On Thu, 10 Aug 1995, Paul K. Harral wrote:
....

> But it seems to me that perhaps the role of the "newspaper" remains somewhat
> the same as it always has ... ordering the information so that people can
> easily assimilate it.  That may mean in the brave new world including
> exhaustive links to all sources of information about the subject under
> discussion.

  The defined role is not in question its the product that is troublesome. 
For example, in the news last week were the acquisitions of two broadcast
networks at a price indicating that a multibillion dollar windfall profit
(some 25% above the share price on the stock market!) was made by the
stockholders of CBS and ABC.  I commented in one discussion list that such
a profit was obscene, when it appeared to arise solely from the
prospective legislative authority that would allow massive monopoly or
oligopoly consolidation of broadcast radio and television. 

  In response, someone not identified but with considerable insider
knowledge denounced me for inaccurately questioning the transaction.  This
individual even sent me private email suggesting that I was nothing but a
leach on society.  There was a problem in my report that I immediately
corrected but no problem at all in my conclusion, which the gentleman
evidently could not digest. 

  In any event, to the best of my knowledge no national newspaper saw any
problem with giving Larry Tish and others billions of dollars by
legislative fiat, for dumping TV programming on the society based on
exploitive sex and gratuitous violence, while libraries that serve the
public are being starved by the legislature (the House had tried to cut
the depository library program appropriations by 40%), and while the
telecom legislation is proceeding on a path in utter disregad for public
interest concerns. Then came major page one stories explaining the event,
in the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, suggesting that the
price paid for CBS and ABC, was an unexplained mystery. 

  What a crock!

  Coverage of this extraordinarily important event by the mass media--in
print or electronically--has been appalling.  Is that what you call
"ordering the information so that people can easily assimilate it"? 

Vigdor Schreibman - FINS 


------------------------------

End of online-news-digest V1 #283
*********************************


From owner-online-news-digest@marketplace.com Fri Aug 11 00:08:55 1995
Received: from marketplace.com (majordom@marketplace.com [199.45.128.10]) by cnj.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA00450 ; for ; Fri, 11 Aug 1995 00:08:51 -0400