On Apr 16, 2:31 pm, "HD Radio" wrote:
Throughout most of history, humans lived in a state of extreme information
poverty. News traveled slowly, field to field, village to village. Even with
the printing press's advent, information spread at a snail's pace. Few knew
how to find printed materials, assuming that they even knew how to read.
Today, by contrast, we live in a world of unprecedented media abundance that
once would have been the stuff of science-fiction novels. We can
increasingly obtain and consume whatever media we want, wherever and
whenever we want: television, radio, newspapers, magazines, and the
bewildering variety of material available on the Internet.

This media cornucopia is a wonderful development for a free society-or so
you'd think.


So, are you saying we need to limit the number of outlets owned by one
company or should we open it up more. I think the FCC needs to do
some more research on the effects of media conglomerates and how many
people actually rely on mulitple news outlets to get their
information. I think if one was to study the country as a whole- we
might find that the vast majority of the population is still relying
on one or two main outlets. Not everyone is using blogs and internet
searches to futher their understanding of the world. And if that were
the case, then if we say that the reason we can allow media
corporations more ownership outlets -- we might not have the correct
picture. I'm still very leary of information coming only from one or
two main companies in one market. That is to say, I don't think it's
such a bright idea to let a major company own lots of radio,
television and print media in one market. I guess I'm just old
fashioned that way.
[full article with graphs]http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27864

--
__________________________________________________ _______________
Est autem fides credere quod nondum vides;cuius fidei merces est videre quod
credis
HD RADIO is here!http://www.HDRadio.com
DUNCAN HUNTER for PRESIDENThttp://www.GoHunter08.com
WHAT THE LEFT WON'T TELL YOUhttp://www.FrontPageMag.com
WHAT COMMUNISTS WON'T TELL YOUhttp://China-E-Lobby.blogspot.com
WHAT ISLAM WON'T TELL YOUhttp://www.WhatTheWestNeedsToKnow.com
__________________________________________________ _______________

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 16, 2:31 pm, "HD Radio" wrote:
Throughout most of history, humans lived in a state of extreme
information
poverty. News traveled slowly, field to field, village to village. Even
with
the printing press's advent, information spread at a snail's pace. Few
knew
how to find printed materials, assuming that they even knew how to read.
Today, by contrast, we live in a world of unprecedented media abundance
that
once would have been the stuff of science-fiction novels. We can
increasingly obtain and consume whatever media we want, wherever and
whenever we want: television, radio, newspapers, magazines, and the
bewildering variety of material available on the Internet.

This media cornucopia is a wonderful development for a free society-or
so
you'd think.


So, are you saying we need to limit the number of outlets owned by one
company or should we open it up more.

IMO, anytime a heavilly government regulated business sector is threatened
by monopolisation the governemt should loosen the barriers to entry for
competition. Have you ever tried to apply for a broadcast license?

In a free economy, when the government does not respond to monopolistic
enterprise, "Free enterprise" will "create" new methods of competition. In
this case the Internet!

If the government reacts in a Socialist manner to enact laws to inhibit
"Free exchange" of information on the internet than expect the ecomy to roil
in response. The internet is the new laissez-faire economy. An economy
that bypasses Socialistic government rules and regulations.


I think the FCC needs to do
some more research on the effects of media conglomerates and how many
people actually rely on mulitple news outlets to get their
information. I think if one was to study the country as a whole- we
might find that the vast majority of the population is still relying
on one or two main outlets. Not everyone is using blogs and internet
searches to futher their understanding of the world. And if that were
the case, then if we say that the reason we can allow media
corporations more ownership outlets -- we might not have the correct
picture. I'm still very leary of information coming only from one or
two main companies in one market. That is to say, I don't think it's
such a bright idea to let a major company own lots of radio,
television and print media in one market. I guess I'm just old
fashioned that way.
[full article with
graphs]http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27864

--
__________________________________________________ _______________
Est autem fides credere quod nondum vides;cuius fidei merces est videre
quod
credis
HD RADIO is here!http://www.HDRadio.com
DUNCAN HUNTER for PRESIDENThttp://www.GoHunter08.com
WHAT THE LEFT WON'T TELL YOUhttp://www.FrontPageMag.com
WHAT COMMUNISTS WON'T TELL YOUhttp://China-E-Lobby.blogspot.com
WHAT ISLAM WON'T TELL YOUhttp://www.WhatTheWestNeedsToKnow.com
__________________________________________________ _______________