We all agree that freedom of the press is very important. Jim and Rob put
their collective fingers on the problem.
Why is it that so many of the investigative articles posted here come from the
Independent or the Guardian? How is the press the United States different from
the government in terms of foreign policy? Why is a national radio system run
by ClearChannel that much better than one run by a government slightly more
enlightened then the Taliban?
Gene Coyle can recite chapter and verse the literature on the superiority of
public versus private power. How many journal articles have investigated the
subject in the last decade? The American Economic Review just published an
article about the inferior productivity of public business.
How many times have you read about the low productivity of Soviet agriculture
without any mention that the collective farms also provided health care and
education?
Jim Devine wrote:
> it's good to hear about progress on Pacifica!
>
> but I want to amplify my previous point. (1) the reason why the BBC is so
> good (compared to the dreadful US media at least) is because of the
> independent development of a Labour Party there, which broke up the
> capitalist/government bloc a little. (2) I would expect that the BBC would
> decline in quality or be privatized (and thus decline in quality) due to
> the neoliberal Blair government, which seems to want to soak the Labour
> Party grass-roots in kerosine.
>
> A third point: maybe corporate vs. government is the wrong issue for
> another reason. It should be monopoly vs. competitive press. Of course the
> powers that be want to prevent competition from workers and the rest of the
> potential grass-roots civil society, while monopolizing information to
> preserve the state/corporate bloc in power.
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chico, CA 95929
530-898-5321
fax 530-898-5901
