The Marketplace They Loathe
The marketplace is a wonderful place, writes Chris Westley, except when it's MarketPlace, that public radio program that airs mornings and evenings in the United States. It's a reliable source of economic fallacy, state celebration, and anti-commercial bias. Since there is no shortage of privately provided business media in print, radio, and television, why must government fund MarketPlace? FULL ARTICLE
Comments (22)
I remember sitting in an introductory Econ class in college where the professor told us that we just had to have public radio, and that because of "market failure," the only way we could have it is for the government to tax people and then provide it for everyone regardless of whether they want it or not. Maybe one reason why mainstream economists in academia and especially government fields, cling to this idea is because it applies to them as well. Perhaps they feel that without government, the market would "fail" to "fairly" value their services and they wouldn't enjoy the incomes they currently do. They might actually have to produce something that people were voluntarily willing to pay money for. So many of them, just like public radio, exist mainly as apologists for government existence and intervention.
Published: October 14, 2005 8:28 AM
Mr. Westley's comments on government propaganda via radio are right on point. When you review the story about President Bush's teleconference yesterday with US troops in Iraq, you read that it was "staged", "rehearsed" and highly orchestrated, with only pre-approved questions being permitted to be aired. Goebbles, The head of the Nazi's SS, would have been proud.
To prove the propaganda point, here is an excerpt from a wire service story:
"Capt. Brent Kennedy told Bush that the 42nd Infantry Division, the lead unit for Task Force Liberty, is working with Iraqis to secure 1,250 polling sites in Iraq as part of "Operation Saratoga."
Before the teleconference, Allison Barber, deputy assistant to the secretary of defense, went through a rehearsal of the scripted question-and-answer session, telling the troops that any nonscripted questions from the president should be handled by Kennedy.
When asked about the rehearsed event, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the coordination was done because of the "technological challenges" of a satellite feed, denying responses had been screened."
McClellan should have said to the press, "You are free to broadcast & print all the news we see fit to print and broadcast."
Ernie Pyle is rolling in his grave.......
Published: October 14, 2005 9:32 AM
Mr. Westley's comments on government propaganda via radio are right on point. When you review the story about President Bush's teleconference yesterday with US troops in Iraq, you read that it was "staged", "rehearsed" and highly orchestrated, with only pre-approved questions being permitted to be aired. Goebbles, The head of the Nazi's SS, would have been proud.
To prove the propaganda point, here is an excerpt from a wire service story:
"Capt. Brent Kennedy told Bush that the 42nd Infantry Division, the lead unit for Task Force Liberty, is working with Iraqis to secure 1,250 polling sites in Iraq as part of "Operation Saratoga."
Before the teleconference, Allison Barber, deputy assistant to the secretary of defense, went through a rehearsal of the scripted question-and-answer session, telling the troops that any nonscripted questions from the president should be handled by Kennedy.
When asked about the rehearsed event, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the coordination was done because of the "technological challenges" of a satellite feed, denying responses had been screened."
McClellan should have said to the press, "You are free to broadcast & print all the news we see fit to print and broadcast."
Ernie Pyle is rolling in his grave.......
Published: October 14, 2005 9:32 AM
Mr. Westley's comments on government propaganda via radio are right on point. When you review the story about President Bush's teleconference yesterday with US troops in Iraq, you read that it was "staged", "rehearsed" and highly orchestrated, with only pre-approved questions being permitted to be aired. Goebbles, The head of the Nazi's SS, would have been proud.
To prove the propaganda point, here is an excerpt from a wire service story:
"Capt. Brent Kennedy told Bush that the 42nd Infantry Division, the lead unit for Task Force Liberty, is working with Iraqis to secure 1,250 polling sites in Iraq as part of "Operation Saratoga."
Before the teleconference, Allison Barber, deputy assistant to the secretary of defense, went through a rehearsal of the scripted question-and-answer session, telling the troops that any nonscripted questions from the president should be handled by Kennedy.
When asked about the rehearsed event, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the coordination was done because of the "technological challenges" of a satellite feed, denying responses had been screened."
McClellan should have said to the press, "You are free to broadcast & print all the news we see fit to print and broadcast."
Ernie Pyle is rolling in his grave.......
Published: October 14, 2005 9:33 AM
Mr. Westley's comments on government propaganda via radio are right on point. When you review the story about President Bush's teleconference yesterday with US troops in Iraq, you read that it was "staged", "rehearsed" and highly orchestrated, with only pre-approved questions being permitted to be aired. Goebbles, The head of the Nazi's SS, would have been proud.
