Rich Gibson  06-04-2003
01:35 PM ET (US)
|
Jerry,
Another argument against the internet serving as an effective counter to the power of centralized media is that, effectivly, the Internet is controlled by those same corporations.
|
CharlesWT 06-03-2003
11:01 PM ET (US)
|
Regulations often take the form of Thou shall not commit murder using any of the following methods...killing someone using any method not contain herein will not constitute murder. We [politicians and bureaucrats] are quite willing to "discuss" whether any method contain herein should be reduced to the level of assault and battery or removed entirely from this code. Edited 06-03-2003 11:04 PM
|
Jerry Kuntz 06-03-2003
06:20 PM ET (US)
|
One of the central arguments put forth for easing the restrictions is the assertion that cable TV and the Internet have opened up avenues for alternative viewpoints to the stranglehold of local traditional media; and that these didn't exist before the original restrictions were written.
I haven't seen the counter-arguments to this, but can guess one of them--those "alternative viewpoints" are pretty much low budget, non-professional, limited audience avenues, since they can't generate the ad income that traditional media rely on.
What are the other refutations of this argument?
|
Rich Gibson 06-03-2003
12:59 PM ET (US)
|
JNelson...We hated Hollings for digital rights management crap, that and general toadiness.
It is funny how the wheels twist and turn. A few years back it was the FCC that lead the push for Micropower Radio, and Congress, at the prodding of the usual corporate bastards _plus_ NPR (!) overruled the FCC.
The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) opposed it for the usual asshole corporate reasons. NPR opposed it out of a specific repudiation of their own principles.
NPR is evil.
|
jerwin 06-03-2003
11:57 AM ET (US)
|
It's worth noting that a broad spectrum of groups, (including , for instance, the NRA, the Family Research Council, and Code Pink, ) opposed this measure
|
bern de galvez 06-03-2003
10:15 AM ET (US)
|
Trent Lott went on to remark that, had Strom Thurmond been elected in 1948, the FCC would never have been chaired by someone like Michael Powell.<br><br>It's refreshing when on occasion the predictable shopworn political pigeonholes are transcended. But when Lott and Safire end up on the same side as Ben and Jerry, then maybe—just maybe—it indicates that not enough rational, factual analysis is going on.
|
JNelsonW 06-03-2003
08:37 AM ET (US)
|
Wait, this bill is proposed by Hollings? Didn't we all hate him not long ago? It's hard for me to remember why, exactly... so many different crappy things have happened since then.
|
Boplicity 06-03-2003
02:50 AM ET (US)
|
It is so difficult to judge the validity of this type of legislation because the media industry is so complex with so many players. Ultimately, I think a cap would be a good thing. But who would it benefit the most in the short term? Edited 06-03-2003 02:50 AM
|
New Topic
My Topics
Views:
408
(Unique:
292
) / Subscribers:
1 | What's this?
