We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
CBS gives in… A few days ago I came across this in a post by The Dissident Frogman. An online boycott targeting companies that would buy advertising during the planned mini-series about Ronald Reagan broadcast by CBS. Those wishing to support could join the battle by signing up for email alert informing them which companies advertise on the CBS series.
Today, I saw the news that the mini-series has been cancelled. CBS said the four-hour final version of the film did not present a balanced portrayal of Mr Reagan and his wife, Nancy, and that proposed cuts did not address those concerns.
Over the past week, CBS has been under relentless attack on talk radio and the Internet, and boycottcbs.com had signed up over 100,000 members. It has also been speculated that the network had bowed to pressure from Washington where it is entangled in a contentious battle with the House and Senate over the relaxation of media ownership rules. So, is it a ‘victory’ for internet grassroots or just the usual political quid pro quo?
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Not entirely cancelled. They’re moving it over to Showtime, which is a subscription cable channel also owned by Viacom. That would make the political angle less likely (as one commentator on radio news put it, misleading a smaller group of people isn’t that much of a concession).
The predictable voices are crying censorship, but this thing really does sound like a hatchet job. Some are trying to define it as a “warts and all” portrayal, but it’s really more like “making shit up that wasn’t at all in character”.
I’ve already seen commentary that says the decision to cancel saved CBS’s butt–as in if they had run the thing, it would have made CBS look so biased that the backlash would have completely discredited the network. I’m not sure that would have been the case, but now we’ll never know.
The Senate thing is interesting—but I can’t see that if the program really had any legs, that CBS would have caved on it.
To let non-US folks know, during the Vietnam War CBS was nicknamed the Communist Broadcasting System.
John Fund has an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal today about CBS’s larger problems that puts the Reagan foofaraw in context.
Basically, CBS does an excellent job of reflecting Upper West Side Manhattan values and programming preferences (read: limousine liberal). Unfortunately, that is a very narrow base for a national broadcast network.
Even though I am a fan of Reagan and his policies regarding economics and the Cold War, I must say that I’m a little disappointed that CBS tucked tail. I’m not sure that many people really expected the miniseries to be particularly accurate, and the network’s bias is already apparent (see e.g. CBS News, 60 Minutes). While the real mistake was in ever trying to make this thing in the first place, I think CBS did itself a greater disservice in not airing the show and in letting itself get bullied. It certainly doesn’t set a good precedent — although it did prompt Babs to issue some of her hilarious indictments of conservatives.
Gabriel: Seems like a simple exercise of the free market to me.
CBS set out to make an entertainment which was supposedly about a real person. They appear, from numerous sources, to have lied — frequently and with great abandon. People heard about this, became angry, and made it known they would not support this product with either their viewing time, nor their trade with prospective advertisers. CBS did the math, and declined to offer the *entertainment* in question.
It’s not as if CBS news caved to government pressure and allowed itself to be censored by agents of the state. CBS *entertainment* listened to it’s audience, and quit while they were merely mildly in the hole.
To date, I’ve not seen credible information to support the assertion of government interference with a free press.
Just citizens, making use of information found though non-traditional channels, making their voices heard.
Not unlike this blog… eh?
Anyone expecting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in entertainment about historical events, is always due for a disappointment. It’s all biased, and whether or not the bias is accepted depends on the target audience.
For example, I’m sure Mel Gibson’s “The Patriot” played better in Peoria than Peckham, whereas a film on the War of Independence focussing on George Washington’s slave keeping and the “ungrateful” insurrectionists’ monopoly breaking and refusing to pay for their own defence might play better the other way around.
At least CBS, like the Dixie Chicks, has learnt that freedom of speech comes with a price even if you’re powerful.
Bill Erneohazy: Actually, censorship never occurred to me. Political horse-trading, yes. Quid pro quo is not censorship.
And free market does not seem to do anything similar for the regular distortion of the reality by the media.
And, yeah, citizens. The last time I heard that uttered with a straight face was on the other side of the Iron Curtain.
And free market does not seem to do anything similar for the regular distortion of the reality by the media.
This is a much larger topic, but I think the free market is addressing the regular distortion of reality by the media.
Much of the elite media’s influence can be traced to the government-granted monopoly on TV and radio broadcast rights, which has been broken by cable and satellite TV. Fox news and other news outlets that do not subscribe to the liberal/statist template have been making huge strides. On the radio dial, an entire new product – talk radio – emerged to fill the market niche left unoccupied by elite media programming. I think that TV and radio news are a pretty decent example of the market finding and filling demand for different viewpoints.
Print media comes in basically two flavors. For magazines, well, the market is certainly satisfying every micro-niche on that front. More disturbing, perhaps, is the degeneration of newspaper business into a series of local monopolies. I would be interested in learning how and why that happened.
