in tiny paragraphs

Frank Zappa’s testimony before the almighty State. Worth another look as Washington ponders a “Fairness Doctrine for the Internet.”

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Monopoly = censorship.

2 Responses to “in tiny paragraphs”

  1. Alex H. says:

    I sincerely doubt Frank Zappa would be defending AT&T’s efforts to decide who does and does not get to publish on the internet. He was a staunch advocate against censorship (thus his testimony against ratings): why would he be in favor of censoring artists in the case of net neutrality? The connection here is unclear.

  2. admin says:

    It would be significant for the govt to prevent these companies from achieving monopoly status, which could lead to corporate censorship. The parallel i see here is that Zappa and others were rightly dubious of the govt’s attempt to regulate creative content and distribution. That could lead down the path to govt censorship, where the end users can only see and read what big brother approves, as in China.

Leave a Reply