This is a reply to CNET's Molly Wood chiding her for her regulatory "hair trigger."
You ducked my question
Posted by Scott Cleland (See profile) - July 13, 2006 11:02 AM PDT
To bring this back to your situation, would you support legislation mandating that the press always be neutral? What if some member of the press was deemed by "the public or other commentators" to be un-neutral and actually had the audacity to have a differentiated opinion? How is your freedom of the press any different from others right to due process?
Don't you feel the least bit troubled by taking away the freedoms of the innocent, because some people think they are guilty or fear that the will do something bad?
And while you seem to favor regulation, why support legislation that effectively would make it difficult for competition to ever succeed?