home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Software Vault: The Diamond Collection
/
The Diamond Collection (Software Vault)(Digital Impact).ISO
/
cdr16
/
impr9412.zip
/
IMPR9412.TXT
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1995-01-11
|
18KB
|
347 lines
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
IS THIS AN UNTAMPERED FILE?
This ASCII-file version of Imprimis, On Line was
packaged by Applied Foresight, Inc. (AFI hereafter).
Every AFI-packaged ASCII version of Imprimis is
distributed in either an "-AV protected" ZIP file
format or a SDN (Shareware Distributors Network)
protected SDN file.
"AV" is the authenticity verification feature provided
to registered PKZIP users, which Applied Foresight,
Inc., is. If you are using the MS-DOS PKUNZIP.EXE
program written by PKWARE Inc. and do not see the "-AV"
message after every file is unzipped AND receive the
message "Authentic files Verified! #JAA646 Applied
Foresight Inc." when you unzip this file then do not
trust it's integrity. If your version of PKUNZIP is not
the PKWARE-authored program (for instance, you are
running a non-MS-DOS version), then this message may
not be displayed. (Note: version 2.04g of PKZIP was
used to create this authentication message.)
SDN is the major distributor of Shareware and
Copyrighted Freeware and users who extract files from
an SDN file with the current version of the archive
utility ARJ, should see:
*** Valid ARJ-SECURITY envelope signature:
*** SDN International(sm) SDN#01 R#2417
This file is an SDN International(sm) Author-Direct
Distribution. It should be verified for the SDN
Security Seal by the FileTest utility available at The
SDN Project AuthorLine BBS 203-634-0370.
(Note: prior to about May, 1993, SDN used PAK to
archive its distributions and its authenticity message
differs from the above.)
Trust only genuine AFI-packaged archives ... anything
else may be just that: ANYTHING ELSE.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Imprimis, On Line
December, 1994
IMPRIMIS (im-pri-mis), taking its name from the Latin
term, "in the first place," is the publication of
Hillsdale College. Executive Editor, Ronald L.
Trowbridge; Managing Editor, Lissa Roche; Assistant,
Patricia A. DuBois. Illustrations by Tom Curtis. The
opinions expressed in IMPRIMIS may be, but are not
necessarily, the views of Hillsdale College and its
External Programs division. Copyright 1994. Permission
to reprint in whole or part is hereby granted, provided
a version of the following credit line is used:
"Reprinted by permission from IMPRIMIS, the monthly
journal of Hillsdale College." Subscription free upon
request. ISSN 0277-8432. Circulation 565,000 worldwide,
established 1972. IMPRIMIS trademark registered in U.S.
Patent and Trade Office #1563325.
---------------------------------------------
Volume 23, No. 12
Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan 49242
December 1994
---------------------------------------------
"The Media Revolution"
by John Fund
Editorial Writer, Wall Street Journal
---------------------------------------------
Preview: A "new," liberating force is revolutionizing
the American media: competition. For years, the three
major television networks and a handful of newspapers,
radio programs, and magazines have dominated the
information business. But, as Wall Street Journal
editorialist John Fund argues here, millions of people
are now turning to alternative news sources. The media
gatekeepers can no longer control what gets into the
news or how it will be presented. That's good news for
the news, Fund says, and for our nation.
---------------------------------------------
In George Orwell's chilling novel 1984, the state
attempts to control citizens through two-way
"telescreens" in their homes that bombard them with
propaganda and monitor their every move and spoken
word. Since his novel was published in the 1940s, many
people have worried that technology would allow
governments unprecedented power over their citizens.
Was Orwell a prophet, they wondered?
Well, we now know that Orwell was wrong, and
spectacularly so. He was wrong not about the nature of
totalitarianism--he was perhaps its sharpest and most
vivid critic--but about the role technology would play
in the future. In the "Information Age," it has proven
to be a liberating force.
