"Steven Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >So, perhaps we should think about setting up an entire network devoted to >our most important right as Americans (our right to vote). The Electorate's >Channel could be broadcasted on a standard UHF or VHF channel. This 'public >service' could be administered by local/regional/national volunteers, >academic leaders and students. It wouldn't need to be on-the-air year >around, only during primary and general elections.
I'm afraid you're operating under the activist's delusion. Communications have become cheaper and cheaper over the years, to the point where one can now reach a vast audience for almost nothing. You're seeing it right here: the Internet. But even before the Internet, such things as photocopying had gotten cheaper and improved in quality. Cable TV came along and kept increasing its penetration. Etc. But what's forgotten in all this is one finite resource: people's attention. We've long since passed the saturation point, wherein people can get all the communication they want. Therefore, it's what they want to pay att'n to that rules. No additional means of communication will solve the att'n problem. So the would-be reformer is left with the option of advocating that att'n be forcibly extracted from people -- that wherever they're looking, THAT channel must be forced to carry the info. Of course that works only for a moment, because then people stop looking there. So you set up your all-politics channel. Who watches? >The bottom line for me is this; What we currently have is corrupt and >doesn't work. We cannot rely on the problem (two party system) reforming >itself. As Americans we must put our heads together and come up with a >process that is administered fairly without bias or discrimination. All >voices should be heard in a true democratic electoral system. Meaning, all voiced should be paid att'n to. >Who gets into the debates? Perhaps anyone who pulls 5% or better from the >primary election. Commissions are mere puppets for the status quo. The FCC, >FEC and, Presidential Debate Commissions need to be accountable to the >public at large. Ultimately, they are. However, the strings of power are very long and take a very indirect route. In Your Sly Tribe, Robert _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
