NYT and Washington Post into that headline.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,758
2,172
1,743
#5
Net Neutrality sounds nice, but is a horrible regulation. Provides massive protections for internet behemoths like Google, Facebook, and Netflix...and stifles competition for upstart innovative companies.

IMO, the absolute worst thing the Obama Administration did during his terms. Luckily, it was only in place for 2-years, but Congress needs to step-in and stop this back and forth of regulation changes due to Presidential Administrations.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,758
2,172
1,743
#13
People read a headline, but guessing very few understand the negative impact of “net neutrality”. It is interesting how some people claim they are ”for the people”, but they align themselves with Google, Facebook, and Netflix and demand onerous regulations that further protect their market dominance.

The Internet worked great and furthered opportunities beyond our imaginations from the 1990s. But as the government often does, it decided it needed to regulate. And the brilliance was to institute regulations for the internet in 2015 with rules crafted in 1934 (for those that don’t know...this may seem like I am using hyperbole, but the Obama FCC actually used 1934 rules to regulate the Internet). Pai made the correct decision and ended those orders.

Why anyone would think the FCC should make regulations and not have our Congress grab a backbone and create needed legislation is beyond me. People seem to love division.
 
May 4, 2011
2,492
1,236
1,743
Charleston, SC
#14
People read a headline, but guessing very few understand the negative impact of “net neutrality”. It is interesting how some people claim they are ”for the people”, but they align themselves with Google, Facebook, and Netflix and demand onerous regulations that further protect their market dominance.

The Internet worked great and furthered opportunities beyond our imaginations from the 1990s. But as the government often does, it decided it needed to regulate. And the brilliance was to institute regulations for the internet in 2015 with rules crafted in 1934 (for those that don’t know...this may seem like I am using hyperbole, but the Obama FCC actually used 1934 rules to regulate the Internet). Pai made the correct decision and ended those orders.

Why anyone would think the FCC should make regulations and not have our Congress grab a backbone and create needed legislation is beyond me. People seem to love division.
Not entirely sure, but you might be misreading people's responses. It's not about net neutrality per se, but the major companies flooding comments about it combined with the fox headline and cim's title that make it seem specific to liberal media outlets.

I'll be honest, I don't really understand it well enough to form a really strong opinion. I get the overall idea, but I don't want to be a five-minute expert turned internet warrior.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,758
2,172
1,743
#15
Not entirely sure, but you might be misreading people's responses. It's not about net neutrality per se, but the major companies flooding comments about it combined with the fox headline and cim's title that make it seem specific to liberal media outlets.

I'll be honest, I don't really understand it well enough to form a really strong opinion. I get the overall idea, but I don't want to be a five-minute expert turned internet warrior.
I understand and very aware of this particular story. I was not addressing that. .
Was just commenting on net neutrality.

BTW, the headline is definitely designed to be misleading, although technically accurate. For those that don’t know, AT&T owns CNN and Comcast owns MSNBC.
 
Last edited:

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,451
2,394
1,743
46
DFW
#16
I understand and very aware of this particular story. I was not addressing that. .
Was just commenting on net neutrality.

BTW, the headline is definitely designed to be misleading, although technically accurate. For those that don’t know, AT&T owns CNN and Comcast owns MSNBC.
Technically inaccurate, but not far from the truth. Subsidiaries are legally separate for tax, liability, and regulatory purposes.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,758
2,172
1,743
#17
Technically inaccurate, but not far from the truth. Subsidiaries are legally separate for tax, liability, and regulatory purposes.
Hence headline says “parent companies”.

MSNBC, along with a lot of other media assets, report up through Comcast CEO.
CNN, along with a lot of other media assets, report up to AT&T.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,451
2,394
1,743
46
DFW
#18
Hence headline says “parent companies”.

MSNBC, along with a lot of other media assets, report up through Comcast CEO.
CNN, along with a lot of other media assets, report up to AT&T.
Haha! You’re 100% right. I didn’t see that in the headline. I read that as CNN, MSNBC, and their parent companies. Misleading but technically accurate is right.

Mea culpa.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
7,281
3,478
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#19
Not entirely sure, but you might be misreading people's responses. It's not about net neutrality per se, but the major companies flooding comments about it combined with the fox headline and cim's title that make it seem specific to liberal media outlets.

I'll be honest, I don't really understand it well enough to form a really strong opinion. I get the overall idea, but I don't want to be a five-minute expert turned internet warrior.
That’s not how it works and you’re not doing it right.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
7,281
3,478
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#20
Haha! You’re 100% right. I didn’t see that in the headline. I read that as CNN, MSNBC, and their parent companies. Misleading but technically accurate is right.

Mea culpa.
And there it is...right there in action. It’s not you. It’s not cim. It’s those who wrote the title. And in the way they frame the stories today, they become inviting to those in agreement while simultaneously making it dismissive to those who are not. Instead of framing the subject as the story, they framed through 2 political charged organizations that aren’t even 1% of 1% of 1% of the story, of problem or of solution.

If they had framed the story in context of net neutrality instead of CNN MSNBC SAY THIS AND THAT, it would’ve attracted an entire different audience as well as being dismissed by entire different audience.

Which in turn, led to me not even wanting to know what’s it about. Furthermore, it’s a story I should be concerned about and I should want to be well informed about it. But I’m not. Intentionally too. It became so politically charged, it turned me off.

Just weird watching it in action.