I think you have a danger of regulating, putting regulations in place which will mean there will be no press in 10 years to regulate.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I'm always a little cautious, there's a few amendments that are out there that I think could do some damage, so I've been more concerned about over regulating, going too far.
The regulations keep on coming. And we are trying to make decisions that we will be happy with for decades.
I'm not a big fan of regulation: anyone who likes freedom of the press can't be.
But let me tell you what happens when regulations go too far, when they seem to exist only for the purpose of justifying the existence of a regulator. It kills the people trying to start a business.
The future regulatory arrangements for the newspaper industry need to be done in a much calmer deliberative way, in slower time when we've got beyond this media firestorm.
While legislation obviously is political, we now have allowed regulation to become politicized, which we believe will likely lead to some bad outcomes.
It is within the last quarter century or thirty years. And a lot of that law has turned out to be very, very protective of the press and the public's right to know.
I believe that we have to have a new regulatory regime for our financial system.
I think some combined pressure could go a long way, could establish the fact that this legislation did pass and we mean business by it. We mean to have it enforced, we mean to have it become effective.
Generally I'm against regulation.
No opposing quotes found.