Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
while every fine American knows that the proper way to do business is to hand out unaccountable monopolies
Right. Tell that to Adelphia's Rigas family.
From the same addled brain comes the notion that Air America no longer airs in New York, which is false, of course,
How in the world would you know? WWRL now has doctor shows in the morning and Ed Schultz in the afternoon. Wanna tell me what happened to Air America crew?
I think the right's greatest "success" is how it has convinced its followers to believe such nonsense so confidently that they spout it, mindlessly, at every opportunity, as we see in this case.
Heh. this makes you 0 for 3.
Let's see 17 state owned oil companies, of which 2 are legitimate democracies. The rest being monarchies or totalitarian states. Oh yeah that's a real recommendation. Heh.
The trouble is, of course, that neither do the people he seems to admire.
Insinuating that I admire Enron, RJ Reynolds, and GM, is pretty low, even for you. If you can't make a legitimate point, quit while you're ahead.
but the lights always go out before the dénouement. Wanna talk about Jack Welch, do you? Or are you just one of those theoretical conservatives, like that idiot Laffer. At least he takes it all off.
Comcast has a monopoly over high-speed Interent access in this area. We cannot get high-speed DSL or any other similar service because of our location and the distance requirement to receive DSL, and because the local telephone company has not invested in DSL "repeater" locations to enable DSL access. Comcast is an example of the corporate greed that currently dominates this era. The coming 2nd Depression will hopefully cure Americans of their "love" of corporate America.
Comcast deeply appreciates citizen concerns regarding alleged wiretapping under the FISA laws. For our part, it is a matter of public record that we have not made our systems available to the government for any customer surveillance without valid legal process, and we have not lobbied on FISA legislation.
While we strongly believe in vigorous debate on these and other issues, we must also respect laws on defamation. Our outside counsel has advised us that the advertising in question could violate laws against defamation because the ads claim or that some companies violated criminal or other laws without any court finding of such a violation. Declining such advertising in these circumstances is standard and responsible practice. Free speech is an essential value, but fairness requires that we all observe the fundamental rules of due process and defamation laws.
Attached is a copy of the letter to Mr. Greenwald from our attorney.
--- Sena Fitzmaurice, Comcast
Dear Mr. Greenwald:
We are writing on behalf of our client, Comcast Cable Communications, in response to your request that Comcast run a television spot regarding U.S. Rep. Chris Carney, sponsored by the so-called "Blue America PAC." Since this spot would not be considered a candidate "use" under Section 315 of the Communications Act (47 USC 315), Comcast would face potential liability for any defamation contained in the spot.
As you know, the spot contains the following audio regarding Rep. Carney: "He wants to pardon phone companies who broke the law and gave thousands to his campaign." That audio is spoken over a video image showing the logos of the following entities: AT&T, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association ("NCTA"), Verizon, Embarq and Comcast. A Monopoly-type "Get out of jail free" card is then superimposed over the images of the logos. Thus, the express language of the spot combined with the images shown implies that the entities whose logos are shown "broke the law" and face either "jail" or a potential "pardon," both of which would be applicable to a criminal conviction.
In support of the statement that these entities "broke the law," you have provided links to the website of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ("EFF") and, in the case of Verizon, the ACLU, "demonstrating that listed telecoms are defendants in the lawsuits based on illegal spying." For the proposition that "[t]hese telecoms broke the law with their illegal spying," you provide a link to your own opinion blog in Salon.com. None of the links provided implicate NCTA in any way.
Moreover, all of the lawsuits for which you have provided links are civil suits that would not result in criminal liability, even if decided against the defendants. More importantly, however, there have been no adjudications in any of these lawsuits against the defendants, including Verizon and AT&T. As I am sure you know, the mere filing of a lawsuit, whether civil or criminal, is not equivalent to a finding of liability or wrongdoing by the defendant unless so decided by a judge following prosecution of the litigation (or, in the case of a criminal complaint, a guilty plea by the defendant). In fact, the EFF website shows that the civil suits against Comcast (and other carriers) have been dismissed: http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/mdl3.pdf.
Under the circumstances, the spot you have provided is factually incorrect and potentially defamatory against the entities shown. Under Pennsylvania law, a false allegation of criminal wrongdoing is considered to be defamation per se. While Comcast tries to accommodate all requests to run political advertising, regardless of the position taken (even if critical of Comcast itself), the company cannot accept a spot that is false and defamatory. Accordingly, we have advised Comcast to decline your request to run this spot, and they have concluded that they have no choice but to do so. If you believe you have additional documentation that would alter our conclusion, or if you care to submit an alternate spot that is factually correct, you are, of course, free to do so.
Insinuating that I admire Enron, RJ Reynolds, and GM, is pretty low, even for you.
Shooter, we have you here on record expressing your admiration for liars, thieves, murderers and traitors in overwhelming abundance. Why draw the line at the corporate enablers of those same people? Don't they deserve your admiration just as much as Bush/Cheney/Mussolini/etc?
If you can't make a legitimate point, quit while you're ahead.
Shooter, you are truly oblivious to irony, aren't you?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
