Rupert Murdoch Spreads False Claim Biden FCC Nom Wants To 'Censor Conservatives.' NewsMax & OAN Immediately Prove Him Wrong.
from the gibberish-and-nonsense dept
We'd already noted how telecom and media giants are hard at work trying to scuttle the nomination of consumer advocate Gigi Sohn to the FCC. Sohn is broadly popular on both sides of the aisle in telecom and media circles, so companies like AT&T and News Corporation are working overtime to come up with talking points politicians can use to oppose her nomination. This week, that included prodding Lindsey Graham to frame Sohn (who has decades of telecom policy experience) as an unqualified radical extremist looking to censor conservatives:
Gigi Sohn is a complete political ideologue who has disdain for conservatives. She would be a complete nightmare for the country when it comes to regulating the public airwaves.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) November 9, 2021
Anybody who knows or has worked with Sohn (which is pretty much everyone in telecom policy circles, including myself) knows this is gibberish. Graham's rant was timed with the release of this clumsy missive by the Wall Street Journal editorial board that tries to claim Sohn wants to "censor conservatives." Their evidence of this? She supported holding Sinclair Broadcasting accountable after it lied to regulators to try and get its merger with Tribune Broadcasting approved:
"After Tribune Broadcasting abandoned its merger with the conservative-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group in 2018, she declared, "Today is a good day for every American who believes that diversity of voices in the media is better for our democracy" and urged the FCC to "look at whether Sinclair is qualified to be a broadcast licensee at all."
The Journal oddly forgets to mention this important context, but Sinclair didn't just "abandon" that merger. It was blocked by the Trump FCC and then fined for using shell companies, relatives, and other shady side deals to try and pretend the Tribune merger wouldn't violate bipartisan media ownership rules. Sinclair's efforts were so legally dubious, even Trump FCC boss Ajit Pai was forced to oppose the deal. Sohn's big crime? Agreeing with Pai. This somehow gets twisted into Sohn "supporting Conservative censorship"; fairly reflective of the Journal's integrity and the quality of policy discourse in 2021.
One ironic bit that ruins AT&T's and News Corporation's lobbying efforts here: right-wing disinformation mills Newsmax and OAN (who both opposed the threat the Sinclair merger posed to smaller right wing disinformation mills) released statements in support of Sohn's nomination. Their primary justification? That she... supports conservative voices. From Newsmax commentator Bradley Blakeman:
"I know Gigi. I have worked with Gigi. And I have seen her fight for people's right to express themselves, even when she disagrees with them."
AT&T, News Corp., and Comcast very much don't want a consumer advocate at the FCC. They very much want to retain all the favors they nabbed during the Trump era, whether that is the death of net neutrality and broadband privacy rules, or the elimination of many media consolidation rules and neutered FCC consumer protection authority. Their problem is Sohn is both qualified and popular across the aisle, which is forcing them to dig a little too deeply into the nonsense bin to try and justify opposition to the nomination.
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: fcc, gigi sohn, lindsey graham, regulations, rupert murdoch
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Well, just in case....
Conservatives have a packed SCOTUS that will gladly protect even the most horrible racist, hate speech that Trump and his sycophants spout.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, just in case....
"The supreme court won't ban speech"
Squints suspiciously, shrugs
And here I was, thinking that packing the court was supposed to be a bad thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, just in case....
To be fair, far more liberal courts would protect hate speech. Just look up Skokie or Brandenburg for just two cases as evidence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kinda giving yourself away there Lindsey...
So I guess we can add 'support of blatant corruption' to the category of 'conservative views' then if GIgi's opposition to that counts as opposition to 'conservatives', though I do so love how not less than bloody OAN came out in support of her as if you could expect anyone to be extra touchy about people being anti-'conservative' they would definitely be on the list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kinda giving yourself away there Lindsey...
Dear Lindsey, Never married
When can you report on What the republican conservatives Stand for? corporation control? No government protections we earned over 100 years?
I know! you are a conservative and think everyone else has to be exactly like you.
In May 2018, Graham voted against legislation that would have overturned the FCC's ruling[clarification needed] and restored net neutrality.[153]
In March 2017, Graham voted for the Broadband Consumer Privacy Proposal that removed the FCC's internet privacy rules and allowed internet service providers to sell customers' browsing history without their permission.
So, you are the one that removed internet Privacy rules? can I have your email address?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On the flip side of things, we have a school board in Virginia threatening to burn books. I bet you won’t hear any of Murdoch’s outlets shittalking that situation, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why? They love it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Well that can't be. That would mean all this campaigning against "cancel culture" is just cynical bullshit that they don't really believe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh no no no, you see it's only cancel culture when it's used against them and that they are hugely against, when it comes to people and subjects they don't like being shut down that's different because (grossly hypocritical) reasons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He said he doesn’t like the idea of Rapp’s book being on school division library shelves for one more night and that the fact that it is in a school library means public schools “would rather have our kids reading gay pornography than about Christ.
