DeSantis Signs Bills To Create 25-Foot Halo Around Cops, Strip Oversight Boards Of Independence

from the lifted-shitheel-licks-boots dept

Here come more bad laws, courtesy of the Florida legislature — a government body that hasn’t met a right it isn’t willing to violate to further its bigoted agenda.

These laws won’t necessarily violate rights right out of the gate, but the potential is definitely there. Here’s Douglas Sole of the Tallahassee Democrat (it’s a newspaper name, not a political allegiance) with the latest legislative bad news:

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed two bills Friday that he says will support law enforcement, but which critics warn will undermine the public’s ability to prevent police brutality and corruption.

“I don’t think there’s anyone that can match what we’ve done to protect the citizens of this state, but particularly to ensure that we respect and protect the men and women who wear the uniform,” DeSantis said at the bill signing event in St. Augustine, surrounded by uniformed officers and standing behind a lectern sign that said, “Supporting Law Enforcement.”

One bill (SB 184) creates a 25-foot “no-go” zone around first responders, including police. The other (HB 601) would limit what citizen police oversight boards can do, including investigating complaints of officer misconduct, and would require these panels to be re-established under county sheriffs and municipal police chiefs, who would appoint the members.

Ron, I don’t think anyone should “match” what you’ve done. And it’s certainly not being done to “protect the citizens” of Florida. The second half of that sentence is far more honest: these laws are meant to protect some of the most powerful people in Florida: law enforcement officers.

While SB 184 extends the halo of protection to first responders like firefighters and EMTs, the real purpose of the law is to give cops a reason to harass or arrest people who attempt to film them. Pushing them 25 feet back (a distance left to the discretion of the officer enforcing the new law) makes it harder to get a clear view of what’s happening.

And the lectern sign gives away the game: “Supporting Law Enforcement.” No first responders who aren’t cops have ever complained about the public interfering with their work or wasted valuable first response time telling people to stop recording. That’s something cops do almost exclusively. This isn’t about ensuring first responders are given space to do their jobs. It’s about adding another 20+ feet of distance between cops and accountability.

Here’s DeSantis’ excuse for this latest bit of bootlicking:

DeSantis said the legislation “recognizes we’ve got some strange currents going on in our society right now that really seek to delegitimize law enforcement,” accusing news media outlets of warping narratives about police for attention and “clicks” and citing media coverage of the recent controversial police killing of Dexter Reed in Chicago.

Ron, cops have done plenty themselves to “delegitimize law enforcement.” The only difference in recent years is that it’s a lot harder to control the narrative when everyone on the street is carrying around a camera of their own. That’s what this law aims to deter: citizen recordings. According to the vague wording of the law, filming cops could be considered an act “without legitimate purpose,” which would be enough to justify cops moving people recording police interactions far enough away they can’t fully document the incident.

An amendment to protect citizens’ right to record was rejected. So was Rep. Angela Nixon’s amendment, which simply asked the legislature to fully own the underlying conceit of this ridiculous legislation:

[N]ixon’s proposed amendment to change the name of the bill to “The I Don’t Want the World to See the Police Kill an Unarmed Innocent Man Like George Floyd Again, So I Want To Protect Bad Cops and Violate Free Speech Act” [also failed].

Creating even more separation from accountability is the second bill, which removes the word “independent” from “independent oversight” to allow police to police themselves, something they deliberately do poorly.

The twenty-one civilian oversight boards that currently exist in Florida will be altered starting January 1 of next year, stripping them of anyone local cops don’t approve of. This stripping of any pretense of accountability could not be more transparent, ironically.

All boards will be required to have from three to seven members, with one member being a retired law enforcement officer. (Keep in mind that a lot of officers choose to retire, rather than face internal investigations or other accusations of misconduct. So, there’s a good chance a lot of retired cops are also bad cops.)

Then it gets worse:

All members must be appointed by the sheriff or police chief over the area

Foxes and hen houses, inmates running asylums, or whatever your favorite idiom is. This law ensures no officers will ever face accountability from oversight boards by stocking them with cops and their friends. It’s the opposite of a kangaroo court — a place where exoneration is guaranteed.

None of this is surprising. DeSantis is an aspiring fascist and there’s little more conducive to fascism than law enforcement agencies being given permission to be a law unto themselves. Florida’s governor and far too many of its legislators have declared war on the Constitution. And all the while, they continue to pretend they’re the greatest Americans of all, even as they work in lockstep to create a nightmarish blend of bigotry and totalitarianism.

