Isn't there a viewing gallery?
That's not "The floor of the House"...
Banned! No streaming live democracy from your phones, US Congress orders reps
The next session of the US Congress will include a ban on representatives shooting and streaming video from the floor of the House. The Republican-dominated House of Representatives voted 234-193 to enact the new rules ahead of the opening of the 115th session of the US Congress. The rule calls for a ban on any use of an …
-
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 11:53 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: The truth is...
A recent triple A game on console and PC lets you explode roads with a phone app... this causes the obvious chaos, destruction and death... oh, but you can do it again when you recharge your "points" meter.
I'm not sure what is more worrying, that people consider it a game to trigger such events in a somewhat realistic setting, or that some consider it a realistic setting to be able to trigger such events.
-
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 01:21 GMT elDog
This is to be used in sessions where all the public have been cleared - won't work well
Under the 'uglican overlords all hearings and votes should be done in private - except for witch hunts and excoriating hearings on Kenya-care, which will be broadcast in full color on Fux.
I'm guessing that the ability to surreptitiously plant recording devices around the chamber will make this effort yet another misguided missile from the party of stooopid. What next, you may ask?
How about holding all decision-making meetings in smoke-filled back rooms by invitation only? Vinny or Vlad will be the enforcers.
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 11:04 GMT Dave 15
Re: This is to be used in sessions where all the public have been cleared - won't work well
They have been learning from our guys... hide it all away, sort out everything on the golf course, on the sofa (Blair style) or in the bar, no notes, no recordings, no record and of course no collusion to make sure your new law makes Fred even richer...
-
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 01:50 GMT a_yank_lurker
Much Ado about Nothing
Both the donkeys and elephants love grandstanding when it suits their purpose. Any complaint about the rule changes by the elephants should be met by pointing the donkey's in the Senate change the rules about filibuster and required majority for confirmation when they had power there. Pot calling kettle black.
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 02:29 GMT veti
Re: Much Ado about Nothing
I wish the media would respond by simply removing all TV cameras from Congress. See how they like that.
Has adding live TV coverage significantly improved the quality of debate or governance in Congress? Has it made the critters more accountable? Has it improved voter engagement or turnout? Trust in Congress?
If the answer to all of the above is "no", then why not just remove them?
-
Friday 6th January 2017 19:14 GMT Eddy Ito
Re: Much Ado about Nothing
It hardly matters whether cameras are present or not as it's largely a show to convince people who might tune in that congress is working hard for the people. Ever wonder why the camera is only showing the individual speaking, the one recording minutes, and an occasional person walking by? It's because if they pan out to show the rest of the room there are usually just the member "officiating", the recorder, a timekeeper, the member speaking, and usually the next member scheduled to bloviate.
-
-
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 13:40 GMT Nimby
This law brought to you by ... the same idiots it is meant to hamper.
"use of an electronic device for still photography or for audio or visual recording or broadcasting"
1. So purely mechanical or chemical devices are still legal then?
2. So non-audio/visual recordings, such as radio wave, thermal radiation, etc. are okay?
3. What about services like interpolation, 3D modelling, etc.? (AKA, I did not "take a still photograph", I "made a cartoonized representation.")
4. Is time-shifting still a legitimate feature?
"an initial fine of $500 and could face further charges adding up to $2,500 for each violation"
5. So with a maximum fine of $3k if a group of 30 chuck in together to use one person's device, then it's like only a hundred bucks per person for one party to make fools of another party? (And less if even more people actually bother to show up?)
6. Is it legal for news agencies to pay the fines on behalf of offenders?
-
Thursday 5th January 2017 22:43 GMT dan1980
Re: This law brought to you by ... the same idiots it is meant to hamper.
I am reminded of this lovely piece:
The connection - loose though it is - being that the strict definition, rather than the spirit, was being argued.
But hey, if TfL can dance around what a 'taximeter' is and is not . . .
-
-
-
Sunday 8th January 2017 18:20 GMT Smody
Not that big a deal.
In the first place, I question how they'll enforce it and levy fines. Any member who wants to stream proceedings should go right ahead, and tell the Repubs to screw themselves. In the second place, I worry more that the Republicans (or Democrats, for that matter) will disappear the voting records. Right now, I can go look at the text of every bill or resolution, and I can see how every member voted. While I recognize the significance of public statements, I evaluate members almost entirely on how they vote. If that information goes away, elections become even more of a farce.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
