FC: Replies to $18 billion agency from Wired's Platt, NPR's Karr

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Previous message:

"Ex-PBS and FCC chiefs want $18 billion new agency, WSJ says"
http://www.politechbot.com/p-02296.html

**********

Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:08:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <cp () panix com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Cc: <politech () politechbot com>
Subject: Re: FC: Ex-PBS and FCC chiefs want $18 billion new agency, WSJ sa
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010723153116.02531e40 () mail well com>

No doubt many "worthy" groups would eagerly embrace funding for their web
sites. I just hope that everyone looks ahead to the next step, after the
funding is received. Generally, this will involve some kind of control,
either overt or covert. You don't get money for nothing, from the federal
government. At the very least, groups receiving "content grants"  will
have to follow disability access guidelines. Banner ads for worthy causes
such as D.A.R.E. may be mandatory. Pornography, of course, may be taboo.
Online text advocating the overthrow of whatever government happens to be
in power may be unwelcome.

PBS has suffered relatively little of this kind of thing, but its charter
was established in very different times. We live in the era when scripts
for sitcoms were evaluated to determine whether they included the right
spin on issues such as drugs.

When you have a government big enough to give you all you want, it will be
big enough to take it all away. This Goldwater aphorism cannot be repeated
often enough.

**********

Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:26:17 -0400
From: "Rick G. Karr" <neuunit () earthlink net>
Organization: neuUNIT(U.S.)
To: declan () well com
Subject: Re: FC: Ex-PBS and FCC chiefs want $18 billion new agency, WSJ says

Declan --

I have to take exception to your dismissal of the Grossman/Minow proposal 
-- at least WRT one type of online content.

You wrote:

> [S]etting up a web server with a large hard drive is hardly expensive.
> If people really want content online, the market will respond by producing
> it. We don't have $18 billion federal book, magazine or newspaper projects,
> but somehow we see splendid writing nonetheless.

Yeah, hardware's cheap. But reporting the news ain't. (Nor is bandwidth -- 
but that's another conversation.) While there isn't much _profit_ to
be made in general-interest news, there is a significant _public good_ in 
deep, broad and smart reporting.

You're correct to point out that the market is pretty good at generating 
that in the print media -- Tony Ridder and his staff-slashing ilk
notwithstanding.

But it's not so good at providing quality _broadcast_ news. The network TV 
news divisions are a joke. MSNBC, Fox and CNN offer us blipvert
summaries in lieu of full stories, alongside hours of spin reflecting the 
priorities of each outlet's corporate parent. In my own medium,
deregulation has resulted in the near-complete abandonment of news and 
public affairs programming on commercial frequencies. Even mighty CBS
Radio News is barely there anymore.

Only NPR, PRI and what's left of Pacifica do radio news with any depth or 
breadth these days.

Sure, we've largely weaned ourselves from CPB support. But without the seed 
money provided by CPB early on, and without the shielding of
noncommercial frequencies by the FCC, we'd never have survived childhood.

The internet media hasn't yet produced a viable, general-interest 
newsgathering organization. Slashcode makes for great dissemination, but it's
hungry for content from outside. Salon is barely breathing, and isn't much 
of a "news" organ, anyway. And great as your employer's content can
be, it's special-interest. Most of the general interest reporting online 
has been recast from print or the electronic media and makes little use
of the technology's potential.

I think an organization that would seed and shield would greatly aid the 
development of independent, general-interest internet reporting
organizations. Does it need to be government? Dunno -- a hefty foundation 
might be able to pull it off. But it seems to me that Grossman and
Minow's proposal is at least a starting place.

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

[I don't disagree with Rick's assessment of the state of only-online news 
ventures, only with his proposed solution. One can bemoan the sad state of, 
say, American literature or filmmaking without advocating a $18 billion new 
federal agency to set things right. Same with taxpayer-supported online 
news. ---Declan]

**********

Reply-To: "Ben" <bmw () carolina rr com>
From: "Ben" <bmw () carolina rr com>
To: <declan () well com>, <politech () politechbot com>
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010723153116.02531e40 () mail well com>
Subject: Re: Ex-PBS and FCC chiefs want $18 billion new agency, WSJ says
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:01:45 -0400

This whole idea is a walking time-bomb for a corporate welfare scandal.
Whether any use exists for it now, as bandwidth and technology grows
eventually sites won't need to rely on subscriptions OR advertisers. The
Internet gives just about anybody the ability to make it big, and change the
world, through their own ingeniuty. Making them dependent on companies like
Doubleclick, or putting them in a 2nd class below people who have government
funding, is counter-productive. It's also a great way to turn the internet
into the same shit-geyser TV has become. And when running a website becomes
much less expensive, the only purpose this agency will serve is to subsidize
their buddies and anyone else who sends a prostit---I mean lobbyist, down to
fellate---I mean, talk with them.

**********

From: "Singleton, Norman" <Norman.Singleton () mail house gov>
To: declan () well com
Subject: RE: Ex-PBS and FCC chiefs want $18 billion new agency, WSJ says
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:08:42 -0400

you missed one big problem with this -- will Drudge get funding under this 
proposal or lewrockwell.com? Doubt it, this agency would give a competitive 
advantages to web sites approved by the regime.

**********




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------