On 10/18/06, Lan Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Something to watch and perhaps record.
PBS, 10/18, 9 PM
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/101706U.shtml
I just got a TV and cable television. It hurts. So, on this
notification, I decided to watch Moyers on Iptv (the midwestern public
broadcaster, not the new-fangled technology). I had to turn it off 30
or 40 minutes into it I was so displeased. I felt like I was watching
one of those religious programs where they take a pseudo-objective
stance and come to the startling conclusion that what they've believed
all along really is true!
Moyers explains that the Internet is essential to democracy and
letting telcos meter it would let them control democracy (and thus
stifle it). Let's turn now to our expert. He's got a degree in
communications, he's dressed in a suit, and besides, he's written a
book. What does he have to say? "The Internet is essential to
democracy and letting telcos meter it would let them control
democracy." The whole time Moyers is nodding his head like "A ha!
Yes, I see. Well that's troubling." ...and so on. News flash to
Moyer: He's not telling you anything you haven't already been saying
the whole program. The purpose of repeating it over and over and over
again is so that the members of the audience can have the same
repeated message echoing in their heads over and over and over. I
heard you the first time.
I heard some semi-decent arguments against the telcos' and cable
companies' freedoms. But I had too many objections that went
unanswered, like "Why not eliminate the artificial duopoly these
companies have in the first place?". The show was entirely one-sided.
The most opponents of so-called "neutrality" could hope for was the
occasional line, "The cable company says that such a measure
would...", followed immediately by, "But respected net pundit
Wutsizzname says..." and five whole minutes of what he has to say.
The issue is fuller than the one-sided coin Moyers was flipping the
audience.
The arguments were based mostly on fear. If the phone company gets to
play favorites, bad things will happen. Several people utter the word
"democracy", a couple "children"s, and an appeal to the principles of
our way of government as practiced by Americans in the 18th century.
If this were poker Moyers would have a full house (and an extra card).
But he doesn't have a sound argument. The most I got out of the 40
minutes I watched was a little more fear about what could happen if
telcos started selectivley metering internet access, and I'm not even
sure that fear is justified.
Mostly it struck me as very typical of television. I just can't have
much respect for those whose primary vehicle of intellectual
expression is pictures. I've really come to appreciate the quality of
public radio. NPR consistently leans lefter than me, but I do feel
like I'm getting a balanced view, presented from multiple points of
view. (Incidentally, I just put my money where my mouth is for the
first time yesterday, with respect to this. I "pledged" to public
radio.)
-- Todd
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament],
'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will
the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the
kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."
-- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
