FC: NPR's Rick Karr on creating an $18 billion content agency

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sat Jul 28 2001 - 13:30:06 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Congress is more than doubling number of federal copyright cops"

    [Rick's comments below are well-written, but he makes a factual error when 
    talking about the Institute for Humane Studies, where Damon works. Contrary 
    to Rick's assertion that his tax dollars went to IHS, the group is funded 
    solely by contributions from individuals, corporations, and foundations. 
    IHS may be a controversial group in some circles, but in my mind it has 
    done a valuable service in promoting libertarian and classical liberal 
    ideas. --Declan]
    
    **********
    
    Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:24:55 -0400
    From: "Rick G. Karr" <neuunitat_private>
    To: declanat_private
    Subject: Re: FC: IHS' Damon Cheston on creating $18 billion federal 
    contentagency
    References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010726135117.0207a830at_private>
    
    Declan --
    
    You wrote:
    
     > if Rick cares to reply, I'll give him the last word.
    
    Thanks -- I'll take you up on that offer.
    
    Mr. Chetson wrote:
    
     > I take issue with Mr. Karr's assumption that because reporting "ain't
     > cheap", the government has to step in to do it.  Karr assumes that the kind
     > of programming on NPR cannot be provided for voluntarily in a free market -
     > hence his statements about MSNBC and CNN.  So, instead, he argues that all
     > people should be forced to pay for programming via tax money that only a few
     > people actually use.  (Indeed, if more people used it, advertising would
     > cover the cost in Karr's scenario).
    
    I assumed nothing about the market. Instead, I made an argument based on 
    the media landscape before us -- namely, that a deregulated market in
    one medium (radio) had resulted in the decimation of news reporting and the 
    debasement of what little remains, and that only a group of
    government-incubated institutions (NPR, PRI, Pacifica) have "voluntarily" 
    provided that service.
    
    Mr. Chetson never addresses either that analysis or the underlying premise: 
    that the high cost of quality newsgathering makes for margins so low
    that investors are loathe to create new newsgathing infrastructures, social 
    or physical.
    
    Secondly, Mr. Chetson seems to have seen a different Minow proposal that I 
    did. The one I've read about suggests that funds be drawn from
    spectrum auctions. I wouldn't call revenue generated by a government 
    auction of a limited natural resource "tax money".
    
    Finally, I never said government "ha[d] to do" anything -- only that I saw 
    the Minow proposal as a valid starting point for a debate on the
    creation of a public-spirited online newsgathering organization. Please 
    recall that government played two roles in the creation of public
    broadcasting -- seeding (CPB monies) and shielding (FCC noncommercial 
    frequency assignments). I'd argue that a quango like the CPB would be much
    better suited to both tasks vis a vis the online media, and I'd agree that 
    foundation support is vital in any event.
    
     > It's always interesting to hear people define the "public good" and then
     > insist that people should be forced to supply it through tax money.  Usually
     > their conception of the "public good" includes all sorts of things they
     > personally like and benefit from.  In fact, all sorts of activities - from
     > exercise to eating fruit to philosophizing about the role of government -
     > contribute to the public good.  Does that mean that government ought to
     > provide them?
    
    This thinly-veiled ad hominem attact strikes me as somewhat silly: Should 
    government -- for instance, that of the Commonwealth of Virginia --
    provide institutions of higher learning that include right-libertarian 
    research and education centers? If there were a demand for the IHS, the
    market would have provided for it, no?
    
    I briefly lived in Virginia and paid taxes, yet never used the services of 
    your institution. I even happen to think the philosophy it propagates
    is problematic at best and downright antidemocratic at worst. But none of 
    this bothers me. I pay for a lot of things I don't use. That's the
    price of living in a democratic republic, in which our representatives are 
    entrusted with making decisions on our behalf. Some of those
    decisions stink. Others lead to the creation of vitally important 
    instituitions -- like George Mason U. and National Public Radio.
    
    Best,
    --
    Rick G. Karr
    Cultural Correspondent
    National Public Radio News
    *** OPINIONS ARE MINE, NOT NPR's *** 
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    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/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jul 28 2001 - 13:39:41 PDT