Boy if reading a book about two teenagers escaping abusive relationships(with a third that doesn't sound too pleasant) is considered worthy of torching the book just wait until they read their own bloody bible...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's hard really. The Bible is the most published book (and probably most discussed) book of all time and can be obtained pretty much anywhere including all religious institutions, sometimes for free. There's clearly no way any child could possibly learn about it or read it if schools don't carry explicitly religious material.
On the flipside - I doubt that the outrage would be lowered if the school said they're set up a religious texts section and included the Koran, Bhagavad Gita and Buddhist texts alongside the Christian bible.
(Disclaimer: I'm assuming a few things here, as the above link is georestricted and I can't be bothered to launch my VPN at the moment, but those are typically correct in my experience)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thats the most interesting about religion. And its books.
Knowing the history that created the Christian bible would scare many people. Including the outtake that the original was based on the Jewish bible.
And so much has been added to the Christian bible, AFTER the fact, is abit Unknown to a good share of Christians.
Then there is the old days, and the back stabbing of each religion, and group. the old ideal that 'if you aint like us, you Will never be us'. The one I like to ask Christians is about Christian stories. And do they know where they came from. NOPE, not one has ever gotten the answer. They are from the Jewish faith, and correlate to 1-2 previous religions.
Most dont even understand the differences between Man's law, and god's law.
And 99% dont see any comparison with Islamic religions and Christian old times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Was that really because they were so legally dubious, or was it because Sinclair's primary competitor, Rupert Murdoch, leaned on Trump to scuttle the merger?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rupert Murdoch Spreads False Claim
News at 11.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rupert Murdoch Spreads False Claim
And the other 23 and a half hours.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"I have also pushed back on unqualified nominees and hacks."
Exactly how many nominees of Trump did he push back against again?
Positions filled by Trump faithful with no experience in the areas they were tasked with overseeing, unqualified hacks who used their positions to line their own pockets on our dime.
But yes Ms. Lindsey do go on clutching your pearls, also I'm still waiting for you to call Jan. 6th what it really was & stop suckling on Trumps ass.
If only you had been more discrete maybe Trump wouldn't have those photos, videos, calls that he used to make you his bitch.
I mean you might like to play that in the bedroom but its a bad look in Congress you spineless hack.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Positions filled by Trump faithful with no experience in the areas they were tasked with overseeing, unqualified hacks who used their positions to line their own pockets on our dime."
You're being too kind. The heads of the Dept. Of Education, the post office, the EPA, etc. were not simply unqualified, they were actively hostile to the existence of those departments.
One of the great examples of comedy in this area was Rick Perry, who had campaigned to abolish the Department Of Energy in his 2012 presidential campaign (even though there was one time where he famously couldn't even remember the name of the department). After Trump installed him as Secretary Of Energy (presumably at least partly due to the above), he publicly recounted his former position, essentially stated that he fully supported the department now that he's learned what it actually does. As in - when he accepted the position to run the department, he had no idea what its role was.
It's way too late to push back on unqualified nominees if your opposition is qualifications rather than partisan politics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I honestly just wish some reporter would have replied with how Ms. Lindsey voted for Trumps nominees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Everybody already knows Graham is a spineless hypocrite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
(Also: calling a man a woman as an insult is kinda shitty. There are lots of things to criticize Graham for without bringing casual sexism into it.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"I honestly just wish some reporter would have replied with how Ms. Lindsey voted for Trumps nominees."
Not cool to compare Lindsey with a woman. Most women would take offense.
That said I think windsocks are genderless so men can probably safely disavow him as well...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Newsmax and OAN are clueless
Newsmax and OAN are clueless that Gigi Sohn if confirmed by the Senate, can force hosting services to shut them down. I agree with Sen. Linsay Graham,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Newsmax and OAN are clueless
[Hallucinates facts not in reality]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As a great man once said:
'That's just like, your opinion man.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Newsmax and OAN are clueless
Lol, wut?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Newsmax and OAN are clueless
what is this i don't even
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Irrelevance
It baffles me as to why anyone, anyone, would give a crap about what Lindsey Graham has to say. After all his bullshit about SC nominees, his flip-flopping on Jan 6th, he literally told the world that his word means nothing and that he has no spine.
This odious piece of garbage is not fit to judge anyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rupert Murdoch is such a bareface liar, that when he says something, I have to check that Rupert Murdoch actually exists and isn't just a random troll with bony mummy arms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
it's the full curse package
[ link to this | view in chronology ]