|
|
|
|
|
by braindemon
5476 days ago
|
|
It's really hard to make comparisons with Europe, because their situation is so different, and also within a very different cultural/historical context as well. Firstly, they don't suffer from a hyper-consumerized, anti-intellectual (shit throwing) Ape culture. So they're typically more immune from Corporate Propoganda. Furthermore, they have state TV stations that are liberal and honest. Our PBS was not allowed to do anything actually relevant or watched, so our PBS was ghettoized to do documentaries about the History of the ice-cream cone on the Eastern Seaboard during the late 19th Century. |
|
Ben Bagdikian, former Berkeley Journalism Dean and author of "Media Monopoly" has spent 30 years painstakingly chronicling these relationships.
These media conglomerates are constantly merging and getting more powerful by the day. They of course have their sights firmly on taking "control" of the Internet (will there always be some dissension...sure on the fringes of society) But those that think that the Internet will always have to be an open medium are naive, remember everyone said the same thing about radio in the 1920s.
One more thing to think about when we compare Europe to the US. One must look at French Pres. Nicolas Sarkozy and his attempts "civilize" the Internet which is really a code for “regulations favorable to big business and the national security state.
Full story here: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/france-attem...
The difference is the French citizens on the whole are more engaged (as braindeomon points out) so they haven't put up with Sarkozy's proposals... unlike the American populace who are largely uninformed on what's going on politically (outside of Congressman Weiner's antics).