Filed Under: , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DeSantis Signs Bills To Create 25-Foot Halo Around Cops, Strip Oversight Boards Of Independence”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
131 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

According to the vague wording of the law, filming cops could be considered an act “without legitimate purpose,”

Mmmmm. Pretty sure the constitution (See the 1st through 6th, 10th and 14th Amendments) says that is by and large outside of the federal/state authority.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Next up, the 'making cops look bad is a felony' bill..

If ‘the public being able to see what the police are doing’ and ‘anyone but cop-approved oversight’ is considered such an existential threat to the cops within your state that you pass two laws to eliminate both that’s a pretty big pair of red flags that the cops are the problem, not the public.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

“…controversial police killing of Dexter Reed in Chicago.”

Whats so controversial? Criminal shoots at cop, forfeiting right to life, gets killed for shooting cop.

If it were controversial, it would be a story here. Cops in the right, so no story here. Plus the cops weren’t white therefore it doesn’t fit the narrative.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Whats so controversial? Criminal shoots at cop, forfeiting right to life, gets killed for shooting cop.

A cop isn’t judge, jury and executioner. The undercover tactical unit that sprayed and prayed is kind of infamous in Chicago for how they conduct themselves and when they need almost 100 bullets to subdue someone in a car, it is controversial for a host of reasons.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
MrWilson (profile) says:

Re:

Whats so controversial? Criminal shoots at cop, forfeiting right to life, gets killed for shooting cop.

That’s literally not the law. They don’t forfeit their lives. While it is a common police practice to shoot to kill if a suspect has shot at cops, it isn’t a de jure death sentence or even a de facto one in all scenarios. Some people who have shot at cops have been arrested rather than shot. And judges and juries don’t sentence them to death unless they’ve committed murder. Criminals always retain the right to life and the right to due process. And this mentality that cops should be so ready for violence has cost the lives of plenty of non-criminals.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
MrWilson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

You don’t agree with me. What I said contradicts your position. I don’t expect cops to kill anyone unless it’s the last resort. Look up videos of people who have shot at cops and lived. Look at cops in Europe using shields to surround dangerous people wielding knives. American cops usually just shoot and go on a paid vacation. Does having a mental episode that includes wielding a weapon warrant an automatic death sentence? No, it doesn’t. Not morally and not legally. We just let cops get away with it because of authoritarian enablers such as yourself.

MrWilson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

I love that you brought up an instance that proves my point. The cop thought the acorn was a patted-down and handcuffed black man inside his shop who was shooting at him because the cop is too ready to assume the threat of violence and too prone to shoot without knowing what’s going on. No, the cop isn’t racist against the acorn. It was literally him being racist against the unarmed, handcuffed black man and ready to murder an unarmed person because of it. And his department found that the shooting wasn’t reasonable, so even other cops who are also too prone to violence even thought it was too far.

MrWilson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11

That was in regard to the person I responded to initially that started this whole thread when they said, “Whats so controversial? Criminal shoots at cop, forfeiting right to life, gets killed for shooting cop.” What I said contradicted that position.

The video about the cop pulling the girl out of the car isn’t related to the Dexter Reed incident that first person to whom I replied and I haven’t opined about the girl getting pulled out of her car so you can’t agree or disagree about an incident we haven’t discussed. You don’t know what I think about that second scenario.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:15

I’m sorry you two don’t seem capable of following a thread. Nor understand nuance.

If I shoot at a cop, I expect them to return fire, this might mean that I die. Therefore I am POSSIBLY forfeiting my right to life by shooting at a cop. Does not mean that I literally forfeited my right to life, but I sure am taking a gamble with it.

Let me know if this is still too complicated for you to grasp.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

“Abstract
This paper explores racial differences in police use of force. On non-lethal uses of force,blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions with police. Adding controls that account for important context and civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities

On the most extreme use of force –officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.

We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings.”
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/empirical_analysis_tables_figures.pdf

MrWilson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5

I too am capable of googling sources that support my argument:

Phillip Atiba Goff, a professor of policing equity at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and cofounder and president of the Center for Policing Equity (CPE), said the paper was conducted “casually” and draws conclusions that go beyond what the data supports.

“If you haven’t read all of the literature and don’t understand what you’re looking at, you end up in a position that doesn’t look good,” Goff said.

