# 3 Reasons Not To Sweat The "Citizens United" SCOTUS Ruling

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [February 9, 2010, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328 "2010-02-09T20:52:12Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328/41 "2010-02-12T23:30:40Z")

</div>

> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#):
>
> More speech is not bad, it catalyzes conversations, especially just prior to an election.
> 
> This is the most difficult for rebuttal

It’s not going to be “speech,” it’s going to be advertising. And despite the fact that every single individual believes themself to be immune to advertising, it wouldn’t be a multi-billion dollar industry if that were the case.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328/42 "2010-02-13T00:46:42Z")

</div>

> [@Mr.Moto](#):
>
> Even if I wasn’t in agreement with this point, it would be nice for critics of the decision to address it. They seldom do.

The constitutional-legal reasoning of the decision, if that’s what you mean, is irrelevant to the topic stated n the OP.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328/43 "2010-02-13T06:15:33Z")

</div>

> [@Cisco](#):
>
> It’s not going to be “speech,” it’s going to be advertising.

What do you see as the difference?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328/44 "2010-02-13T12:56:38Z")

</div>

> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#):
>
> What do you see as the difference?

Right. What’s the difference between a newspaper article and a newspaper ad, or 60 Minutes and an infomercial, as far as the First Amendment is concerned.

And please don’t bring up some code of journalism as a justification for this. First of all - for the purposes of the First Amendment this is irrelevant. Secondly we have seen in recent elections that media companies can behave admirably or badly alike - this has little bearing on their right to publish or be on the air.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-reasons-not-to-sweat-the-citizens-united-scotus-ruling/528328.md?page=2)