YOUR LETTERS: DOES MEDIA MATTER?

Nina Reznick draws our attention to an article in the New York Times Book Review by a conservative judge :

“The cover article was by Judge Richard Posner (entitled BAD NEWS) — he’s a hugely prolific author of books and articles and seems to be a pretty balanced thinker. Some of his thinking (quoted or slightly paraphrased): Only a tiny minority of readers has ever read or watched the media to decide public issues. The great majority of people have never consumed news and public opinion to become well informed on such public issues. Most look for information that will support rather than undermine their existing beliefs. People read or watch to learn facts that bear directly and immediately on their lives — hence the greater attention paid to local than national and international news. They also want to be entertained.

“So the media keep score rather than discuss the results of different policies; candidates statements are evaluated not for their truth but for their adroitness; campaign coverage is aimed at the sports — rather than the civic-minded. the mainstream media do not kick sacred cows such as religion or patriotism.

“Does the polarization (because of more competition from blogs etc.) of the media mean we were better served before? The small slice of the populace who does read to be informed (and, therefore, reads contrasting points of view — REALLY?) have more to choose from and are better served now. The increased polarization of the media provides a richer fare than ever before.”

A DISPATCH FROM TOM

One of my favorite bloggers/analysts, Tom Engelhardt of TomDispatch.com, writes:

“Loved the Wiki piece!

“From Tomdispatch, in the nick of time, Michael Schwartz’s ‘The Ironies of Conquest: The Bush Administration’s Iranian Nightmare:’

http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=11233

“Just at this crucial moment, when the Iranians have taken up uranium conversion again at their facility in Isfahan, when rumors (and leaks) about administration plans for possible assaults on Iran are multiplying — think what that might do to oil prices, already hovering at an unprecedented $64 a barrel! — and the clock seems to be ticking down on a U.S./Iranian confrontation, Michael Schwartz offers us a soup-to-nuts discussion of Iran, Iraq, and the Bush administration’s boomerang policies when it comes to both of them. Schwartz, as ever, hits the policy nail right on the head.”

ON PETER JENNINGS FROM RIGHT AND LEFT

I am not sure why, but my balanced tribute to my late ABC colleague Peter Jennings attracted some venomous responses.

David Goodwin doesn’t conceal his political agenda:

“If you go to ‘Google/peterjennings + anti-Israel bias’, you will find about 730 items, many discussing his well-documented pro-Palestinian biases which have been clearly identified and protested for many years. Bias favoring Palestinian terrorism is also bias favoring Muslim terrorism, which equates to anti-Americanism… Sorry, I cannot shed a tear for his passing.”

And there was this from a correspondent in Vancouver:

“THE JENNINGS STUFF IS OVER THE TOP. you are ignoring the news for celebs, jennings was a face, a dweeb, a smiling agit-prop male model. a jerk. as a man i am sad for his family, but as a capitalist media fixture he was a cold toilet bowl with a warm seat”

Bradley Laing complains that Jennings drew a big salary “at the same time that ABC news was closing down foreign news bureaus as a cost-saving measure:”

“Did Jennings ever ask for a salary cut, so that the money could be spent on news gathering?”

CONTINUING THE WIKI DEBATE

Robert T. Drury hails the Wikipedia:

“It’s about time Wikipedia got some press. When I seek the truth, the facts, and objectivity then Wikipedia resonates most. This is a confused world because some people want to hoard the facts and exploit their information advantage. I hope that Wikipedia can help to change this world, tear down those information barriers. Knowledge is a wonderful thing and nobody should be deprived of it. Right now the giant corporations are profiting from the efficiencies of web. What a crime. Wikipedia is the basis for an egalitarian world. Wikipedia is a true leveling of the playing field. Wikipedia is becoming the new world university. Wikipedia fertilizes and seeds the earth. The harvest will be grand.”

FREE THE MUSIC?

Paul Palmer comments on the concerns raised by Danish singer Pia Raug about calls for free music:

“Pia Raug’s lament, about musicians having to give their work away free, will of course fall on receptive ears. No one wants musicians to starve in garrets while their music is played widely. But that begs the real question which she sidesteps. Should musicians have the option of becoming as wealthy as royalty of old from a few popular songs. The now-legendary profits of successful rock bands strikes me as obscene. It is merely an artifact of the work of Thomas Edison who showed how to duplicate music without having to sing or play personally every time. Now the Internet technology is replacing the Edison technology. That era of endless, but salable duplicates, is coming to an end. The music industry is fighting bitterly to hold on to an accident of technological history.

“I want to see a distribution system emerge that rewards musicians well, even handsomely, but not obscenely. More important, music making should be a legitimate, normal job, paying for a normal life for anyone moderately good at it. That is where the musician’s lament should intersect with the public mood. Free distribution requires a floor under it that can reward individual musicians.

“Unless the fantastically wealthy stars and recording industries are dissected away from ordinary jobs of musicians making music, the discussion misses the moral basis it reaches for.”