Goff is one of the authors of “The Science of Justice: Race, Arrests, and Police Use of Force,” a report also released in July. The CPE report analyzes 12 law enforcement departments within the National Justice Database that are geographically and demographically diverse. The data revealed that racial disparities in use of force persisted.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/07/21/paper-finding-no-racial-bias-shootings-police-criticized/87301632/

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Koby (profile) says:

Just Use Your Zoom Lens

Ron, I don’t think anyone should “match” what you’ve done. And it’s certainly not being done to “protect the citizens” of Florida

The citizens will decide whether they should match, by voting with their feet. Crime ridden democrat cities, or southern red states? Right now, the population movement is clearly in the red states favor. When oversight boards protect perpetrators and demonize cops, the citizens receive muggings and burglaries.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

Crime ridden democrat cities, or southern red states?

Red states that have to deal with an influx of people moving in from “Democrat cities” will see their crime rates rise in turn. Crime isn’t a “big city” thing⁠—it’s a “desperate people” thing, and desperation is most decidedly non-partisan.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“The citizens will decide whether they should match, by voting with their feet.”

Yup – The brain drain is affecting red states to their detriment.

“Right now, the population movement is clearly in the red states favor.”

This is true .. since their objective is to have a very ignorant populace.

“the citizens receive muggings and burglaries.”

By the cops.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Mamba (profile) says:

Re:

The fact that your dumb enough to believe this shit is true really shouldn’t shock me, but here we are.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/america-has-two-economies-and-theyre-diverging-fast/

Democrat voting districts out produce, out educate, out earn, and out perform red voting districts to such a high degree that it’s clear that Republican voters are suckling on the nipple of Democrat voters while biting that the milk is sour.

And not content with the depth your ignorance, you’re doing your best to make states dumber:

https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/04/05/idaho-is-losing-ob-gyns-after-strict-abortion-ban-but-health-exceptions-unlikely-this-year/

MrWilson (profile) says:

Re:

Some phones have shitty, useless zooms. You can’t spot a cop planting evidence from 25 feet with a useless zoom. You also can’t pick up audio well from that distance and plenty of audio recordings have incriminated cops or proven that they knew they were making up charges or planting evidence.

But I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. You’re not arguing in good faith.

Anonymous Coward says:

Congress, state legislatures, and even SCOTUS have long been creating special rights, privilegeses, and imunities for police and some other classes of government agents.

Both REPUBLICANS & DEMOCRATS have generally supported these unconstitutional tyrannies for decades.

FLORIDA is merely following a well established oppressive trend in American Government.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Related side story – I understand that in russia some oligarchs have flashy lights on their vehicles that let them drive like idiots. Saw a video of some dude who jumped upon said flashy light vehicle. He had a bucket on his head which the driver successfully knock off – only to reveal a second bucket underneath. lol
was prob just a prank vid .. idk.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
mick says:

Re:

Both REPUBLICANS & DEMOCRATS have generally supported these unconstitutional tyrannies for decades.

Only one party pretends to believe in Small Government while removing any and all oversight of government agents.

It’s not just about the obvious constitutional issues; it’s also about the never-ending Republican hypocrisy.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

First responder perspective

I spend much more time training first responders than being one these days, but: I’ve rarely had a problem with members of the public intruding on a scene…and when I have, it’s because they’re upset about what’s happened or has happened to a family member, friend, or neighbor. Since we carry no weapons, we use what we have: our voices and our compassion. A hug and some understanding words are pretty much always are enough to control the situation.

As for recordings: we welcome them. We do post-operations review of every response, because no matter how well trained we are, no matter how experienced we are, no matter how careful we are: we always make mistakes and we can always do better. (Nearly all of those mistakes are inconsequential and invisible to the public. But we know.) We don’t have time to record so I’m gratified when someone does it for us and shares it with us, so that we can go over it second by second and use it to improve our next response.

We require no special protection, no privileges, no exemptions, nothing. We welcome scrutiny and we accept responsibility for our mistakes as much as we accept credit for our successes. We’re part of the community and we’re accountable to everyone else in the community for everything we do. And I, personally, think that this is how public service is supposed to be.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Jesus was a Jewish Palestinian, born homeless to an unwed teenager, who spent his formative years as an illegal immigrant before returning to his home country. He associated with twelve men, prostitutes, and socially untouchable tax collectors while he taught a radical social doctrine that included ideas such as paying taxes, free universal healthcare, and the sharing of resources within a community. His advocacy for equality, love, and forgiveness for all people led to his arrest, trial, conviction, torture, and execution for crimes against the state.

