FC: NPR's Rick Karr on creating an $18 billion content agency

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

[Rick's comments below are well-written, but he makes a factual error when 
talking about the Institute for Humane Studies, where Damon works. Contrary 
to Rick's assertion that his tax dollars went to IHS, the group is funded 
solely by contributions from individuals, corporations, and foundations. 
IHS may be a controversial group in some circles, but in my mind it has 
done a valuable service in promoting libertarian and classical liberal 
ideas. --Declan]

**********

Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:24:55 -0400
From: "Rick G. Karr" <neuunit () earthlink net>
To: declan () well com
Subject: Re: FC: IHS' Damon Cheston on creating $18 billion federal 
contentagency
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010726135117.0207a830 () mail well com>

Declan --

You wrote:

> if Rick cares to reply, I'll give him the last word.

Thanks -- I'll take you up on that offer.

Mr. Chetson wrote:

> I take issue with Mr. Karr's assumption that because reporting "ain't
> cheap", the government has to step in to do it.  Karr assumes that the kind
> of programming on NPR cannot be provided for voluntarily in a free market -
> hence his statements about MSNBC and CNN.  So, instead, he argues that all
> people should be forced to pay for programming via tax money that only a few
> people actually use.  (Indeed, if more people used it, advertising would
> cover the cost in Karr's scenario).

I assumed nothing about the market. Instead, I made an argument based on 
the media landscape before us -- namely, that a deregulated market in
one medium (radio) had resulted in the decimation of news reporting and the 
debasement of what little remains, and that only a group of
government-incubated institutions (NPR, PRI, Pacifica) have "voluntarily" 
provided that service.

Mr. Chetson never addresses either that analysis or the underlying premise: 
that the high cost of quality newsgathering makes for margins so low
that investors are loathe to create new newsgathing infrastructures, social 
or physical.

Secondly, Mr. Chetson seems to have seen a different Minow proposal that I 
did. The one I've read about suggests that funds be drawn from
spectrum auctions. I wouldn't call revenue generated by a government 
auction of a limited natural resource "tax money".

Finally, I never said government "ha[d] to do" anything -- only that I saw 
the Minow proposal as a valid starting point for a debate on the
creation of a public-spirited online newsgathering organization. Please 
recall that government played two roles in the creation of public
broadcasting -- seeding (CPB monies) and shielding (FCC noncommercial 
frequency assignments). I'd argue that a quango like the CPB would be much
better suited to both tasks vis a vis the online media, and I'd agree that 
foundation support is vital in any event.

> It's always interesting to hear people define the "public good" and then
> insist that people should be forced to supply it through tax money.  Usually
> their conception of the "public good" includes all sorts of things they
> personally like and benefit from.  In fact, all sorts of activities - from
> exercise to eating fruit to philosophizing about the role of government -
> contribute to the public good.  Does that mean that government ought to
> provide them?

This thinly-veiled ad hominem attact strikes me as somewhat silly: Should 
government -- for instance, that of the Commonwealth of Virginia --
provide institutions of higher learning that include right-libertarian 
research and education centers? If there were a demand for the IHS, the
market would have provided for it, no?

I briefly lived in Virginia and paid taxes, yet never used the services of 
your institution. I even happen to think the philosophy it propagates
is problematic at best and downright antidemocratic at worst. But none of 
this bothers me. I pay for a lot of things I don't use. That's the
price of living in a democratic republic, in which our representatives are 
entrusted with making decisions on our behalf. Some of those
decisions stink. Others lead to the creation of vitally important 
instituitions -- like George Mason U. and National Public Radio.

Best,
--
Rick G. Karr
Cultural Correspondent
National Public Radio News
*** OPINIONS ARE MINE, NOT NPR's *** 




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------