FCC refuses public records request about Ajit Pai's monumentally unfunny "comedy" videos


Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/04/06/secret-shitty-jokes.html


Watching Republicans try to do “funny” is downright painful.


Give the guy some credit, it was a colonoscopy, that’s some funny *shit!



Huckabee ALMOST could have salvaged that joke if he followed it up with “Lesson learned: never tweet while you’re still under the influence of powerful sedatives.”


Anyone care to venture a guess as to what that word salad is supposed to mean?
To me it looks like
person: “Hey, I think you did something wrong and the law allows me to ask for your records”
agency: “We found evidence we did wrong but giving it to you would prevent our staff from talking about how we broke the law and their jobs depend on talking about how we break the law”


I think that clause is meant to be used when the reporter asks you “I’ve just heard that all of the city power substations are connected to the internet and have default admin credentials, can you confirm this?” and the municipal worker uses this to shut them up until the problem is fixed. Basically would there be a public safety issue if this matter was discussed openly at this time. Of course it’s vaguely worded so it is abused by people just trying to cover their ass.


Ajit Pai is what happens when a 4chan troll becomes a lawyer and gets appointed to head the FCC.


I keep confusing Daily Caller and Daily Beast. They’re very different, I know.


On the other hand I’m not sure what damaging thing would be disclosed here. Ajit Pai is a corrupt asshole? That’s not really a state secret.


Make a video about Pai’s FOIA refusal and mock him mercilessly.

Then when the Feds show up looking for the source, refuse to give it to them, except with 99% of it blacked out.


I have no problem with Ajit Pai’s “comedy” video output - it makes excellent fodder for folks like Cody Ko to mercilessly rip to shreds for our enjoyment.


What’s “FCC”? “Federal Cosplay Commission”?


My understanding is that it’s the public-records analog to telling children that there are no stupid questions in order to encourage to ask when they have one:

Some (necessarily rather vaguely defined) portion of the internal discussion is protected from disclosure on the notion that people are going to be less likely to discuss internally if they know that their just-off-the-cuff-here notion that was discarded within the first ten minutes could still land them in the news despite never even getting close to surviving internal discussion; and that this omission from the public record is acceptable because it covers stuff that dies early, so doesn’t impede access to records relating to plans that get put into action.

Obviously, any vague exception to disclosure is a convenient excuse; and it’s pretty obviously bullshit in this case; where the discussion in question made it all the way to (literal) production.


So true. It had to be the same day, today, that I discovered this:


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.