<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Comments to FEC on Internet Campaigning Are In</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pardonthedisruption.com/2005/06/05/comments-to-fec-on-internet-campaigning-are-in/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pardonthedisruption.com/2005/06/05/comments-to-fec-on-internet-campaigning-are-in/</link>
	<description>Hosted by Chip Griffin</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 18:08:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Krempasky</title>
		<link>http://www.pardonthedisruption.com/2005/06/05/comments-to-fec-on-internet-campaigning-are-in/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Krempasky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.interadvocacy.com/2005/06/comments-to-fec-on-internet-campaigning-are-in/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>&quot;My position will not be popular with fellow bloggers, but I do believe that if a blogger is paid to blog by a campaign, that should have to be disclosed -- just like real world political activities. &quot;
My apologies, but you&#039;ve misunderstood the law. No one &quot;offline&quot; has to disclose such things. The campaign - the &quot;spender&quot; is under the onus of regulations, not the recipient. To force bloggers to do so would immediately make them the ONLY regulated recipient of funds.
Sure - bloggers ought to disclose. That&#039;s a far, far cry from saying we ought to force them through the power of law to do so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;My position will not be popular with fellow bloggers, but I do believe that if a blogger is paid to blog by a campaign, that should have to be disclosed &#8212; just like real world political activities. &#8221;<br />
My apologies, but you&#8217;ve misunderstood the law. No one &#8220;offline&#8221; has to disclose such things. The campaign &#8211; the &#8220;spender&#8221; is under the onus of regulations, not the recipient. To force bloggers to do so would immediately make them the ONLY regulated recipient of funds.<br />
Sure &#8211; bloggers ought to disclose. That&#8217;s a far, far cry from saying we ought to force them through the power of law to do so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Politics and Technology</title>
		<link>http://www.pardonthedisruption.com/2005/06/05/comments-to-fec-on-internet-campaigning-are-in/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Politics and Technology</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2005 07:03:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.interadvocacy.com/2005/06/comments-to-fec-on-internet-campaigning-are-in/#comment-13</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;FEC gets comments on regulating blogging&lt;/strong&gt;

The FEC has received comments from bloggers, activists, and lawmakers on their proposed rulemaking related to political activity on the net. From the Washington Post: The authors of the campaign finance reform law, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russe...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>FEC gets comments on regulating blogging</strong></p>
<p>The FEC has received comments from bloggers, activists, and lawmakers on their proposed rulemaking related to political activity on the net. From the Washington Post: The authors of the campaign finance reform law, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russe&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
