From the daily archives:

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Obama’s Media Policy

by Frank Paynter on September 9, 2008

Today Tim Wu has a good article in Slate comparing the split between the Republicans and Barack Obama on media policies. He observes,

The Obama camp starts from the premise that the media and information industries are special—that like the transportation, energy, or financial industries, they are deeply entwined with the public interest. That means they warrant a level of scrutiny beyond that accorded the market for low-alcohol beer. Why? Control over media and communications, the argument goes, translates too readily into political power and influence over speech. If a few companies have the power to control who and what gets heard, they can suppress or amplify news and wield a private control over democracy of the kind that terrified Thomas Jefferson. The public might also want a little more from their media than what the private sector delivers without oversight. Reasoned debate or shows like Sesame Street don’t always generate the ad revenues of, say, Dancing With the Stars.

The net neutrality struggle is certainly not over, and Barack Obama is squarely on the side of those of us who understand that “…basic anti-discrimination rules (a modern version of the ‘common carriage’ rules that make phone companies and innkeepers serve all comers) will preserve the open nature of the Internet—and keep it safe for unapproved speech and surprising innovations like Wikipedia and YouTube.”

According to the Republicans, the Internet is “more like cable television on steroids than some imaginary commons of the ether. What channels should be on cable is mostly a question for Time-Warner and Comcast—so why shouldn’t Internet providers make the same kinds of decisions?”

Wu says, “That’s the view McCain pushed in 2005, when he co-sponsored a bill that allowed Internet blocking ‘on notice.’ If McCain’s bill had become law, a cable or phone company could in theory block, say, the video site Hulu.com by providing notice in the ’service plan.’”

Reasoned media policies and the importance of free speech and an open Internet are among the many reasons we support Barack Obama in my house.

[tags]free keith olbermann, free all political prisoners, pit bull bitch, free to good home, loves children[/tags]

Post to Twitter  Post to Plurk  Post to Yahoo Buzz  Post to Delicious  Post to Digg  Post to Facebook  Post to MySpace  Post to Ping.fm  Post to Reddit  Post to StumbleUpon

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Sarah

by Frank Paynter on September 9, 2008

EMStoveken in Salon (via Bruce at The River)

Her narrative tells us that she just rose up from her kitchen table one day and took on the “old-boys establishment” in Alaska. I call shenanigans. Who was her mentor? Her sponsor? Who taught her the secret handshake, and taught her about the creepy Autocratic tactics that marked her first taste of “executive experience[?]“

I’d like there to be an underlying plan on the part of the evil neo-cons, because that would make them easier to encounter. Unfortunately, I think it’s just as likely that Sarah is “a natural,” that she has scratched and clawed her way up via the PTA, the bizarro xtian church, small town politics, and vicious state level in-fighting.

An underlying question that is relevant: who is John McCain listening to these days? Who guides him in these decisions? Does anyone have veto power? Or are we supposed to believe this Maverick bullshit, this narrative that McCain calls the shots because he’s really THE DECIDER?

[tags]along came a spider, and stroked the decider, who wriggled and jiggled and grimaced beside her, sarah got his gun[/tags]

Post to Twitter  Post to Plurk  Post to Yahoo Buzz  Post to Delicious  Post to Digg  Post to Facebook  Post to MySpace  Post to Ping.fm  Post to Reddit  Post to StumbleUpon

{ Comments on this entry are closed }