> And what would be the consequence of their lying? A FCC letter saying "please > don't do this again?" After all that has happened with the government and > Comcast in recent years I can't understand how you can be so naive.
Believe it or not, an infuriated FCC can make life hell for a cable company and even worse for one that wants to acquire a broadcast network. It can delay or deny the purchase with at worst, a long period of appeal to overturn any FCC decision. If the FCC actually cites reasons within its purview, overturning such a decision in a court is just about impossible. People also seem to forget that the FCC has some say over rates and at the least can force Comcast to spend months justifying a raise. We don't yet know how the present FCC will deal with those who anger it, I suspect no broadcast or cable entity wants to find out either. > On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:34 PM, Art Clemons wrote: >> The other point to consider is that presently Comcast >> among other large ISPs is treading on thin ice regulation wise. I >> suspect undisclosed monitoring would more likely than not be a better >> argument for real net neutrality. > > Comcast is about to acquire the NBC television network and will remake it > into a propaganda arm of the Corporation. Politicians will think twice before > crossing Comcast. Gee, I wonder if this means that NBC will finally report on the polluted Hudson river? I'm also not sure that NBC is all that good a propaganda arm for Comcast. There is a difference between selling one set of ideas and selling one corp as a lovable entity which can do no wrong. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
