Tom Wheeler: 'I'm Not A Dingo.' John Oliver: 'Prove It!'

from the indeed dept

Mon, Jun 16th 2014 8:35pm — Mike Masnick

The John Oliver on net neutrality saga lives on. Following John Oliver's segment on net neutrality, in which he said we should all really be calling it preventing cable company fuckery, the FCC's servers melted down, and suddenly Oliver himself was a story. While the FCC had offered some boring acknowledgement of Oliver's piece, Wheeler was finally caught on the record having to respond to the piece, and he noted something about how it was satire, but also, "I would like to state, for the record, I am not a dingo."

And, of course, how could Oliver resist responding to that challenge. As Oliver jokingly notes, he had only really said that hiring a former cable industry lobbyist to run the FCC was merely like hiring a dingo to babysit your kids. He'd never actually said he was a dingo -- but, of course, now that Wheeler is denying it, Oliver is asking for proof that Wheeler is, in fact, not a dingo.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: dingo, fcc, john oliver, net neutrality, satire, tom wheeler

34 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

The First Word

“

Re: credibility

I think what you may have missed the subtle subtext.

Wheeler didn't respond AT ALL. He said people are more informed, but he didn't say whether he was happy, angry, sad, annoyed, etc. about it. By blatantly dismissing the impact that the video has had and subverting the conversation away from the serious issues he is failing to do his job. Oliver was calling out a ridiculous response for what it was - a well paid public official chuckles at the public being informed and then seems to misunderstand what a metaphorical comparison is.

Wheeler - while not an idiot - is definitely not treating this subject with the respect it deserves. He deserves to be ridiculed about dumb shit until he can't say any more dumb shit and has to focus on the real issue.

—HT

”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2014 @ 8:41pm

Instead of making a joke out of the response he should have asked the guy to prove he wasn't actually out to fuck us.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2014 @ 9:13pm

Re:
By denying he is the dingo, Wheeler denies he is the tool of the corporations. Its the more subtle version of claiming he is not out to fuck the public.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Will, 16 Jun 2014 @ 9:32pm

At least...
...Wheeler seemed to have a bit of a sense of humor about the subject.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Whatever, 16 Jun 2014 @ 10:17pm

credibility
Well, Oliver built up some credibility with his big video on the topic, and just blew it by being an idiot about the response.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
saulgoode (profile), 16 Jun 2014 @ 11:21pm

Re: credibility
Your observation would carry more weight if he were running for office or was an industry lobbyist; however, since he's the host of a comedy show...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Whatever, 16 Jun 2014 @ 11:54pm

Re: Re: credibility
For me it doesn't really matter. His flippant answer makes me wonder what other issues he treated flippantly rather than trying to get the full on answer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2014 @ 11:59pm

Re: credibility
You're hardly one to talk about credibility and being an idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wallyb132 (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 12:14am

Re: credibility
I wouldnt say he lost credibility over his response, because like the post above says, he is the host of a comedy show.

However, i think he did something powerful with his first piece, something that nobody else has been able to do, and that was to get the message about cable company fuckery out in a way the general public, who has no clue what it means or how it will effect us, could understand it, all jokes aside, he did one hell of a good job explaining the subject. And with that said, I do think he missed a great opportunity to engage Tom Wheeler in a way that no one else could have.

Obviously his piece got some attention, and for once, the American public as a whole is enlightened about and starting to become engaged in a subject that is extremely important to all of us, and for that alone John Oliver deserves immense respect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 12:58am

Honestly
I'd rather have a dingo as FCC Chair than Tom Wheeler.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 2:49am

Re: Re: Re: credibility
You do realise that there are people who trest this sarcastically because there has been almsot no change in the operation of the FCC twoards the telcos since the Ma Bell break-up, right? And nothing has changed.

Perhaps Wheeler, instead of treating the public so flippantly, should actually do his damned job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 3:24am

This is a tough one. He certainly LOOKS like a dingo...

I don't know. We'll see. The truth will come out eventually.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
HT (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 4:07am

Re: credibility
I think what you may have missed the subtle subtext.

Wheeler didn't respond AT ALL. He said people are more informed, but he didn't say whether he was happy, angry, sad, annoyed, etc. about it. By blatantly dismissing the impact that the video has had and subverting the conversation away from the serious issues he is failing to do his job. Oliver was calling out a ridiculous response for what it was - a well paid public official chuckles at the public being informed and then seems to misunderstand what a metaphorical comparison is.

Wheeler - while not an idiot - is definitely not treating this subject with the respect it deserves. He deserves to be ridiculed about dumb shit until he can't say any more dumb shit and has to focus on the real issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 5:02am

Re: Re: Re: credibility
Awwwww - here, have a tissue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 5:10am

Listening comprehension
I always question peoples' reading comprehension, but how can you trust someone in this type of position that can't even understand what someone says. He never called you a dingo! It is scary that he's making policy that affects us all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 5:30am

Re:
In fairness, he is a comedian, not a politician or political pundit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 6:29am

Re: Re: Re: credibility
His flippant answer makes me wonder what other issues he treated flippantly rather than trying to get the full on answer.

