Get ready for more campaign ads this year, especially paid for by corporations.
[link]
The Supreme Court threw out a 63-year-old law designed to restrain the influence of big business and unions on elections Thursday, ruling that corporations may spend as freely as they like to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress. The decision could drastically alter who gives and gets hundreds of millions of dollars in this year's crucial midterm elections.
By a 5-4 vote, the court overturned two of its own decisions as well as the decades-old law that said companies and labor unions can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to produce and run their own campaign ads. The decision threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.
Makes sense. Thanks. But I think the little teaser clips should be exempt from that. I keep forgetting every time I click on a Dr. Who tidbit on the BBC site. Annoying. (She said as she studiously avoided doing what she said she was going to do WRT cleaning her room. Maybe the BBC just wants to help me stop procrastinating...)
I don't think the BBC cares when or where anyone else in the world gets to see Doctor Who, so they don't make most of their video accessible to us. It's not their job.
If, for example, you can't watch Torchwood in the US, you might buy the DVDs.
Brits pay a license fee to fund the BBC. I don't. While it'd be terribly nice if they decided to use their taxes to let me watch things online for free... it doesn't seem entirely fair to expect it.
Not all Brits pay the license fee, but all of them can view the clips, so that's not strictly the dividing line.
It's more that I keep forgetting that I find annoying, not so much the fact of not having access. I mean, where there's a will, after all.
I don't think the BBC cares when or where anyone else in the world gets to see Doctor Who, so they don't make most of their video accessible to us. It's not their job.
The official reason for restricting access to BBC shows is that it's not fair to the license-payers for non-license-payers to see content they didn't subsidise.
Not all Brits pay the license fee, but all of them can view the clips, so that's not strictly the dividing line.
No, but only because geolocation based on IP is cheaper and easier than filtering by Actual License Payer Status.
Not all Brits pay the license fee, but all of them can view the clips, so that's not strictly the dividing line.
Plus doesn't the BBC give a message like, "You seem to not be in the UK. If you actually are in the UK, click 'Yes'," which if you click 'Yes' lets you see it anyway?
it doesn't seem entirely fair to expect it
Just to be clear, I don't have any expectation that I should have access to everything merely because I am me. Was just curious. And fake-pouty about the video clips.
The official reason for restricting access to BBC shows is that it's not fair to the license-payers for non-license-payers to see content they didn't subsidise.
I just figured it would be the flip side of NBC content not being available to Brits. Is ITV content available over here?
