When I began this blog in 2001, I was appalled by President Bush's headlong rush to an illegal war (we were not in fact under attack). As time wore on and Bush began his assault on the Constitution and any people bold enough to criticize, I believed that "the republic is endangered more by actions of our own government than by those of any terrorist." With the election of a high-minded, compassionate, intelligent man like Barack Obama, my fears have ceased.
"Honor them with peace, not war"
United for Peace
Wednesday, January 08, 2003
The only way to get a balanced view of what it going on is to read, watch, or listen to a variety of news outlets. No matter how hard it strives for objectivity (and some, of course, dont so strive) one paper or radio show can't present everything it would be useful for you to know. Each reader has to take responsiblity for seeking out news of interest to him.
The internet is wonderful for this, allowing one to read the news published abroad as well as in various parts of the country. Now the FCC plans to relax the rule limiting the ownership of news outlets by any one entity in any one area, citing econocmic benefits to the outlets in question.
Monopolies are of course more economical to the holder of the monoply position. If you're the only show in town, you can charge what you like for shoddy products and skip customer service altogether. But this country has long held that monopolies are contrary to the public interest. If this is true when it comes to shopping, think how much more true it is in news production. If ALL your information comes from one source, it will be slanted, even if they try to balance it.. No way around that. If it comes from a right wing Republian, you can bet their intention is to slant it.
You have until the end of this month to contact the FCC and register your objection.
Copyright © 2001-03 Pam Shorey
(except the specific sources credited in quotes)
Your right to know
The only way to get a balanced view of what it going on is to read, watch, or listen to a variety of news outlets. No matter how hard it strives for objectivity (and some, of course, dont so strive) one paper or radio show can't present everything it would be useful for you to know. Each reader has to take responsiblity for seeking out news of interest to him.
The internet is wonderful for this, allowing one to read the news published abroad as well as in various parts of the country. Now the FCC plans to relax the rule limiting the ownership of news outlets by any one entity in any one area, citing econocmic benefits to the outlets in question.
Having seen how totalitarian regimes moved the world to war through domination of their news media, the government during the 1940's put restrictions on how many news media outlets one company could own, both nationally and in a single city.
Though those rules have been relaxed in the last 20 years, companies are still blocked from buying a newspaper and television station in the same city or from owning more than one TV station in the same market.
Three weeks after it proposed eliminating those rules, the F.C.C. released a series of reports about the current media marketplace. But the reports focused almost entirely on the economic impact of relaxing the ownership rules. They largely ignore the public's interest in a diverse and independent press.
The F.C.C. argues that technologies like the Internet offer Americans access to more information than ever and thus worries about monopolies are unfounded. But studies also show that most Americans receive their news from a handful of outlets. Beyond this, much of what appears on the Internet is repackaged from those outlets. The number of operations that gather original news is small and now may become smaller. -- By BILL KOVACH and TOM ROSENSTIEL published on the NY Times op ed page 1-7-03
Monopolies are of course more economical to the holder of the monoply position. If you're the only show in town, you can charge what you like for shoddy products and skip customer service altogether. But this country has long held that monopolies are contrary to the public interest. If this is true when it comes to shopping, think how much more true it is in news production. If ALL your information comes from one source, it will be slanted, even if they try to balance it.. No way around that. If it comes from a right wing Republian, you can bet their intention is to slant it.
You have until the end of this month to contact the FCC and register your objection.
Palema
5:17 PM
Comments:
Post a Comment
Copyright © 2001-03 Pam Shorey
(except the specific sources credited in quotes)
|
|