Ok, so no actions, just statements. I'm not defending the FCC chairman, he's a complete idiot, but we should at least be accurate, right?

▲

JumpCrisscross 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> so no actions, just statements

This is mind-numbing goal-post reconstruction.

If they'd issued an order, it wouldn't be final until it reached SCOTUS! Most regulatory interaction happens informally. A regulator tells a regulated entity to do something, and they do it. Public statements by the FCC commissioner are significant enough to make it into court cases as evidence of the Commision's intent.

▲

strictnein 11 hours ago | parent [-]

That's not "goal post reconstruction". Someone said the FCC took actions. I thought I might have missed them actually _doing_ something, so I was asking about it. The response was to highlight the statements they said.

▲

JumpCrisscross 11 hours ago | parent [-]

The point is the FCC Chair making public statements threatening specific regulatory actions against a regulated entity is an action. You're trying to hold the word action to a higher standard than a judge would. The Rubicon was crossed.

▲

strictnein 11 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

	▲	JumpCrisscross 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> You're certainly very sure of what I was thinking, but you are again wrong Nope. You're confusing regulatory actions, broadly, with official actions. The FCC didn't take any official action. The FCC Chair absolutely conveyed a credible threat of official action in response to specific political speech; that constitutes a regulatory action. Like, the SEC announcing they're going to launch an investigation is a regulatory action. The Fed Chair saying they believe the job market is cooling is a regulatory action.

▲

zeven7 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They literally said the easy way or the hard way. What do you think the hard way is?