We simple, unsophisticated Americans still use the word “citizen” without irony. Most often, while being arrested or arguing with a minor government functionary. As in “get your hands off me, I’m a _______ !” Or, “how’s come the city didn’t pick up that busted Frigidaire I left on the curb this morning? I’m a _______! I pay my taxes!”
S. Weasel: Oh, excellent.
When the head of CBS-liberal lefty- says it’s biased, it’s biased.
Story was the CBS honchos re-edited this tripe 3x and still couldn’t make it fly.
They out-and-out lied in dialog. The producers tried to shop it to ABC in 1998 and couldn’t get it done and one of them was quoted as saying something like, “our version of the truth,” or something like that.
I’m not interested in YOUR version, dipwad.
It was supposed to be about Ronnie and Nancy, a love story. It became a hit job.
I’m glad it’s gone to pay TV. I’m just surprised it didn’t go to Public Broadcasting (PBS).
Liberal America is only now starting to realize that conservative America exists, and to their horror they’re also realizing that ignoring and insulting this huge market segment is going to cost them money.
Government has nothing to do with it, nor should they.
There was a man on TV last night – Reagan’s former chief of staff, if I recall, I was a bit distracted at the time – being very upset about this show, and either he or the host compared the upcoming show to Oliver Stone’s JFK.
Well, that was released, and it was a commercial success. So I’m not sure what his beef was. That it was going to be broadcast on one of the networks ? Or the content ? Or both.
Political pressure is certainly a factor. After all, the elections are coming. Politicized historical soap-opera can be quite a vehicle for propaganda.
But I’d argue that so is the West Wing. In fact, the latter might be even worse in terms of impact, if only because it’s been running a while and lasts more than a few episodes. We’re talking seasons here. This thing is a political manifesto disguised as fictional entertainment. It’s very well done. But it’s thoroughly biased and full of well-crafted one-liners and slogans.
What S.Weasel said.
I still annoy my Britsh in-laws with the “I’m a citizen of the Republic, not a subject of the Queen”. (I even try that on some Canadian friends from time to time, since, as I understand it, the Queen is still the head of state of Canada).
The US Army still uses the term ‘citizen-soldier’ with a straight face. All those National Guardsmen are finding out about that right now.
Reagan may live to be 100+. He was chopping wood well into his 80’s. So I wonder if it’s OK, given he’s a public figure and all, for a TV production purporting to be biographical to depict him saying things he not only didn’t but wouldn’t have ever said.
I notice Viacom’s man, in their climb down (big climbdown since the lies will appear on Showtime), said they had sources on it all. Really? Reagan saying, “I’m the Anti-Christ”? Reagan saying of AIDS sufferers, “Those who live in sin will die in sin”?
Surely some lawyer might make the case that this liberal media hatchet job the perps will doubtless call “art” is so appallingly damaging that Reagan should be compensated. It’s Showtime!
Reagan may live to be 100+.
That’s out of the question; He’s dying of end-stage Alzheimer’s Disease.
Which made the potential airing of the “hatchet job” right now that much lower.
He is, however, the oldest president. Beat John Adams.
Customer feedback sucks, doesn’t it, Mr. Moonves?
Man it sounds like the only thing that didn’t make it into this fiction pimped as truth was a crack pipe and a midget in bondage gear. But then I guess the producers couldn’t get everyting past Moonves. How this moron runs a billion dollar corporation is a mystery to me. He must have tossed a lot of salads, if you know what I mean?
Gabriel:
Citizens, yep. People like me, who wrote.
You don’t believe that… why?
(As to the Iron Curtain strawman: actually, my dad left Europe in a leaky “liberty ship” rather than be repatriated to his native Hungary, which was falling under the yoke. If the intention was to accuse me of occult Stalinist nostalgia, or other such bilge… sorry to disabuse you.)
As to free markets and the media: Which media? Dead tree? CBS? Fox News? This blog?
Seems to me the market is at work, after all. Surely this ain’t BAD news on a libertarian website?
And here we have Bill Ernoehazy missing the point by a wide margin!
Citizens means nothing to me, other than invididual human beings that are appropriated by the state. I prefer individuals.
There was no Iron Curtain strawman, man. I said that last time I heard the word ‘citizen’ pronounced with a straight face was during communism. It was I who grew up under a totalitarian regime and your family background played no role in this argument whatsoever. For start, the last sentence of my comment was addressed to S. Weasel who started waving that particular flag. Yeah, citizen.
> Citizens means nothing to me, other than
> invididual human beings that are appropriated by
> the state. I prefer individuals.
We’ve got this weird American libertarian thing where we love the government because it protects our liberty while at the same time distrusting the government because it is a possible threat to liberty… Schizy? Yes…. But we don’t mind being considered citizens…