Technology and the information it conveys directly
contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union, as
Scott Shane documents in Dismantling Utopia: "The new
technology turned out to include weapons the citizen
could wield against the state as readily as the state
could use them on the citizen." He adds that once
Gorbachev was compelled to allow citizens access to
information, "the forbidden fruit soon swept across
Soviet existence, touching every nook of daily life,
battering hoary myths and lies, and ultimately eroding
the foundations of Soviet power."
New technology is also reshaping and empowering
citizens in the Western democracies. Walter Wriston,
the former chairman of Citibank, argues that "the
Information Age is rapidly giving power to the people"
and "driving nation-states toward cooperation with each
other so that the world's work can get done."
Nowhere is the Information Age having a more
profound effect than here in the United States. Here,
the flow of information is more free than anywhere
else. But American journalists still have a protected
status--a kind of diplomatic immunity, if you will--
courtesy of the First Amendment. While they favor and
even agitate for regulation of every other industry,
journalists insist that there is no such thing as
"reasonable regulation" of the media. Government
meddling in the media always makes matters worse. It
deprives the public of vital information, stifles
debate, and intimidates and punishes political enemies.
The fact that journalists regard their freedom as
sacrosanct was brought home to me quite forcibly a few
years ago when I addressed a group of distinguished
journalists at a national conference. I announced at
the beginning of my speech that they should take out
their notebooks, because I was going to give them a
scoop; I was going to tell them about an industry in
their country that consistently exploits its work
force--an industry that receives very little scrutiny
and that often tries to keep its dirty laundry out of
the news.
It is an industry that heavily relies on child
labor. Boys and girls as young as ten years of age are
forced to rise at five o'clock in the morning to go to
work. Heavy loads are deposited on their doorsteps.
They have to fold each item and put it in bags, which
they must haul on bicycles throughout the neighborhood.
And they have to deliver each item unerringly to its
specific destination. They must do this in all kinds of
weather, often enduring heat, cold, rain, and snow.
They face potentially dangerous hazards: traffic,
biting dogs, strangers who might do them harm. For all
this difficult work, they are paid far less than the
minimum wage--pennies per item.
Most of the journalists stopped scribbling before
I finished my speech. They correctly guessed that I was
describing the newspaper industry and that the
exploited child laborers were paper boys and girls.
They were outraged; though these jour-nalists are vocal
advocates of child labor laws when applied to other
industries, they demand that their industry should
remain exempt. The courts have bowed to journalists on
this issue, accepting the curious argument that the
First Amendment would be abridged if children could not
be employed to deliver newspapers.
The Demise of the Media Gatekeepers
The media, of course, demands exemption from all kinds
of regulation, not just child labor laws. We
journalists are experts at convincing others that we
are providing a highly valuable service and that we are
the watchdogs of society. As Chicago Tribune columnist
Stephen Chapman points out, journalists self-
righteously claim that their occupation champions
truth, enlightens an uninformed citizenry, and is
somehow more "noble" than other occupations.
"Journalists believe other industries provide their
customers with what they want. We journalists believe
we fulfill needs. The trouble is, we don't know for
certain what people need. We only know what we think
they need," he concludes.
To some extent, this media arrogance is
understandable. The media has had a very real power
that does distinguish it from other industries. For
years it has been in the position of deciding what is
important for its
customers to know. But all that is changing in the
1990s. We are living through not just an information
revolution, but a media revolution. Increasing
competition is forcing more and more media outlets to
take account of the demands of consumers of the news.
Like big government, big business and big labor, big
media is at last learning about the real world of the
free market.
Once it was possible for the "media gatekeepers"
to control the flow of information to the American
people. Once a handful of national publications and
three major networks filtered the news and set the
parameters of political debate. But rival information
networks have sprung up everywhere in the 1990s. We are
on the verge of having 500-channel cable systems, and
desktop publishing makes it possible to deliver
information to hundreds of niche markets. Five million
Americans have satellite dishes. In 1988, there were
200 radio talk shows. Now there are a thousand such
programs. Rush Limbaugh has a weekly audience of 20
million people. One out of every six Americans is a
regular listener to talk radio. One listener says,
"Talk radio is a response to an elitist, biased and
out-of-touch media.
