193
FCC ends affordable internet program due to lack of funds | CNN Business
(edition.cnn.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024
193 points (99.0% liked)
News
23301 readers
3530 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Its fucked up.
"Republicsns, can you agree to extend this program?"
"Yes we can."
"Democrats, can you agree to extend this program?"
"Yes we can."
Great! A rare bipartisan support! And for a bill that will help out Americans that need it most! Now all thats left is to collectively vote to extend the funding! Democrats, would you like to go first?
"....."
Oh. Alright. Not a big deal. You're still saying you support it when it comes time to vote on the bill. Republicans! Maybe YOU'D like to go first?
"....."
Hmmm. You both agree, but neither wants to go first. But if nobody goes first, the funding just ends. Democrats? Maybe you???
"....."
Uhhhhhh, cutting it close guys. Republicans???
"....."
Dammit. This bill isn't reaching the floor, is it? Look, I know the trump stuff is the headline grabber, but maybe you just get together and slip this one through before lunch? Kinda like how the net neutrality bill just went through with no coverage. Look, neither of you will look weak, and you can both go back to your bases claiming credit for helping them. So, who's going first???
"......"
God dammit, my internet bill is going up, isn't it?
While your version jives with lemmy's "both sides" reactionary bullshit, reality is quite a bit different.
I wonder why you think the refusal to continue ACP funding was a bipartisan choice. Every report I've read about it over the past several months has indicated otherwise.
Edit: Is it just because the phrase "bipartisan legislation" appears in this article? If so, then I would suggest reading the whole article more carefully, and maybe following up with additional sources. It won't take long to see that one specific party is responsible for this program ending.
I like this version of the TL;DR.