To prove the propaganda point, here is an excerpt from a wire service story:
"Capt. Brent Kennedy told Bush that the 42nd Infantry Division, the lead unit for Task Force Liberty, is working with Iraqis to secure 1,250 polling sites in Iraq as part of "Operation Saratoga."
Before the teleconference, Allison Barber, deputy assistant to the secretary of defense, went through a rehearsal of the scripted question-and-answer session, telling the troops that any nonscripted questions from the president should be handled by Kennedy.
When asked about the rehearsed event, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the coordination was done because of the "technological challenges" of a satellite feed, denying responses had been screened."
McClellan should have said to the press, "You are free to broadcast & print all the news we see fit to print and broadcast."
Ernie Pyle is rolling in his grave.......
Published: October 14, 2005 9:33 AM
Mr. Westley's comments on government propaganda via radio are right on point. When you review the story about President Bush's teleconference yesterday with US troops in Iraq, you read that it was "staged", "rehearsed" and highly orchestrated, with only pre-approved questions being permitted to be aired. Goebbles, The head of the Nazi's SS, would have been proud.
To prove the propaganda point, here is an excerpt from a wire service story:
"Capt. Brent Kennedy told Bush that the 42nd Infantry Division, the lead unit for Task Force Liberty, is working with Iraqis to secure 1,250 polling sites in Iraq as part of "Operation Saratoga."
Before the teleconference, Allison Barber, deputy assistant to the secretary of defense, went through a rehearsal of the scripted question-and-answer session, telling the troops that any nonscripted questions from the president should be handled by Kennedy.
When asked about the rehearsed event, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the coordination was done because of the "technological challenges" of a satellite feed, denying responses had been screened."
McClellan should have said to the press, "You are free to broadcast & print all the news we see fit to print and broadcast."
Ernie Pyle is rolling in his grave.......
Published: October 14, 2005 9:33 AM
I agree that MarketPlace is a particularly bad program. I also agree that the $4oo,ooo,ooo spent annually to fund public radio and TV should be eliminated and I was disappointed when Congress recently failed to do that. But in the big picture, the money the government has spent on propaganda dwarfs the amount spent on PBS/CPB. When you add up the salaries of little Scotty, Bush's loyal spokestwit who has yet to speak a word of truth, and all the other government mouthpieces in the bureaucracy and their enormous support staffs (and don't forget Armstrong Williams and his clones), public broadcasting is insignificant. Why should the government spend any of that money when they have Faux News as their unofficial propaganda organ? And to paraphrase Mr. Singleton's last sentence: so many of them, like Big Dick Cheney, exist mainly as apologists for big government and intervention in everyone's lives from birth to death. Let's get our priorities right. Shut down the Texas Big Spender propagandists before we wring our hands over the small fry.
Published: October 14, 2005 9:49 AM
A most agreeable essay from my point of view.
It is a problem of democracy, that becomes nothing more than mobs of interest groups clamoring for whatever their concept of the common good be,that the State becomes the "principal" and the interest groups, fed at the trough, become the agent. A self-serving network born on the backs of those who fund it through taxation. But the biggest problem, as Mr. Westley points out, is that the majority believe government to be a benign and beneficent "agent".
Published: October 14, 2005 10:05 AM
Good story! The left can't even launch a few radio stations to counter the right-wing talk shows if they have to depend on the market. It should tell them something that Marxism survives only in the protected sanctuaries of PBS, NPR and universities.
Published: October 14, 2005 10:45 AM
I remember a few years back the manager of our local (university owned) NPR station came and talked to a political club I was a member of. After the meeting, a few of us cornered him and asked how he justified using coerced tax money to run his station , especiall when no other radio station in town had access to that funding source. He replied "But, without tax money, we couldn't do a lot of the things we want to do with our station." When I pointed out that there were lots of things I could do with my little business if I could get the government to steal for me, he left. I guess he decided it was hostile territory. Talk about different world views!
Published: October 14, 2005 12:44 PM
I see Chris may be aware of economics (because his bio piece says so),but it is obvious that he does not understand how government regulates all media and by so doing economically supports all media, just as it supports corporate welfare of most of private enterprise.
What public broadcasters may receive in government largess for services rendered is miniscule compared to what so-called private media receive through the use of their free spctrum owned by the public through their elected government.
Rarely have I seen any piece wrtitten by a critic of public broadcasting that indicates a clue abouy the subject. It must result from the searth for the simplistic.
Published: October 14, 2005 5:03 PM
Economic ignorance is widespread. See this recent WSJ column. Here is a brief extract.