Conservative Christians lost their minds when they were asked to do the bare minimum during the pandemic and wear facemasks. Not only would they crucify Jesus Christ all over again if he were to return without a display of the power of God, they’d complain about being “persecuted” by “woke leftist Antifa” for doing it. The allegiances of Conservative evangelicals lie not with the radical doctrine of Jesus, but with the all-consuming power of Caesar. That Donald Trump has captured them so much as a voting base that they celebrate the idea of a Trump-branded Bible speaks to the lack of principles behind their faith.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: 'Of course he's not the anti-christ, he doesn't have a european accent!'

That Donald Trump has captured them so much as a voting base that they celebrate the idea of a Trump-branded Bible speaks to the lack of principles behind their faith.

While also providing some dark humor for anyone familiar with the sub-genre of religious movies that are the ‘rapture/tribulations’ ones that have as one of their central characters the anti-christ and the idea that it’s the true christians(which you can be damn sure his MAGAt followers would self-identify as) who would be the ones to see through his lies.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

…born homeless to an unwed teenager…

Unwed mother, no. Mary was married to Joseph by that point. Also, there’s nothing in my Bible to say that Jesus had nowhere to live after his parents’ return to Nazareth. Now, I understand that the Bible sometimes has to be interpreted rather then read as-is, but there’s no need to make stuff up.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

The academic consensus on Jesus’ past also agrees that he was probably not homeless.

He was a carpenter, like his father before him, and had an education, if somewhat unorthodox, in the religious texts of his time.

Before 30, he would have had a roof over his head, because skilled labor such as carpentry would have been able to make a living. Not a good one, mind you, but enough to put food on the table and make rent.

And well, he was convicted of supposed insurrection. Ironic, considering that his message (drive out the Roman occupiers) was a cottage industry when he decided to be an itenarant prophet.

Stone’s message still stands, errors notwithstanding.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Both you and the prior commenter seemed to miss the fact that I said “born homeless”, which…well, being born in a stable surrounded by a bunch of animals because there was no room at a nearby inn sounds a lot like being born without a home. Whether he was homeless later in life is beside that specific point.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

Unwed mother, no. Mary was married to Joseph by that point.

A distinction without a difference. That slut was pregnant and Joseph was conned into supporting her bastard.

Now, I understand that the Bible sometimes has to be interpreted rather then read as-is, but there’s no need to make stuff up.

How exactly is his (or my, for that matter) ‘interpretation’ of a book that was made-up in the first place ‘making stuff up?’

I fail to see the problem.

Anonymous Coward says:

Yes, laws like this are exactly what we need, because those who would unlawfully interfere with first responders clearly can’t do so from twenty-six feet away.

Also I couldn’t help but notice that the bill text on FL’s website specifically calls out recordings as NOT harassment… but I’m sure the police will be fully briefed on that, right?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Apparently I was looking at an older version of the bill:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2024/75/BillText/Filed/PDF

“The peaceful audio or video recording or eyewitness observing of a first responder is a legitimate purpose that does not constitute harassment.”

The fact that it was there and was removed is quite telling, don’t you think?

Tanner Andrews (profile) says:

Re: actually, no

the bill text on FL’s website specifically calls out recordings as NOT harassmen

This appears to be unreliable information. Having downloaded the actual bill text, Ch. 2024-85, I find no reference at all to recording.

The closest thing to a mention is that if your actions could cause emotional distress, then your actions are illegal. We know that being recorded often makes officers feel distress, with perhaps the most notable examples being the unhappiness of officers recorded as they kill unarmed civilians. Even there, however, the term recording is not mentioned.

Link to session law, http://laws.flrules.org/2024/85 (PDF Fla-2024-85)

David says:

You wish

No first responders who aren’t cops have ever complained about the public interfering with their work or wasted valuable first response time telling people to stop recording. That’s something cops do almost exclusively. This isn’t about ensuring first responders are given space to do their jobs. It’s about adding another 20+ feet of distance between cops and accountability.

While I certainly share your concern that this is just to give less accountability to cops, the purported reason is more real than you appear willing to acknowledge: people trying to get their clickbait cellphone videos at the cost of victim privacy and partly disrupting and blocking rescue work have become a thing in recent decades.

