From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest) To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Subject: shindell-list-digest V7 #150 Reply-To: shindell-list@smoe.org Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk shindell-list-digest Sunday, June 26 2005 Volume 07 : Number 150 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #149 [Jamie Younghans / John McDonnell <] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 10:38:57 -0400 From: Jamie Younghans / John McDonnell Subject: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #149 Hi all, My e-mail was down for a few days, so I missed the last posts until now. Glad to see the list has a political side. My two cents: Adam made the point that the funding and/or bias issue for public radio really isn't a political issue like it has been made, and while I agree with everything else he said on that post, I disagree with that point. The increasing ownership in fewer and fewer hands--especially Clear Channel's--makes it a very political issue. The airwaves may be public, but they are regulated by a political--and unelected body--the F.C.C. When ownership and regulation are so closely connected--left or right--it becomes a huge political problem. I think this is especially true when news organization are acquired by or merge with entertainment companies, a la Disney and ABC. Why would a corporate owner ever permit a negative report about its core business, regardless of how newsworthy it may be? Rational business practices, and the responsibility to the shareholder would dictate its suppression, and the more outlets you own--T.V., newspapers, radio--the easier it is to suppress information. The private sector is never going to provide information or be accountable in a way which is comparable to that which we can demand of our government. John McD ------------------------------ End of shindell-list-digest V7 #150 ***********************************