"Whenever I teach a seminar on basic economics, I always survey the audience: What proportion of the American labor force earns the minimum wage or less and what is the standard of living of the average American today relative to 100 years ago? Even among highly-educated groups such as journalists or congressional staffers, the median answer is depressingly similar -- they think 20% of the American work force earns the minimum wage or less. In fact, the actual number is something less than 3%. Usually a non-trivial portion of each group thinks that our material well-being is lower today than 100 years ago. Their median answer is that we are 50% better off than we were 100 years ago. In fact, the average American is at least five and maybe 30 times better off than we were in the good old days."
Unfortunately most self described leftists are not only pig ignorant of basic economics but don't believe there is any such thing as economic principles at all. They confuse ignorance with skepticism and thus stroke their own ego. Their economic thinking is about as dumb as thinking a car can run on orange juice.
Published: October 14, 2005 9:56 PM
Tim,
Excellent neocon talking points. You forgot to mention how all "leftists" are unable to string coherent sentences together and that they're un-American.
Published: October 14, 2005 11:19 PM
"5 and maybe 30 times better off" -- Tim
... I don't understand how you can measure that?
Does having a high speed internet connection give me 52 'better off' points?
Or is the measurement akin to what the "average" person bought with a years salary at that point versus how many times that same thing could be purchased today? Because then differences in quality, savings, etc. muck that up...
Published: October 15, 2005 12:20 AM
Good essay. But I remember when a company I worked for one day-out of the blue-announced they were bankrupt. Until that day there was no indication anything was wrong. That's what I see the US doing one of these fine days. People get the government they want. No one I talk to is concerned about government spending, the propaganda machine convinces them otherwise.
Published: October 15, 2005 2:27 PM
John,
The US is already bankrupt and is only kept afloat only because others continue to buy our debt. Since this can't continue, one should be preparing accordingly, which means moving out of dollar denominated investments, as well as investing in what Addison Wiggin, in "The Demise of the Dollar", rightly calls"the only global currency that is no one's liability" -- i.e., the "pure money" otherwise known as gold.
Published: October 15, 2005 3:39 PM
Tim: Thanks for the link. Interesting column.
Published: October 15, 2005 5:59 PM
Serendipity ... I was just listening to my local NPR station this morning, and they went into pledging mode. Along the way, they pointed out that (at least here in the Nashville, Tennessee outlet) their funding comes from: a) only SEVEN percent Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is the federal- subsidy arm of the process; b) 44 percent listener sponsorship; c) something like 35 percent corporate donations and contributions; and d) the rest (14% or so) from endowments they have set up, using mostly user donations as seed capital. That means that a full 93 percent of their money comes from other than government subsidy! Given that this trend is up from the roughly 50-60% or less it was, only a few years ago, CAN WE STOP KICKING PUBLIC RADIO for a change, and just encourage more pledges from the listenership, so that 7% can fade away as well, along with the CPB itself?
Published: October 16, 2005 8:26 PM
That is 7% of that particular stations operating budget, Steve. It does not include any of the shows that would otherwise not get produced without direct government sponsorship.
All your information points out is that community sponsored media is indeed viable on some level, removing even more of the foundation of lies supporting NPR and PBS.
I would like to submit http://www.wcpe.org/ as another example. They take no government money at all, and do just fine. I like their programming and send them some spare(sic) money once in a while. Just like Mises.org.
Published: October 17, 2005 12:18 PM
Marketplace is not that bad. Westley just picked around some particlulary awful stories. They also have Amity Shlaes, a very sharp commentator who wholeheartedly is in favor of deregulation and reduction of government power, and various news report from the Economist, which has a Classical Liberal outlook on things.
It is actually one of the most balanced shows on public radio. And yes, I know that they broadcast statist propoganda disguised as news; I am the man most likely to write a letter to their producers about the drivel portions.
JBP
Published: October 21, 2005 3:25 PM
JBP - I did not "pick around." The stories I listed were from a single morning show--the one that aired the day I wrote my piece. Also, your comments do not address the philosophical questions of whether others should be forced to fund such shows (simply because you enjoy them) or whether the state-involvement in media is consistent with a free society.
As for MarketPlace being "among the most balanced shows on public radio" you're right. And that tells us much more about the state of public radio today than it does of shows like MarketPlace.
Published: October 21, 2005 3:42 PM
Hi Chris,
In my opinion:
No, others should not be forced to fund this show, nor any others.
You may have found a particularly foul single show (it is on after the market closes, you sure we are listening to the same show?). I listen to it every day; it is not near as foul as the rest of the stuff on NPR.
JBP
Published: November 1, 2005 6:42 PM