Applebees,you say?

“Dear Mr. Revere
Your caterwauling in the middle of the night only served to annoy. In the future, try sliding messages quietly under the door. Also, my wife is light-sensitive and the lanterns at the Old Church aggravted her migraines. You are driving people back to the loyalists w/these antics.”

I hope she dumped him completely. What a loser.

Man, I used to feel so smug about that ending, until I started to need glasses….

Absent that fact, the 1A comes into full effect WRT cable, internet, etc. There is no plausible justification for got. regulatory authority.

It is highly probable rhat in today’s environment, Red Lion would be overturned even for broadcast.

I think you’re ferociously agreeing with each other.

The 1A provides a broad prohibition on govt. regulation of speech, to which there are a small number of exceptions.

Red Lion allowed one such narrowly defined exception due to the fact the govt. needed to allocate spectrum.

It will be interesting to compare the new MiniTru version of this report to the leaked original.

Despite there being “decades of it”, he hasn’t named one case yet.

I would *love* to see the post that started this thread, but I seem to be blocked.

Of course. :)

There’s plenty of very smart lawyers. I’ve just learned there’s a lot more unsmart ones than I used to believe.

Now, ask me about neurosurgeons since Ben Carson came on the scene…

Tick tock….

Would you ban anything with a “message” or a “moral”? Or demand ‘equal time” for a competing “very special episode”?

How about when NCIS does an episode about the failure of mental heath treatment for vets? Or when 9-1-1 has positive Muslim and trans characters? Trump, et al, would call that “propaganda” and would love to ban it.

Also, what *is* propagana? Are pro-recycling PSAs pro-aganda? How about the anti-smoking ads the FD actually did require be run?

But that’s just govt. Does non-govt. speech count, too?

I dunno, ever since in re:Gondor, I’ve *really* downgraded my estimate of how smart you have to be to be a lawyer.

What mark? Do you think it was wrongly decided? Should I have to go register at the local Post Office if I want to get the Daily Worker?

Or, in modern terms, tell my local ISP I affirmatively consent to access left-wing websites, so they can be unblocked?

How is creating a mass censorship regime "progressive"? Sounds like fascism to me.

(Lamont vs. Postmaster)

I heartily suggest you study how such laws were used and what speech they suppressed.

Yes, I'm quite sure the government would love to be able to declare information "false" or "propaganda". Indeed, Trump keeps claiming he already HAS that power, and it's a damn good thing he's deluded in that regard.

There were anti-propaganda laws in the US. The last of them died in the late 60s.