Elizabeth Grattan
@egrattan.bsky.social
1.1K followers 360 following 37K posts
mother, daughter, sister, friend, foe, also, i write and talk on the radio. ElizabethGrattan.com radioelizabeth.com
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
egrattan.bsky.social
Words often forgotten. Words we white men and women ought to remember. Every. Single. Day.

"Letter from a Birmingham Jail"
egrattan.bsky.social
So shred 1A? No thanks.
egrattan.bsky.social
The fact that you argue there are “licensed national broadcasters” is reason enough to dismiss you completely.

It shows you lack any understanding of what a license is or how frequency allocation works.

My god… have you just never been on a road trip?
egrattan.bsky.social
Your piece is factually incorrect.

Sounds like you read bad memes and tried to blog and now when being corrected you’re too proud to admit you were wrong.
Reposted by Elizabeth Grattan
50501movement.bsky.social
The Portland Frog army has now infiltrated Tulsa, OK and they’ve made an unlikely alliance with the T-Rex infantry and Sharks on Hoverboards mercenary forces.

This is truly terrifying.
egrattan.bsky.social
But a PAC and/or a baker? The law can’t force a station to take the ads let alone draft their day part rate card.

Again… Regulating political propaganda is a bad bad idea. And it violates 1A.

But I’m sure Trump would LOVE to be in charge of that.
egrattan.bsky.social
The only place one might be able to argue a distinction would be with candidate advertising on FCC licensees. There political speech is set apart (narrowly) regarding access.

A station can charge a baker $$$ for an ad. But candidate ads under the statute must get lowest unit rate. Etc.
egrattan.bsky.social
I should also mention FTC disclosures as well.

They are the same whether you are posting about cheesecake or a MAGA hat.

If it’s sponsored… it must be disclosed.

Arbitrarily targeting one and not the other is problematic AF.

www.ftc.gov/business-gui...
Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers
Do you work with brands to recommend or endorse products? If so, you need to comply with the law when making these recommendations. One key is to make a good disclosure of your relationship to the bra...
www.ftc.gov
egrattan.bsky.social
I’m explaining that you calling it a strawman is incorrect.

And suggesting I have an “outrage radio show” is just you being an idiot.
egrattan.bsky.social
The fact that she suggests it’s just political influencers who should be regulated the way she wants is clear indication her concern is not about influencers or transparency.

In fact, she’s singling out just specific RW influencers.

It’s viewpoint discrimination.
egrattan.bsky.social
It’s not a strawman just because you don’t actually know 1A and how arbitrary her position is.

She is literally calling for regulation of political propaganda. And she’s doing that because it’s political speech she disagrees with.

It’s protected. Full stop.
egrattan.bsky.social
The fact that she claims she is not an influencer but rather a journalist just shows she doesn’t grasp how arbitrary her position is.

The GOP would love to arbitrarily decide what propaganda is allowed or not and who gets to be regulated for speech. It’s literally their current flex. It’s BAD.
egrattan.bsky.social
I mean… propaganda is protected speech. Political propaganda is protected speech.

Her wanting political propaganda regulated different than other types of propaganda violates 1A.

This is not hard. 🤷🏻‍♀️
egrattan.bsky.social
I don’t entertain calls to shred 1A. That’s the GOP’s kink.
egrattan.bsky.social
The FD has nothing to do with this. If anything, MtP actually meets the old requirements for local stations.
egrattan.bsky.social
You always say anti 1A shit like this. You’re always wrong.
egrattan.bsky.social
That’s not Fox News dumbass.

And there’s no such thing as an entertainment registry.

Local broadcast stations are licensed for use of the spectrum.

Sit down.
egrattan.bsky.social
There is no FCC registry for them. There is no such classification. And cable channels are not even under FCC jurisdiction.
egrattan.bsky.social
This myth needs to die. 🤦🏻‍♀️
pdusaint.bsky.social
Of course it didn't regulate Fox. You missed my point. "Read" what happened the very day FD ended. It was an unleashing that opened the way to the culture we now find ourselves in. There's a huge difference between the bullshit before and what we have now. I was active in media when it happened.
egrattan.bsky.social
This is myth perpetrated by people like you who have zero understanding of what the policy actually was and how it was enforced or not and why it ended.
egrattan.bsky.social
You’re drawing arbitrary lines that do not exist in the law but only in your mind.
egrattan.bsky.social
I mean… come on. 🤦🏻‍♀️

They reply with examples of a network AND a cable channel? Even after being corrected?

🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️
egrattan.bsky.social
Fairness Doctrine myths need to die.
ashleylynch.bsky.social
It's not irrelevant today. It would prevent what Bari Weiss is about to do to CBS News. It would prevent Fox News from existing.
egrattan.bsky.social
It absolutely would not.

It never regulated news - let alone networks.

And Fox News is a CABLE CHANNEL.

It’s clear you are uneducated on what the policy was.

Do you actually think FCC policies apply to cable channels and profanity is prohibited on HBO?

🤦🏻‍♀️