Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (61745)	8/31/2009 5:42:29 PM
From: Mac Con Ulaidh	Respond to of 149317

The Coverage We Deserve ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com Lots of back and forth on why there is so much horse-race coverage in the media. I think that the general sense that horse-race stuff is a little easier than mastering the math on, say, health-care is right. Moreover, journalists sometimes pull the objectivity stunt, not to honor their craft, but to avoid being tainted as bias. Still, I think Ezra is basically right: This is the market getting more efficient. This is the market learning how to deliver more of what people want (Sarah Palin) and less of what they don't want (the difficulties of adjusting Medicare payment rates). If policy stories begin swamping servers, people will hire more policy reporters. But there's not much evidence of that happening. That's not to say there's no room for substantive policy coverage. But the more eyeballs matter, the less substantive coverage there'll be, and I don't think it'll be the fault of reporters. A lot of the policy coverage that happens right now exists not because the audience wants it, but because the media decides they need it. As the market becomes competitive, that type of reportorial paternalism will become less and less viable. Tough medicine. It's always more comforting to think that some all-powerful being (rich white men, the media, big business etc.) has brainwashed "The People." But when you start delving into this stuff, you realize that often those institutions are performing in the service of actual human beings, many of them not so rich, and not so powerful. "The People" aren't noble. And they aren't evil, either. After dealing with my own writing, with my own family, and with my own person, I find it difficult to muster the energy to master the details of climate change. And I write for a living. But damn if I can barely keep my living room clean. I thought about this last week while attempting to follow through on a promise to my family, to cook more. I grew up in household where my Dad cooked. My cornbread game is not to be slept on. But cooking right, and cleaning right is hard work, and takes a lot of time. There is a reason people go to McDonald's every night for dinner. Perhaps the reason isn't a good one, but it's not stupid or pathological. Ditto with political coverage. The shouting heads exist for a reason--we invented them.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (61745)	8/31/2009 6:59:31 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

>>Powell has made amends. I support his getting upset on his COS. "Spilling beans" is not the way things are done. Instead, he did it the honorable way which is to quit. And he went a step further by supporting Obama over McCain.<< I think he knew he was being used from the get go. He did keep asking questions like he suspected something; and did it anyway. And Powell did not quit until the second term. Is that the exact moment when he figured it out? That would be a pretty big coincidence. Wouldn't it have made a bigger impact if he had quit as soon as he knew? He should have quit the minute he suspected he had been used, not wait for his first term to end. And his crime like Macnamera's was too large for any amends. Spilling the beans? Bush and Cheney took us right down the road to fascism I would hope someone would spill the beans. And he supported Obama at the very end, when it was safe to do so. And you do not see Obama recognizing him anymore than Steele. But what was he even doing in a party that caused his people so much grief? >.He is one who toiled his way up and like all right thinking folks, I accept his philosophy which, in his own words is "socially liberal, fiscally conservative." Unlike the one who said "compassionate conservative" during the campaign but turned out to be a neocon supporter once he got to the WH. Powell said it very powerfully when he talked about the fallen soldier in Arlington where "on his tombstone was not a cross or the Star of David but a star and a crescent moon." That, my friend.>> I have read a lot of his biography. They said Powell loved ROTC. He loved the army. In my opinion, one does not romantasize armies or war. Nothing glorious about war. Last, Michael Powell, was involved in some very shady stuff as chairman of the FCC. His derregulation allowed large players to control the airays e.g. Murdock and IMO reduced our freedom in a serious way. Why kind of moral eduction did Powel provide him with? My kids do not act like that. ""As the chairman of the FCC, Powell led from his long-stated libertarian philosophy of deregulation of communications. Powell saw excessive regulation as stifling to technological innovation, and led the charge to open up markets in VoIP, Wi-Fi, and Broadband over Powerline (BPL). His Chicago School approach (read Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman's unregulated capitalism) believed that these new communications technologies would allow small companies to take on established corporations, and that regulations often stood in the way of progress. Powell began his tenure at the FCC with a controversial comment comparing the digital divide to a Mercedes divide (""I think there's a Mercedes divide," Powell told the press. "I'd like to have one, but I can't afford one"). His libertarian deregulatory policy coincided with a period of significant consolidation in the communications market. He advocated an updating of media ownership rules to reflect new communications technologies such as the Internet, a move that critics derided as increasing rampant media consolidation. He opposed applying telephone-era regulations to new Internet technologies, a move critics charged would deny open access to communications facilities. He articulated a policy of network neutrality, and in March 2005 fined Madison River Communications for blocking voice over IP applications, the first-ever government action of its kind.[1] A defining moment of his tenure as FCC Chairman was the Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show controversy, in which Janet Jackson's breast was exposed on live-broadcast television. This high-profile incident increased public attention toward the FCC's enforcement of indecency rules, which had already stepped up following Bono's use of an expletive on live TV. Howard Stern and other controversial on-air personalities felt the sting of record fines, and both the U.S. House and Senate separately approved legislation significantly increasing the amount of money a station could be fined for indecency. Although the legislation was not ultimately enacted, the climate in Washington became so grey that several TV stations across the country declined to air Saving Private Ryan on Veterans Day for fear of FCC fines. Some of Powell's initiatives have been challenged in federal court. Notably, the FCC's BrandX cable modem service proceeding, which declared cable modem should be free from telephone service regulations, was overturned in the Ninth Circuit case but is currently before the Supreme Court. The FCC's Broadcast Flag proceeding was overturned by the D.C. Circuit Court as an inappropriate exercise of FCC jurisdiction. The FCC's Media Ownership rules were likewise blocked by federal court and the television ownership cap set directly by the U.S. Congress. During his Chairmanship he was invited to speak at the University of California, San Diego on January 26, 2004. The video is available on-line through the University of California, and is titled: FCC's Michael Powell: Charting the Future of the Telecom Industry.[2] In the talk Powell spoke about the process of effecting change in Washington. He also spoke about Ultra-wideband and speculated on the effect it would have on telecommunications. In a notable confrontation over the FCC's local telephone competition rules, Powell was outflanked by Republican Kevin Martin, who formed a majority with the FCC's two Democratic commissioners. Powell was later vindicated by a D.C. Circuit Court decision on March 2, 2004 that struck down Martin's order. Three months later, the U.S. Supreme Court let the D.C. Circuit decision stand. When Powell resigned, Kevin Martin, who served George W. Bush's presidential campaign in Florida, was named the FCC's new Chairman. Martin has subsequently purged the FCC of many of Powell's staff. [edit] On-air Confrontation with Howard Stern on KGO Radio