the case of hillary: the movie

The Reporter’s Committee on Freedom of the Press has weighed in on the side of protecting the right of corporate funding for campaign-related “speech.”  hillary

The case involves “Hillary: The Movie,” a mix of advocacy journalism and political commentary that is a relentlessly negative look at Mrs. Clinton’s character and career. The documentary was made by a conservative advocacy group called Citizens United, which lost a lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission seeking permission to distribute it on a video-on-demand service. The film is available on the Internet and on DVD. The issue was that the McCain-Feingold law bans corporate money being used for electioneering.

What do this journalist advocacy group and the makers of an anti-Hillary Clinton movie have in common?


One Response to “the case of hillary: the movie”

  1. Nicolas Ochoa Says:

    This Supreme Court case is very interesting, especially because re-arguments are so rare. It is something that definitely needs to be done, however I strongly believe nothing is going to change. It would be ridiculous if corporations could spend money to support or oppose political candidates. It would simply suck the motivation to vote right up. This past election was my first time to really speak my voice. It was something honorable, and something I got excited about. I’m afraid if Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce gets overturned, this motivation will not be there. It will just be another disappointment. However, I am eager to see what comes of this case.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: