SOPA and Censorship

Listen to Julian Sanchez and Caleb Brown talk about SOPA in the above podcast, the internet blackout, censorship and free speech. No, the bill isn’t dead yet. Yes, there are ways we can target pirates without going as far as SOPA/PIPA go.

Alyssa Rosenberg also has a good post on why we should use this opportunity to have a grown-up conversation on piracy, artist’s ownership of their work, and censorship:

It might help for both sides to acknowledge the legitimate fears held by powerful interests on both sides of the SOPA debate. Changing the way the internet is governed, especially after a year when free access to it played a major role in critically important liberation movements, is a hugely momentous thing to propose, even if you feel that your industry is at stake. It may bedifficult to quantify the economic impact of piracy, but that doesn’t mean that there is none, or that it’s illegitimate for the people who work in an industry to feel insecurity about its transformation and their prospects for stable employment in it. Tech companies could do more to sell themselves to legacy content providers as beneficial partners. And legacy media companies could spend more time talking to consumers about customer service and cross-platform accessibility than scolding them. […]

It makes much more sense to embrace that connectivity and common interest, and for legacy and new media born out of tech companies to learn as much as they can from each others’ experiences getting rich content to broad audiences on diverse platforms. The SOPA debate has been bruising. But if it helps us lay out the issues that prevent these sides from working together, perhaps it’ll be worth it.

I agree. I wrote recently about piracy and economic frontiers and it really is a trick separating the long-term and short-term goals of all these different groups and sorting out how best to ensure that people can be creative and still make a living do it. There is no one perfect answer. The reason SOPA/PIPA are so pernicious is that they forcefully shut down debate and toss free speech out the window. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t any problem at all, only that it’s not the right way to tackle the problem that does exist.

And before we can make any diagnosis I think we need a lot more data and a much more robust conversation.

Follow me on Twitter or FacebookRead my Forbes blog here.

Share

If Romney is the nominee, don’t expect Christie or any other moderate on the ticket

There’s been rumblings that maybe New Jersey governor Chris Christie would make the Romney presidential ticket but I don’t see that happening at all. Christie makes for good television, but he’s way too moderate for the VP slot. He’s a tough-talker which Republicans like, but he tends to be pretty reasoned in his approach to Democrats and the president. None of that chewy red meat Sarah Palin threw to the masses in 2008.

Ditto for Huntsman who is, to be quite honest, much too Mormon for an already too-Mormon ticket. I could rattle off a half dozen other moderates that people like to speculate on but it’s just not going to happen. Romney needs a social conservative on the ticket – preferably an evangelical, not a Catholic or mainline protestant. That means Santorum and Gingrich are both out unless Santorum has some leverage nobody knows about. Obviously Paul will never be considered, and I doubt he’d sign up anyways.

So who does that leave? Jim DeMint? Michelle Bachmann? I honestly don’t know. Most of the speculation I’ve seen sounds like either wishful thinking or revelations of secret crushes…

In the above video it’s suggested that Ohio’s Rob Portman might be the Romney pick and that actually makes sense. Portman is pretty universally awful on all the issues as far as I’m concerned – which makes him perfect for the GOP.

Follow me on Twitter or FacebookRead my Forbes blog here.

Share

Why I’m Rooting For Gingrich In South Carolina

Aspiring child janitors everywhere will not forgive Gingrich if he drops out after South Carolina.

Newt, this is not the former speaker we know and love. You don’t give up on politics, just on marriages!

Newt Gingrich came clean Tuesday afternoon, admitting that if he can’t win this state’s primary on Saturday, he probably can’t win the Republican nomination at all.

“If I don’t win the primary Saturday, we will probably nominate a moderate,” the former House speaker said, referring to Mitt Romney. “And the odds are fairly high he will lose to Obama.”

The question is whether Gingrich endorses Santorum if the frothy ex-Senator stays in the race after a South Carolina loss.

I suppose that depends on whether or not all this bad press actually puts a dent in Romney’s titanium exoskeleton. The fact that Perry, Santorum, and Gingrich all failed to get on Virginia’s GOP primary ballot may be a moot point if they all run out of money by March.

Obama must be sleeping like a damn baby these days. All these Super PACs are doing his job for him as the Republican field shreds itself to pieces. They’ll all line up like good soldiers behind Romney in the end (Ron Paul is a wild card on this point) but the damage will have been done.

Perhaps I just have a morbid fascination with Republican primaries, but I really do hope Gingrich or Santorum beats Romney so that this whole lovely mess gets dragged out even further.

(P.S. Totally unrelated random thought: why should we settle for just one president? We pay the president way too much. We could hire like 2,000 kids to do that job instead and teach them about hard work and responsibility all at the same time. Extend this logic to congress and you’ve not only saved money, you’ve dragged thousands of kids out of unemployment.)

Follow me on Twitter or FacebookRead my Forbes blog here.

Share

Colbert’s Brilliant Super PAC Ad ‘Mitt The Ripper’ (Starring John Lithgow)

How can you not love an ad voiced by John Lithgow which accuses Romney of being a serial killer since he “killed” corporations who are “people, my friend”?

The thing is, this ad is essentially just an extension of Colbert’s show. The ad itself is hilarious, but it’s as much a spoof of negative ads as it is an attack on Romney. More importantly, it shows just how little these ads actually represent an existential threat our democracy. As I argue in my Atlantic piece, the real threat is two-fold: the stranglehold the mainstream media has over the political process – and the gads of money that the big corporations who own the mainstream money can spend on that process – and the money that greases the wheels of power. Citizens United allows people to spend more money on “electioneering” which is just not nearly as big a deal as many apoplectic souls make it out to be.

I enjoyed this ad in the same way that I enjoy Colbert’s television show. And I’m even watching it on an embed from Comedy Central, owned by Viacom, a media company historically exempted from campaign finance laws.

(Actually, some negative ad campaigns can backfire for candidates. Maybe more people should think about using cutting humor instead of boring, predictable vitriol, to make their point. Just a thought.)

Follow me on Twitter or FacebookRead my Forbes blog here.

Share