People who never had a say in any political arena
can now call in and be heard."
Electronic "town halls" and computer bulletin
boards are also an increasing source of information. A
single computer network, Internet, receives more than
three million calls a day. It features 5,000 electronic
discussion groups and 2,500 electronic newsletters 24
hours a day. Once you have a personal computer--and a
third of Americans now do--and a telephone modem, it
costs $10 a month to subscribe--that is how much the
cost of this new information technology is being driven
down by competition.
Other kinds of new information technology have
helped ordinary citizens bypass the media gatekeepers.
In February of 1994, for example, an amendment was
added at the last minute to a major education bill
pending in Congress. It would have effectively required
private school teachers and the parents of home
schoolers in every state to be certified by the
government.
The major media outlets were completely
uninterested in covering this story, even though one
million American families now engage in home schooling.
Nor were they moved by the fact that the amendment
would have been an unprecedented assault on the nature
of private education and individual freedom in America.
But a few private school and home school groups did try
to get the word out. They reached 200,000 individuals
through fax and telephone "trees" in the space of 72
hours. As a result, an avalanche of calls and faxes
opposing the amendment poured into congressional
offices. Talk radio took up the issue. "Please stop
calling," one congressional chief of staff begged a
home school lobbyist. "I believe in democracy. It's
just that we've had about as much democracy as we can
handle for one day." The amendment, which had been
expected to pass, was defeated by a vote of 424 to 1.
Access to the news through alternative information
networks literally kept private school and home school
students free.
The alternative media and new information
technology are revolutionizing our entire society by
changing the way many issues, from education to taxes
to health care, are debated. Americans have a greater
opportunity than ever before to find out what is going
on and to make their voices heard. "The congregation
has rebelled against the media priesthood and is doing
an end-run around it," says media analyst Robert
Lichter.
We, the media gatekeepers, had better look out!
The gate is swinging wide open. We can no longer
effectively bottle up information and keep it from the
public if we don't like it. The Berlin Wall that has
existed for decades in the media industry is falling
apart brick by brick. We cannot guard the entire length
and breadth of the electronic spectrum. We cannot hem
in every cable program, talk radio show, computer
bulletin board, and fax machine.
The Public's Responsibility
The media revolution is bringing about a more
open, vigorous, and honest debate on issues. Though
media and government elites still command a great deal
of power, the public has access to more information--
and, therefore, more power--than ever before.
It also means that the public has more
responsibility than ever before. Citizens should not be
satisfied when journalists and politicians try to
persuade them they must leave solutions to the
"experts." Nor should they blindly accept the argument
that the system of limited government and maximum
personal liberty the framers of the Constitution
devised is inadequate to address modern problems. As
President Ronald Reagan reminded us, "The experts tell
us there are no simple answers to our difficulties.
They're wrong. There are simple answers, just not easy
ones."
The American people have it in their power to
rediscover the simple answers and the "legacy of
freedom" that Hillsdale College President George Roche
argues is the cornerstone as well as the central,
animating force of our nation. The media revolution
will help them.
---------------------------------------------
John Fund is an editorial writer for the Wall Street
Journal. His insightful articles have made him a
familiar name to America's top business executives and
political leaders.
He began his journalism career in 1982 as
investigative reporter for syndicated columnists
Rowland Evans and Robert Novak. In 1984, he joined the
Journal as deputy features editor for the editorial
page, and since 1987 has specialized in writing about
politics and government. He is the co-author with James
Coyne of Cleaning House: America's Campaign for Term
Limits and collaborated with Rush Limbaugh on his
number-one, best-selling book, The Way Things Ought to
Be.
###
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
End of this issue of Imprimis, On Line; Information
about the electronic publisher, Applied Foresight,
Inc., is in the file, IMPR_BY.TXT
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
