C-SPAN is providing coverage of a conference on “national media reform,” with the usual “liberal” crowd lamenting that their views are not given sufficient attention. The reinstitution of the so-called “fairness doctrine” has been suggested by some at this gathering. It is ironic that when conservatives used to make the same plea, calls for the government to mandate more of their favored voices were met, by “liberals,” with the charge of “censorship.”
To those in attendance at this meeting, “reform” is synonymous with “progressive,” with which the leftist branch of statism has long identified itself. “Reform” becomes equated with “improvement.” Why this is so has long amazed me. To “form” something, a dictionary tells me, is “to give a particular shape to.” To reform, then, means to repeat the process. I put “fairness” in the same trash-bin of meaninglessness as the word “justice.” “Justice” is but the redistribution of violence, while “fairness” amounts to little more than the underlying sentiment of teenaged thinking: I want what I want when I want it. (When any of my students use the word “fair” in my classes, I tell them that I will not tolerate the “four-lettered ‘f’ word.” “If you think something is ‘fair’ or ‘unfair,’ tell me on what basis you draw your conclusion.” They rarely are able to do so.)
By the definition I am using, the media is undergoing reform (i.e., recreating a particular shape to itself). This morning, the major story CNN is covering is the annual hot-dog eating contest at Coney Island. (Having a lot of baloney stuffed down the throats of people has more than metaphorical significance to the modern mainstream media!) Nor can we overlook Rupert Murdoch’s contribution to media “reform”: his efforts to purchase the Wall Street Journal. I can imagine the day in which, following the hot-dog eating contest, the Murdoch-owned WSJ will have a feature article on the increased price of Nathan Hot-Dogs stock.
That media reform is already occurring is evident from the steady collapse in network news viewership and newspaper subscriptions. Do you want your political/social point of view to find more expression? That’s already taking place in the emerging, horizontally operating system known as the Internet, to which more of us have been turning for intelligent, fact-based information. Are you an anti-vivisectionist Marxist who wants to get your ideas out into the public? Start a web-site!
Of course, there is no guarantee that other people will find your opinions of interest. They will likely have other web-sites to which they turn their attentions in this real-world expression of the “marketplace of ideas.” But if the voices for “media reform” have anything to say about the Internet, it will doubtless be negative in nature. Many of these people probably embrace Hillary Clinton, who – while Bill was still president – expressed support for the idea of a “gatekeeper” for the Internet, to prevent just “anyone” from putting their ideas out into the public. After all, to allow for the expression of ideas that are hostile to your own would not be “fair.”
11:14 am on July 4, 2007
