IP: AOL Time Warner: Calling the Faithful to Their Knees

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> > AOL TIME WARNER: CALLING THE FAITHFUL TO THEIR KNEES
> >
> > By Norman Solomon
> >
> >    And so, early in the year 2000, it came to pass that visions of a 
> seamless
> > media web enraptured the keepers of pecuniary faith as never before. A
> > grand new structure, AOL Time Warner, emerged while a few men proclaimed
> > themselves trustees of a holy endeavor. They told the people about a
> > wondrous New Media world to come.
> >
> >    Lo, they explained, changes of celestial magnitude were not far off. A
> > miraculous future, swiftly approaching, would bring cornucopias of
> > bandwidth and market share. A pair of prominent clerics named Steve Case
> > and Gerald Levin gained ascendancy. Under bright lights, how majestic they
> > looked!
> >
> >    And how they could preach! Announcing unification, they seemed to 
> make the
> > media world stand still. Reporters and editors gasped. Some were fearful,
> > their smiles of fascination tight. Others bowed and scraped without
> > hesitation.
> >
> >    In keeping with the dominant creeds of the era, believers in the divine
> > right of capital asserted that separation of corporate church and state was
> > an anachronism. A torch had been passed to a new veneration. Media monarchs
> > would rule with unabashed fervor, while taking care to help regulate mere
> > governments.
> >
> >    The power of the new theocracy promised to be unparalleled. On Jan. 2,
> > 2000 -- just one week before the portentous announcement -- the chief
> > prelate of Time Warner alluded to transcendent horizons. Global media "will
> > be and is fast becoming the predominant business of the 21st century,"
> > Levin said on CNN, "and we're in a new economic age, and what may happen,
> > assuming that's true, is it's more important than government. It's more
> > important than educational institutions and non-profits."
> >
> >    He went on: "So what's going to be necessary is that we're going to need
> > to have these corporations redefined as instruments of public service
> > because they have the resources, they have the reach, they have the skill
> > base -- and maybe there's a new generation coming up that wants to achieve
> > meaning in that context and have an impact, and that may be a more
> > efficient way to deal with society's problems than bureaucratic 
> governments."
> >    The next sentence from the monied prince underscored the sovereign right
> > of cash: "It's going to be forced anyhow because when you have a system
> > that is instantly available everywhere in the world immediately, then the
> > old-fashioned regulatory system has to give way."
> >
> >    To discuss an imposed progression of events as some kind of natural
> > occurrence was a convenient form of mysticism -- long popular among the
> > corporately pious, who were often eager to wear mantles of royalty and
> > divinity. Tacit beliefs deemed the accumulation of wealth to be redemptive.
> > Inside many temples, monetary standards gauged worth.
> >
> >    A little more than half a century earlier, Aldous Huxley had predicted:
> > "The most important Manhattan Projects of the future will be vast
> > government-sponsored enquiries into...the problem of making people love
> > their servitude." To a lot of ears, that sounded like quite an exaggeration.
> >
> >    "There is, of course, no reason why the new totalitarianisms should
> > resemble the old," Huxley foresaw. He observed that "in an age of advanced
> > technology, inefficiency is the sin against the Holy Ghost. A really
> > efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful
> > executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a
> > population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their
> > servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day
> > totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and
> > schoolteachers. But their methods are still crude and unscientific." That
> > was in 1946.
> >
> >    In 2000, there wasn't much crude about the methods of Steve Case, Gerald
> > Levin and others at the top of large corporate denominations, heralding joy
> > to the world via a seamless web of media. Two days after disclosure of
> > plans for unification, Case assured a national PBS television audience:
> > "Nobody's going to control anything." Seated next to him, Levin declared:
> > "This company is going to operate in the public interest."
> >
> >    Such pledges, invariably uttered in benevolent tones, were the classic
> > vows of scamsters claiming to have the most significant gods on their side.
> > In this way a hallowed duo, Case and Levin, moved ahead to gain more
> > billions for themselves and maximum profits for some other incredibly
> > wealthy people. By happy coincidence, they insisted, the media course that
> > would make them richest was the same one that held the most fulfilling
> > promise for everyone on the planet.
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> >
> > A transcript with audio of Norman Solomon appearing on a panel on the
> > "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," discussing the AOL - Time Warner merger, is
> > posted on the PBS website at:
> > http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/jan-june00/aol_01-10.html
> > ______________________________________________
> >
> > Norman Solomon is a syndicated columnist. His latest book is "The Habits of
> > Highly Deceptive Media."