Here's my question-

Would At&T felt compelled to bleep out one of the seven words, had Pearl Jam uttered them during a song?

Since this was not "broadcast" television, are they subject to FCC fines? 

Or was this purely a politically motivated propaganda move by At&T to keep the boss happy? 

Alphonse ( Al ) Kada
Iranians are fighting the Americans in Iraq so they don't have to fight them on the streets of Tehran

For the sake of argument, why does ATT care what people think of George Bush? He isn't exactly popular with corporate America either, Halliburton being about the only exception. My guess is this is more likely a hamhanded attempt to avoid embroiling the company is a political controversy than an outright attempt at pro-Bush censorship. For an example on the other side of the fence, the large corporation I work for vetoed an employee effort to collect, at work, various useful and hard-to-get (in Iraq) goods for the American troops in Iraq, not wanting to have its name associated with the Iraq War, pro or con, in any way at all.

By the way, excuse my ignorance, but I take it webcasts are not done in real time? Otherwise how could anything be silenced or bleeped out?

AT&T might act differently if there was a political party willing to stand up for the Bill of Rights.

OK, so they would do the same for a Democratic president? It's not really political just a case of not wanting to rock the boat by POing the powers that be on high, more or less as I said?

Do you really think there is nothing wrong with a public medium censoring words because they don't want to "rock the boat by POing the powers that be on high?"

I don't think that fear of rocking boats came along until the spymasters in this criminal cabal showed up.  I certainly never saw or heard of any self-censorship with Clinton -- we were all exposed to the most personal and detailed verbiage possible during his tenure.

And as to this:

He [Bush] isn't exactly popular with corporate America either

I have to ask.  What are you smoking?  The example you gave about your particular company's response to collecting things for Iraq is a lame one, and hardly qualifies as an across-the-board opinion on Bush! 

Did you hear what he wants to do about repairing bridge and road infrastructure in our crumbling country?  He wants to use the many dollars already appropriated for infrastructure, and then give corporations another TAX CUT!

If you believe that corporate America doesn't like Bush, is it because they happen to like Cheney more? 

Jan

Yeah, where are the elected officials who have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution as a condition of their holding office in this country. Bush/Cheney are shredding it: By ignoring it, Congress is guilty of dereliction of duty - not to mention breaking their oath.

where are they? they are doing their political calculations. Amy Klobuchar in a fairly blue state votes to support unconstitutional wiretapping. Why? My only response is "she supports the shredding of the constitution". What absolute garbage!!!

(Who says we won the Cold War?)It depends on who "we" are. Some of "us" won very big. Others of "us", not so much.

The Janet Jackson nipslip was an instance of being asleep at the switcher. The technical director probably said WTF??? and it was over before he could say "Cut to camera 4!!!!".

Don't think so...

The camera crew had to be in on the nipslip from the get go they were apparently scripted for a quick toggle in on a tight-tit shot. Be thankful some maroon didn't think of a Velcroed on crotch or codpiece instead.

…OK, so they would do the same for a Democratic president?

For a Clinton or Obama my guess is yes. It's a bit more basic, IMO, than just a case of not wanting to rock the boat by POing the powers that be on high.

The Neo-Conservative/Neo-Liberal corporate establishment of Globalist pirates control the Republican party lock stock and barrel, though the religious right and law and order voting block is starting to show some signs of being careful not to drop the soap in the showers with these guys. Worse they control the DC Democrat Party leadership and a not inconsequential number of Democrat Senators and Representatives. Who is not represented by the current corporate funded government/establishment and corporate media is the JC Middle Class small businessmen Republican types of yore and the Middle Class Democrat working class Joes and Janes, who together actually make up the bulk of registered voters.

Both the old the old Republican and Democratic Partys could be counted not to sell our industrial base off shore and protect our markets and national sovereignty. The new Corporate Globalist establishment has no loyalty to the American people as a whole or the country's sovereignty. These phony arsed global citizens with their high flown Globalist rhetoric are in reality imperialist pigs of the worst sort little better than the old Communist or Fascist satraps and are apparently bent on raping the first and third worlds to increase their personal power and thus wealth. They are a new class of super imperialists whom I think will with their inane rationalizations, justified mostly in their own minds and by their blind greed will destroy much of the world and themselves with it.

If Satan were real I'd say the current globalist corporate establishment were his devoted followers. The only thing that scares me worse than religious fundamentalists is irreligious fundamentalists.

I think that the assessment is right that the Dems were afraid if there were another attack the GOP machine would blame them for not letting them get all the intelligence.  If that is true it is more pathetic than we ever dreamed.  Where is the furor over the "sting" where people with a New Jersey phone number got information about how to build a bomb?

Why do they let these huge lapses go and follow the neo-con talking points as though they don't have brains of their own?  They could make an easily understood list of 10 (well, it could be 1000, but not practical) things that Bush SHOULD have been doing about security.

It should start with our complete unpreparedness for a national disaster, with Katrina being a fairly small example.  Since Katrina, what has been done (not even counting the abused people of New Orleans) in case a nuclear, or bio-attack occurred?

The Dems just follow the playbook that the publicans put out there and never challenge anything or write their own, intelligent view of security.  No wonder we are in the shape we are in! 

And frankly, I am sick of putting things "on the table," and taking things "off the table."  What a bunch of sohphomoric babble!

   Jan

Apart from the issue of net netrality, why can't Pearl Jam sure AT&T for very pennny they have based on breach of contract. I assume that AT&T does not include a clause in its standard contracts that allows them to randomly alter artistic productions or any other work. Is there some reason that Pearl Jam can't just sue these folks for ruining their product?

Censorship of the arts is hardly a new thing. Artists, musicians, authors and playwrights have been censored throughout history in every communications media you can name, from stone and canvas to live theater and opera to the printed word to film to radio and TV and now the internet. I doubt net neutrality will stop it, particularly since that isn't really what net neutrality is about -- it has a lot more to do with money talking than artistic freedom of expression being shut up. Certainly the two can overlap and often do, but they are very much not the same thing.

Right on every point!  And to carry the absurdity further:

How in the hell did George Bush get POINTS for 911?  How did he get the Dems to support him in a fake war?  This attack was on HIS watch after credible warnings and somehow they have turned it in to a publican bonanza!

We can only blame them for so much.  We are also culpable for letting them get away with it.

Jan

Pearl Jam sucks.

George Bush leave this world alone.  George Bush find yourself another home.

 Ugh

Is that was passes for political songwriting these days? So much stuff out there that is a lot better than this.

There's The Yeah Yeah Yeah Song by The Flaming Lips.

There's Sixteen Military Wives by The Decemberists.

Getting a couple years older, there's Hiway 9 by Eliza Gilkyson, and Steve Earle's whole album "The Revolution Starts Now" which includes Home to Houston, Rich Man's War, and the apparently topical F the CC.

So, just to be clear, my only point is that Pearl Jam sucks. 

I might have.