Probably a lot. I know this is repetitive but it doesn't seem to have sunk in yet. He treats subjects flippantly because he's a comedian. Making things funny is his job. If you are looking for serious, responsible treatment of important issues, do not watch Last Week Tonight, The Daily Show, or The Colbert Report, because they are not news shows, they are comedy shows.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 6:32am

Re: Re: credibility
Oliver was calling out a ridiculous response for what it was - a well paid public official chuckles at the public being informed and then seems to misunderstand what a metaphorical comparison is.

I'm wondering if Wheeler was delighted with Oliver's rebuttal. If he can keep the conversation about whether he's a literal dingo, then people won't be talking about whether he's a metaphorical dingo.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 6:34am

Re: Listening comprehension
I always question peoples' reading comprehension, but how can you trust someone in this type of position that can't even understand what someone says. He never called you a dingo!

He understood perfectly. By saying "I'm not a dingo!" he looks like he's responding, without actually addressing the substance of the criticism (which he doesn't want to do). It's misdirection.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baron von Robber, 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:23am

Re: Re:
Which makes him smarter and more honest than the previous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
cubicleslave (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:24am

Re: Re: credibility
Well said. I couldn't agree more. Comedy is a very effective medium to make a point.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:26am

Re: Re: credibility
"...however, since he's the host of a comedy show..." ...we can take him more seriously.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
art guerrilla (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:32am

Re: Re: Re: Re: credibility
thanks for setting whatever straight...

however, it IS an indicator of just how debased 'our' (sic) media has gotten when we DEPEND UPON satirical shows for 'real' news that the 'real' news won't cover in any significant fashion...

i understand whatever's frustration in some ways, in that there have been many times when jon stewart/colbert has an evil minion of doom on their show, and they get off lightly... (AS OPPOSED to the numerous times they DO NAIL THEM TO THE WALL in a manner the 'real' media will not do...)

i would LIKE THEM to reach over and smack the evil minions of doom, and while that might be satisfying to me, i doubt it would do their show much good... well, i bet the ratings would skyrocket, but their sponsors would squeal like stuck pigs, and THAT is the important factor...

again, the shame is NOT in the fact that stewart et al do a better job pointing out gross hypocrisy than the 'real' news; the shame is THEY SHOW UP the 'real' news, who most of us have essentially dismissed as having little-to-no relevancy in actually discussing/reporting on these issues...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crusty the Ex-Clown, 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:37am

I have some experience with that agency
Instead of the Federal Communications Commission it should be named the Federal Uncommunicative Commission or FUC. Trying to have a dialog with them is like pulling teeth. No doubt wealthy corporations fare quite well but the average citizen is SOL.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:50am

Re: Re: Re: Re: credibility
do not watch Last Week Tonight, The Daily Show, or The Colbert Report, because they are not news shows, they are comedy shows.

I disagree. They are very much news shows in that they inform their views of current issues and events. They are also comedy shows, and anyone who uses them solely for their news value is missing a lot. However, they are the only news shows you'll watch where you know the exact bias (or the case of Colbert, the anti-bias) of the presenter. They are trying to make you laugh at stuff you really should be shaking your head or crying about. You aren't going to get that from 60-minutes (or, as better known, the state shill hour,) or the local news (unless you happen to have a ghetto news service.)

I consider them to be what Wikipedia is to research, a starting point to which you spend further investigating, but not the one-stop destination for everything you need to know.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MatBastardson (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 7:56am

I am not a dingo
Never believe anything until it is officially denied.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 8:11am

Re: Re: Re:
Which gives him the leeway to say things that would get any politician in hot water.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 8:17am

Re: Re: Listening comprehension
He was just making a joke instead of addressing the issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 17 Jun 2014 @ 8:48am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: credibility
I disagree. They are very much news shows in that they inform their views of current issues and events.

My point is that if you're expecting them to be thorough, objective, or serious, which seems to be what Whatever is looking for, you will be disappointed at best. They definitely cover news, and in a valuable way, but Oliver is a perfect example. If his aim were news, he would have gone on about how Wheeler was deflecting criticism and called on him to actually address the revolving door issue. Instead, he challenged him to prove he isn't a dingo - because that's funnier.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 8:55am

Re: Re: Re: Re: credibility
His job is to pass laws for the lobbyists so that he can become one when he leaves office as a regulator.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2014 @ 9:27am

I think a more accurate description of Wheeler would be the Honey Badger "Because Honey Badger Don't Give a F'CK".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AnonyBabs, 17 Jun 2014 @ 9:52am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: credibility
You could maybe include the qualifying dependent clause in your quote: "If you are looking for serious, responsible treatment of important issues..."

Then you wouldn't have to disagree.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sheogorath (profile), 18 Jun 2014 @ 8:35am

Well, it's as they say, "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dingo."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 18 Jun 2014 @ 9:01am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
If saying the truth gets politicians in hot water, then we have a serious problem in this country.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 18 Jun 2014 @ 12:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If saying the truth gets politicians in hot water, then we have a serious problem in this country.

Yes, that's one of many problems we have. It seems like there's hardly anything a national politician can just come and say the unvarnished truth about without paying a price for it, and we the public are to blame for that. We have a history of demanding that politicians tell us impossible things, and punishing the ones who will actually tell it to us like it is, because we don't want to hear about difficult solutions and complex problems.
[ link to this | view in thread ]