Hacker News
new
|
past
|
comments
|
ask
|
show
|
jobs
|
submit
login
snsr
on Oct 17, 2014
|
parent
|
context
|
favorite
| on:
A Raw Deal in Michigan
Money is not speech, despite the Citizens United ruling.
twoodfin
on Oct 17, 2014
[–]
So Congress could set limits on how much money the
New York Times
could spend to cover federal elections?
lhc-
on Oct 17, 2014
|
parent
[–]
News coverage of federal elections is vastly different than candidate advocacy.
gfrdgre4
on Oct 17, 2014
|
root
|
parent
|
next
[–]
LOL what? The New York Times has endorsed a Democratic president for the last 50 years or something.
uptown
on Oct 17, 2014
|
root
|
parent
|
prev
|
next
[–]
Agreed. But news agencies seem to cross that divide when they feel the need to endorse political candidates.
twoodfin
on Oct 17, 2014
|
root
|
parent
|
prev
|
next
[–]
It doesn't matter how different it is: If money is not speech, why couldn't Congress prevent the
Times
from spending money to write and print articles about candidates?
seanflyon
on Oct 17, 2014
|
root
|
parent
|
prev
[–]
Is it? I think instead of funding a superPAC I'll start a news organization to cover the election as I see fit.
Guidelines
|
FAQ
|
Lists
|
API
|
Security
|
Legal
|
Apply to YC
|
Contact
Search:
