You can read all about it here .. but the key take point is the opening paragraph.
For the fourth time in as many Congresses, a bill has been introduced to compel the Supreme Court to televise its proceedings. Earlier versions of the bill, which was sponsored in the House of Representatives by members from both sides of the aisle, have failed to become law. The justices have generally opposed any suggestion that their public sessions should be televised, although all state supreme courts and some of the lower federal courts do broadcast their proceedings.
And it got me to thinking, so I dug up this little billy do – from the eminent news source Phaux News.
Turns out all the cameras in Congress are managed – and far more importantly – controlled by the Government. The link above is 5 years old – but likely hasn’t changed. How else could the House Floor demonstration at the end of last year, not be shown, because the cameras were ordered to go dark – and we only knew it happened because the people involved used their phones and ‘talked to the people directly’.
So – two things …
- If cameras in congress could be ordered to go dark last year – prior to the 20th January, that is prior to Galactic Overlord Donald Trump taking control, then any bets on when the first dark call will be made.
- How dare congress – who themselves will not cede control of how they are televised keep pushing for a totally independent body to force cameras into their world
I haven’t got a strong opinion one way or the other. BUT. But – I fundamentally believe in what is good for one’s goose is definitely good for one’s gander!
It has become a hallmark of totalitarian regimes to not just intercept and monitor communications, but as John said, to control them. Egypt blocked Twitter during the uprisings there, for example. And if disparaging and devaluation constitute control, we’re seeing that here in the attacks on otherwise-(establishment)-respected media such as CNN. It’s almost the opposite of the Big Lie – the Big Disparagement, but in general and in advance.
Now this, of course, takes some technology, and thus some investment. And where there’s demand, backed by the bottomless governmental pocket, there is of course supply. But what possible ethical justification is there, apart from adding a few million to the bottom line, for investing in blocking mass communications, in a democracy based in freedom of speech and expression? Unless that only counts here.