And Pia responds:

“Thank you for responding to my lament. And a lament it is. A dialogue like this is extremely essential. But there is a very important distinction you are not making. You are talking about musicians. I am talking about creators/composers. I know that in many cases in the modern world of music the creator and the singer/musician is regarded as one and the same. This is far from always the case even if it is also so in my case. I am a composer AND a performer. Behind a good song ‘that takes you far’ very often you will find an isolated creator, who will be totally dependent on the few cents generated from the performance of that one song in his life that hit home at the right time and for some reason caught peoples’ attention.

“It makes a very important difference — at least to me — that as a performer/singer I always have the option to say NO to a gig if I do not think that the conditions are all right. That is — as a performer I can decline to act if the money is not decent enough — or if the event is not dedicated enough — but I also have the freedom to give away my professional skills for free to any good cause — if I choose. I am in the position to make the choice. And for better or worse — the way I am — my choices are closely related to what is most currently nowadays named: Politically correct. In the States it would probably instinctively be called: Radical or leftish.

“BUT as a composer, lyricist and songwriter I do not have that option in the digital world. The tele companies earn big money transporting my works without any extra cost and without any augmented effort. They do not add to the original except for making it available to anybody — at my cost. Why doesn’t anyone scold the electricity company for charging money to make the gadgets work? Power is basically even more essential to digital communication than content. Except without content neither hardware nor electricity would be interesting enough to digital consumers to pay dearly to gain the choice.

“I am not wealthy. I Have done better than most Danish performers over a period of 33 years, but every month of my life has been a struggle for the rent. I do not seek pity for or lament that. It is my choice and I am proud that I have been able to hang in there, even if many would call me hopelessly oldfashioned. I love what I do. And I’m willing to do it without money if that is what it takes. But I will defend my freedom of choice as to which occasions I will offer my abilities to — for free. This freedom is granted to anybody else in any kind of work position. You have the freedom of choice as to when you are willing to give away one days work to your employer for free. Why can’t you grant an equal freedom to me?”

ANOTHER ANGLE: WHAT ABOUT WRITERS?

Debra Cash of WBUR Online Arts in Boston enters this debate with another perspective and a suggestion:

“I’ve been following the discussion of wikis with great interest. Glad you got to the conference.

“On the one hand, conglomerate media is a mess and I’m committed to both alternative press sources and to broad public participation in the questions of the day. On the other hand, I still want to write for food, rent, and even — if I can figure out how to do it –support my old age. Do you and Rory believe that this is a perfect storm where only the very young and marginal and the very wealthy (who can afford to contribute their work for free) can write, take photographs and generally act as media contributors? Is journalism, and creating ‘information content’ something that we all should be doing for a hobby? Or do you have another vision?

“Please consider writing something about this. If you want to convene some sort of on-line or actual panel on this, I’d love to participate. For free.”

Any takers?

FINE NOVAK!

Ed Slota asks: “How do we get the FCC to fine Robert Novak the maximum amount possible for intentionally using the word ‘bullshit’ on live television? Just wondering.”

My query: How do we get the FCC to change TV to end all the BS?

MORE COVERAGE OF 9/11 NEEDED

Joy Stowe writes:

“With all of this information coming out now about the second Atomic Bomb 60 years ago, how long will it take for the Media to print the stories about 9/11 that are circulating? They ignore it.

“I refer to a book written by Dr. David Ray Griffin, ‘The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11.’ Why are we as a public denied the information that Dr. Griffin says the media knows about, but refuses for some reason to print? Why did the 9/11 Commission ignore this information? Are we as a country really sold out to untruths, corruption, fraud, lies, deception etc. for the obsession of ‘making money’ and controlling the entire world, at any and all costs?”

Joy, I wrote about David Ray Griffin’s work in a column two weeks ago and he responded on this blog.

PUBLISHING PIONEER PASSES

Diversity Inc.com reports: “Ebony and Jet magazine Publisher John H. Johnson, one of the nation’s richest and most powerful black businessmen, died of heart failure at age 87 on Monday.”

KEERECTION

Yesterday, I wrote about a lighter that Peter Jennings passed on to a friend of mine. I was right about the lighter. Wrong about the time frame: “In today’s blog, it was actually after the death of Peter’s mother in Canada from lung cancer that he passed along the lighter.”

Apologies to Broadcasting & Cable for Mediachannel inadvertently republishing an original investigative piece without proper attribution.

HELP WANTED

Please note that we are posting a job and some opportunities on the Mediachannel home page. We need help and want to build a more active community of readers. Note also, that we are featuring the beta version of Wiki News, news that you can edit. Tell us what you think.

THEMS THAT HAVE, GET

CNN: Former Disney President/agent Michael Ovitz to keep his $140M severance package.

THEMS THAT SLAPS, PAYS

New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer fined Radio Station Hot 97 $240,000 for staging an on air “slap fest” promotion, in which two women were physically slapping each other. Spitzer says this was a violation of state rules governing sports like boxing.

ONIONIZE THIS

And finally, sophomoric as it sometimes is, The Onion invents news we often need to laugh at. This week:

“Bush Vows To Eliminate U.S. Dependence On Oil By 4920

“WASHINGTON, DC — President Bush unveiled an aggressive initiative Monday that would make the U.S. free of petroleum dependence by the year 4920, less than three millennia from now.”

That’s all for now, folks. Your comments welcome to: Dissector@mediachannel.org