Re:Michael Arrington: "We Need More Opinion In News, Not Less"
by protomyth on Thursday July 08, 2010 @05:44PM
(#1498887)
To a point, but the text of the bill was out there for a couple of days before the vote and even afterwords they didn't bother to really talk about it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Michael Arrington: "We Need More Opinion In News, Not Less"
by yummyfajitas on Thursday July 08, 2010 @06:06PM
(#1498948)
The bill was 1017 pages, and reads like a legalese styled diff-output (i.e., "the word XXX in HR YYYY shall be changed to ZZZZ"). Besides, it's also important what was left out of the bill (e.g., the Heller amendment).
I think you expect too much from reporters.
Re:Michael Arrington: "We Need More Opinion In News, Not Less"
by protomyth on Thursday July 08, 2010 @07:15PM
(#1499106)
It really isn't much different then any other bill in form. I still haven't heard any follow-up on the rule making process that the bill set in motion. Some of that stuff (according to the bill, and I am sure there are reporters more qualified to read it then me) was on a 90 and 180 day time frame.
I expect them to spend the time and report on what actually affects the most people's lives. I would bet more in-depth analysis has been done on the Lohan sentence (90 days - too much?) then on the followup rules making on this bill.