When I made a video earlier this year supporting the Supreme Court’s holding in the Citizens United v Federal Election Commission case that “the Government may not suppress political speech on the basis of the speaker’s corporate identity,” I got a lot of negative reaction some of which went as far as to claim that protecting “corporate free speech” would lead to the end of democracy, but the failure of two corporate backed measures in California’s June 2010 primaries despite the massive spending advantage those measures had for advertising is strong evidence those concerns about the recent Supreme Court decision were somewhat overblown as I show in this video. The news clip of consumer watchdog Harvey Rosenfield I use in this video comes from the May 17, 2010, KABC-TV news story available online at abclocal.go.com The images I use of my previous video titled “Is It Just Corporate Free Speech” come from the YouTube player page at www.youtube.com The image I use of the election results in California’s June 8, 2010, primary comes from the California Secretary of State’s webpage at vote.sos.ca.gov The image I use of Dan Morain’s June 10, 2010, Sacramento Bee editorial titled “Voters get wise to sly corporate power plays” comes from the webpage at www.sacbee.com And, finally, the images I use of the text of Proposition 16, the so-called “Taxpayers Right to Vote Act,” and Proposition 17, the so-called “Continuous Coverage Auto Insurance Discount Act,” comes from the California …
Posted by
on June 14, 2010. Filed under News, Politics, Video.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Posted by
on June 14, 2010. Filed under