View-blocking screens have become an item for first responders that also helps mitigating traffic jams from slow-moving peepers.

That part of the excuse for those laws is a thing. Of course there are ways to address that without overreaching laws that conveniently provide a lot of smokescreen for more sinister actions.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Bloof (profile) says:

So now all cops need to do is approach people filming to make them guilty of a crime if they don’t back away. If this isn’t overturned, it’s pretty much guaranteed people of colour recording police wil either be arrested or shot for ‘resisting arrest’ as they back away from approaching cops to remain in compliance. ‘They had something in their hand! That phone I saw they had could have been a gun! If they didn’t have anything to hide they wouldn’t have tried to flee!’

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re:

An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere. If you want Florida to fuck off, then that means that you don’t care about the innocent people who are stuck there, or even the liberals and other left-wingers who live there (like my sister and her fiancé).

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Bloof (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Up and move to where? What do you say to Florida’s poor and disenfranchised, those on gerrymandered districts surgically constructed to minimise their voting power, people who have never voted for DeSantis and don’t have the kind of money or prospects that would enable them to just up and move?

There are plenty of people who had no meaningful say in putting DeSantis in power, and are there because they have no other choice, saying these should GTFO or be wiped off the map is a lousy thing to say. Think, then do better.

Nimrod (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

I suppose you’re also gong to argue that they could have never seen any of this coming. Florida has been this way for a VERY long time. DeSantis is a symptom, not the malady itself. I’ve left town with the shirt on my back before- literally. Sure, it wouldn’t be EASY, but leaving is always an option. I surmise that many of us prefer to complain than make the hard choices needed to move forward in their lives. It’s hard for me to find much sympathy for THAT.

MrWilson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Some people literally can’t move or the cost (not just monetary cost) of moving is too much. They may rely on medication/treatments to keep them alive and moving to a new state means new processes and waiting periods to get different benefits that may run out their supply before they get a replacement or a new state may not even have a replacement option. Some people have joint custody/visitation agreements with ex-spouses for their kids so moving might mean losing custody. Some people just have all their family living in the same area and want/need the connections or family support. Maybe they only make good money at their current employer and can’t afford to take a pay cut to work somewhere else.

But the bigger answer is that running away is giving the fascists what they want. They want to drive all the liberals, progressives, LGBTQ folk, atheists, Muslims, etc. away. They want their conservative theocratic authoritarian dystopia. It’s definitely not the responsibility of individuals to weather the bullying and tolerate the gerrymandering, but decent people abandoning conservative states en masse can create black holes where civil and human rights go to die.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

“Stuck there”? By what, probation? You can always MOVE.

Yes, because everyone in Florida has oodles of money to move from the state, and then to move again when the political arena in their new state begins to reek of hatred and corruption. You are clearly an anti-LGBT+ troll. 🤦‍♂️

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

And you are clearly a prejudiced troll who thinks moving out of state time and time again as the political climate becomes ever more unhealthy all over the US is so fucking easy. Ever tried moving with a severely autistic child below the age of ten? We moved one block, and that took ages to get him on board with the idea. I don’t like to imagine how things might be with families with autistic members in Florida. If anyone’s making assumptions, it’s you; you’re assuming that everyone is in your position, and thus failing to have any empathy for them.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Moving to a new place within a given state is, for the average person, a life-changing event that requires a fair amount of both money and time; moving to a new place in another state, even moreso. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to afford the cost of moving⁠—financially, chronologically, and socially⁠—and to tell those people “suck it up and move” is to take an incredibly shortsighted and privileged stance. Blaming marginalized people for their marginalization does nothing to help them.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Nimrod (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I guess I shouldn’t believe all that I read. I saw an article decades ago that claimed that there were no remaining Seminoles, only white people exploiting the memory of those they’d ethnically cleansed. Given my past experience with Floridians, this didn’t surprise me. I’m glad to hear that it was untrue. I feel that the best measure of a democracy is the way those in control treat the indigenous population. Maybe we still have a chance at one in this country, even with the binary bullshit the two criminal enterprises disguised as political parties are forcing upon us to further their corporate agenda.

Samuel Abram (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

I feel that the best measure of a democracy is the way those in control treat the indigenous population.

On that measure, the US Department of the Interior gave the Prairie band of the Pawatomi Nation’s land back: https://nativenewsonline.net/sovereignty/report-doi-places-prairie-band-potawatomi-nation-s-northern-illinois-reservation-land-into-trust

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...